How many steps have you seen managing the risk:
Example: southern 416 Thursday night a mad shooter in the hallway and we hear a
What do we do?
Can a prof just leave? A prof is master of the room and the shooter just enters so the
prof just hides under the desk.
The guy is actually in the corridor everybody gets nervous
1. Turn off the lights
2. Everybody affirmative “everybody on the ground”
Hunting is a notion of game
The guy is actually not moving once everybody is secured check to see where the
Avoid people moving (targets)
Are professors trained for this type of situation NO
Different for high school?
Exercise of lockdown there is a training they know the drill… what about university
What’s the probability of risk? Very little happens everywhere…. We need to have
dictators increase the level of security
It’s the spit of intervention
In1980 when we had the massacre
Police had the policy if there was a mad shooter in the building they wont enter the
premise until have backup the guy took all the women… and shot them… the policy
is now that the first to enter the premise is suppose to take action… we have changed
the policies… but then we take the plane.. Today the door sealed something goes on
the actual cabin is land the plane… you actually bring it down right away they don’t
open the door until they land the plane.
When you have a plane someone starts to be stupid on the plane..
Today the first authority to enter the premise needs to act… if he doesn’t otherwise
hes not doing the work the whole thing is changed you need to have indicators to have
a lockdown. Nobody is trained for a mad shooter..
How we organize who makes the decision how we do it?
Look at all these cases always happens in a small area…other risks would be health
Now we jump into disputes
How do we resolve disputes?
First key thing when we resolves we start we
1. Mediation so what does that mean?
It means we will try to get an independent third party that will bring the party to
compromise so consequently we are trying to get two parties to come at the table and
solve the problem
Bring oil sand to west coast so we can to export to India and china so Aboriginals are
like no its our land so what is the thing that we can do so aboriginal can let us cross
The problem is that aboriginal in those reserves don’t want money if you are going to
crack you are will to let their be a self government there if you get a pipe lines. So then we can compromise… oil bloom will be over in 2030 US is going to be the
greatest exporters of oil. Who’s to first country to quebec ? Algeria ….
We need to get a pipeline from alberta to montreal n nothing to ontario
You want to wait 30 years
You invoke environmental issues.. no a lot of people are like Canadians will pump
their own oil which
1995 less than 500 oil train cars to get oil 50k this year alone.. is it going to increase..
everybody has to compromise
2. Arbitration an independent party that will impose a decision to resolve the
conflict.. both parties come up with the argument then solve then we come up with a
compromise: the independent party is the actual arbitrator the ruling is final without
appeals only the access of justice
Example: one wants black color in the room and one wants blue
Then one of them have to compromise but then we bring in an arbitrator who will rule
a final decision.
The point is this all these concept have to be explained to an arbitrator
Lets add an glitch labor relation.
We are losing the political negotiation with legal battle of two groups in front of the
arbitrator (lose the power to this person)
Look at the price to go see Chicago..
If you look at the ESP list of professional teams..
Quality of show you get vs the price of the ticket…
3. litigation (ONLY WHEN NO OTHER ROUTES TO GO )> go to trial two
parties are arguing and judge. .. a judge that will determine the elements of what
needs to be decide… what are the steps that we have to follow when have to go to the
1/ statement of claims: someone has to argue that there is a reason to do to do this
type of procedure… e.g: bad way when the bus hits the train bad way of being robbed
away from their life. Is there going to be a case against OC Transport the via rail said
they did everything correctly.. OC transport maybe at risk here what would be the
possible reason why this happened? The guy had an heart attack.. When you are in an
why this case? What are w looking for? Money? Financial obligation.. And especially
if the driver was under the influence of alcohol
2/ defenses: accept the statements that you deemed to see agreeable. And then you
will reject those other statements e.g: I took the bus at 8 o clock in the morning so the
other party says yes (verify)
3/Check to see all their claims: (dozing because social commitment… the guy was
actually was well awake you have to prove that he was dozing on the wheel at the last
moment he did put the brakes if its speeding what is speeding if the limit 60 what is
65 … 5 k out of 60.. it becomes an evidence issue with the experts.. you might as well
cut a deal and inquiry and learn from what is the issue of transport.. but lets settle that
issue through litigation) 3/ counter c