Whitehorse Daily Star

Company had been reminded it would need a permit

A B.C. company working on the new F.H. Collins Secondary School has been fined $2,300 for violations of the territory’s gas-burning devices legislation.

By Rhiannon Russell on August 18, 2015

A B.C. company working on the new F.H. Collins Secondary School has been fined $2,300 for violations of the territory’s gas-burning devices legislation.

Shawn Madu, part-owner of Kelowna-based Christman Plumbing and Heating, pleaded guilty in territorial court this morning on behalf of the company to failing to obtain gas fitter licences and a permit to install gas equipment.

Both are required under the Yukon’s Gas Burning Devices Act regulations before work begins on a site.

Government lawyer Tracy-Anne McPhee said that last spring, a mechanical inspector in the building safety branch became aware that Christman had purchased several boilers and gas appliances for the F. H. Collins project.

He confirmed that the department had issued no gas-installation permit. On April 2, the inspector took a tour of the site and found “virtually all of the piping work had been done,” said McPhee.

Some of it had already been covered over by roofing and other barriers to enclose it, she said. No gas appliances were yet hooked up.

Not only was there no permit, but the workers had B.C. gas fitter licences, not the required Yukon ones. To get a Yukon licence, a propane gas examination must be completed.

“It’s not onerous, it’s not difficult, it’s not time-consuming, it’s not expensive,” McPhee said of the process.

At the site, a stop work order was issued while inspectors examined the piping. It was all done properly and did not have to be removed, they concluded.

A permit was then issued by the department for the work that had already been done, and a second permit was issued for continuing work.

An aggravating factor in the case is that the branch’s manager had reminded Christman that it would need to obtain a permit after the company was awarded the contract in the spring of 2014, McPhee said.

She noted the “primary goal” of the legislation is community safety, which is particularly relevant in this case, with a school involved.

There have been court cases in the past of B.C. companies not realizing or ignoring the fact that their provincial licences aren’t effective here, McPhee said.

The maximum fine typically imposed in these cases has been $2,000 for each charge.

But in this case, McPhee said $1,000 per charge would be appropriate, because the company was co-operative with the investigation and the work was done properly.

Madu told Judge Donald Luther it was also Christman’s first offence in the Yukon or British Columbia.

He said the company had done everything possible to co-operate with the process and is taking the proper measures to get permits and licences.

Christman also worked on the new Dawson City hospital and is now working on the Carcross learning centre, Madu said.

Luther imposed the $2,000 total fine for both charges, plus a $300 surcharge.

Madu said he would pay it today.

Comments (8)

Up 5 Down 5

Jonathan Colby on Aug 21, 2015 at 5:49 pm

Indeed I have.

It should be said, before you go throwing around the 'b' word, that being close to the situation doesn't mean I am necessarily sympathetic. If I were to be honest and thorough, there would be less flattering things I could say. I only defend because there seems to be a lot of venom and little substance aimed at this one employer. I owe them no loyalty, but I think I owe it to the greater conversation to provide a story closer to the reality than simply provoking the phantoms of economic threat by lamenting how many people come here from Outside.

The failure to get a permit was negligence, pure and simple. I mentioned that I see a lot of regulatory procedures done afterwards, but now that I think about it, that has more to do with my time with the construction industry in the GVRD. I will make no apologies for such actions, I only pointed out such things are common. Note in the article that the fine was reduced because there was ample cooperation from the defendant.

If local individuals working this site made fair wage, then there's no foul. Equal pay isn't part of the act, except along gender lines. Even if they were picked for shifts with no OT while the out of towners got the better shifts, I don't think that is illegal. It's unpleasant, but it's in play as a business tactic.

The reality is, we live in a global market. Employees of local companies came from elsewhere, are they to be shamed and criticized for their local involvement?

Mostly though, I played defense here because I am always appalled at the xenophobia in the Yukon and how inflammatory it gets. Everyone comes from somewhere, and almost all the money in this territory comes from somewhere else! Pretty sure none of the materials for, oh, almost any capital project were locally produced, either. Manage your expectations, folks, and point the finger where it belongs if you want to see local firms getting preferential treatment on capital project bidding. The Yukon Party meddled with this project and obliterated the collaborative, locally sourced effort on this project in favour of he scenario we got. If you don't like it, stop voting YP! If you don't like competition, then too bad. That's the way world works. I don't like it, but I ain't gonna close my eyes and deny it, either.

Up 3 Down 2

Jon not out of work on Aug 21, 2015 at 3:39 pm

Jonathan Colby, have you worked for or subcontracted to CPH on this or any other project? Is your rant possible bias? You generally don't get convictions in court and accusations of not paying fair wage by playing by the rules ( as far as I know).

Up 5 Down 4

mech tech on Aug 21, 2015 at 8:16 am

Be interesting if Christman uses the same sound bite about them being a good family company. What a joke.

Up 13 Down 5

Jonathan Colby on Aug 20, 2015 at 5:34 pm

I would like to mention some things on this matter.

Christman, while here, took pains to hire local plumbers. The results were disappointing. They pay according to the fair wage for any employee based in the Yukon, and (as far as I know) comply with union rates for union members who are under the local's collective agreement. They even kept employed locals who were performing poorly in the name of local hire.

I agree with Steve, that documentation should be provided up front. However, despite any criticisms I may have regarding CPH and putting the cart before the horse, that way of organizing these projects seems typical, where a contractor will deal with the bureaucratic end of things only when confronted about them. It isn't excusable, it just seems to be part of the culture.

The Yukon gas act is a distinct animal from other jurisdictions in Western Canada, and yes, the onus is on the contractor to familiarize themselves with the regulations of the areas in which they'll be operating. That said, in neither BC nor Alberta would their behaviour been out of line. This isn't cutting corners, it's a mistake; the first pancake never turns out perfect. They complied with the process, and bent over backwards for A LOCAL CONTRACTOR, who was responsible for the second permit and the installation from that point.

And finally, I would caution readers to watch their words; many individuals who are a part of CPH are located here in Whitehorse. They're not invaders here to pillage the countryside and leave.

If so many locals are out of work, then they aren't looking hard enough. There is lots of work out there for qualified people who are willing to go out and find it. Complaining about every company that rolls into town and crying about how they took our jobs isn't an honest examination of the industry, nor an accurate portrayal of the local workforce.

Up 11 Down 6

YT Tradesman on Aug 20, 2015 at 4:15 pm

Check around and see who's doing the work these days. Outside general and mechanical on the new hospital addition, the new ambulance station on hospital road, looks like the new CopperRidge extended care will be outside contractors.

Up 24 Down 7

steve on Aug 19, 2015 at 12:14 pm

Why was this contract awarded when it would have been very simple to say in the bid process proponents must have the required license approvals and be eligible to work within the Yukon before submitting a proposal. Please include documentation to support these requirements.
This would never have happened. On top of that it would have been easy to put in the bid package and the contract that the contractor must abide by the fair wage scale set in the Yukon.

Who were the rookies that put out this proposal and created the contract and who is the CM who should know all this?

Up 32 Down 9

Tim on Aug 19, 2015 at 7:56 am

This is the same contractor that was accused of not paying the fair wage scale also. How are they still allowed to bid on work in the Yukon? This company seems to be cutting a lot of corners at Yukoners expense, both in pay for locals and the product our taxes are paying for.

Up 29 Down 10

Wundering on Aug 19, 2015 at 7:47 am

Great to see we are keeping these out of territory contractors busy, we will need them when there are no local contractors left in the Yukon.

Add your comments or reply via Twitter @whitehorsestar

In order to encourage thoughtful and responsible discussion, website comments will not be visible until a moderator approves them. Please add comments judiciously and refrain from maligning any individual or institution. Read about our user comment and privacy policies.

Your name and email address are required before your comment is posted. Otherwise, your comment will not be posted.