Worker Crushed by Swinging Load: What Went Wrong

$375,000 fine. One worker dead. A completely preventable incident — killed by a planning failure, not a technical one.

What Happened

November 2023. A Toronto-area propane company was replacing a large tank. A worker was positioned between the tank and a wall when the crane holding the tank swung unexpectedly.

He was crushed. He died.

What the Investigation Found

The Ministry of Labour investigation identified multiple failures:

• No swing control: The load wasn't controlled to prevent rotation or swing
• Worker in the danger zone: The victim was positioned where a moving load could strike him
• Inadequate protective devices: Required safeguards weren't in place before the lift began

The company was convicted of violating Ontario Regulation 851 and fined $375,000. Understanding Ontario's evolving OHS regulations is critical for every employer.

Why Loads Swing

Every rigger knows loads can swing. But under production pressure, this knowledge gets ignored.

Loads swing when:

• The hook isn't directly over the centre of gravity
• The crane moves while the load is suspended
• Wind or vibration acts on the load
• The load catches on something during the lift

A swinging load is an uncontrolled load. And you never stand where an uncontrolled load can reach you.

The Real Failure

This wasn't a technical failure. The crane worked fine. The rigging was probably adequate.

This was a planning failure. Someone decided it was acceptable for a worker to be in the swing radius of a suspended load. That decision killed him. A proper safety consulting review of lifting operations could have identified this gap.

This wasn't a technical failure — it was a planning failure. Someone decided it was acceptable for a worker to be in the swing radius of a suspended load. That decision killed him.

What Should Have Happened

1. Pre-lift planning: Identify the swing radius. Establish exclusion zones. No one enters until the load is stable and secured.
2. Tag lines: Use tag lines to control load rotation from a safe distance.
3. Stop work authority: Any worker should be empowered to halt the lift if someone is in the danger zone.

Ontario Regulation 851 and Lifting Operations: What the Law Requires

Ontario Regulation 851 (Industrial Establishments) under the Occupational Health and Safety Act contains specific requirements for hoisting and rigging operations that many employers have never read carefully. Section 53 requires that a hoisting device only be loaded up to its rated capacity and that a rated capacity be marked on every hoisting device. Section 54 prohibits workers from being under a suspended load, and section 55 requires that loads be secured or enclosed to prevent tipping, slipping, or displacement.

The requirement that trips or swings of a load be controlled — which was the central failure in this incident — is found in the obligation to prevent workers from being struck by moving equipment or loads. Employers cannot simply rely on workers to know to stay clear. The employer must establish and enforce exclusion zones around the swing radius and verify before each lift that no one is within that zone.

Ontario Regulation 213/91 (Construction Projects) contains parallel requirements for construction sites. Under section 164, a signal person must be designated for any crane lift where the operator does not have clear view of the load. That signal person cannot be in the danger zone themselves. Section 168 requires tag lines for any lift where the load might rotate or swing in a way that could injure workers.

Developing a Rigorous Lift Plan

A lift plan is not just a form. It is a systematic analysis of every element that could go wrong during a hoisting operation and a documented strategy for preventing it. For any non-routine or heavy lift, the plan should be developed by a competent person — ideally a certified rigger or professional engineer for critical lifts — before the lift begins.

At minimum, a lift plan should identify: the load weight and centre of gravity; the lifting device to be used and its rated capacity at the planned working radius; the rigging configuration including sling angles, shackle ratings, and attachment points; the swing radius and exclusion zone; the path the load will travel from pick point to set-down point; any overhead obstructions, proximity hazards, or ground conditions that could affect the lift; and the signal communication method between operator and signal person.

This plan should be reviewed with all workers involved in the lift before it begins. The toolbox talk before a lift is not optional ceremony — it is the moment where everyone verifies shared understanding of who does what, where the danger zones are, and what the stop signal is. In the Toronto propane incident, this kind of pre-lift briefing would likely have identified and prevented the positioning of the worker who was killed.

Struck-By Incidents in Ontario: The Broader Pattern

Struck-by incidents — where a worker is hit by a moving object, vehicle, or load — are among the most consistently fatal categories of workplace injuries in Ontario. According to the Ministry of Labour's Critical Injury and Fatality Summary, struck-by incidents involving cranes, forklifts, and mobile equipment account for a significant proportion of construction and industrial fatalities each year.

The pattern across these incidents is remarkably consistent: a worker is in a location where a load, vehicle, or object can reach them, and a safeguard fails or was never established. The specific technical failure — whether it is swing, tip, brake failure, or operator error — matters less than the underlying question of why a worker was in a position where any of those failures could be fatal.

This is why effective safety management for lifting operations cannot focus only on equipment and rigging. It must also address exclusion zones, worker positioning, supervision, and stop-work authority. A culture where workers feel empowered to call a halt to an unsafe lift — and where that call is respected rather than resented — would have prevented the death in this case and would prevent similar deaths elsewhere.

The Question for Your Workplace

When was the last time you watched a lift at your site? Where were workers standing? Would you bet $375,000 - and a life - that your current practices are adequate?

If you're not sure, that's your answer.