If I may add, we have a compliance continuum that we look at in terms of looking at our work, supplemented by business intelligence about which sectors, which industry, which companies may be problematic. I don't mean that they're necessarily bad employers, but they just don't know. They could be a new employer and so on.
When you look at that compliance continuum and you look at our officers' roles, if they're spending all of their time on the right side of the continuum, which is responding and addressing issues after the fact, we are missing the opportunity to actually prevent all of that from happening.
As I said, I've had the opportunity to go from coast to coast to shadow and to ride along with our health and safety officers, and I've done both, where they've had to deal with refusals in a very heated capacity, with lots of tensions and emotions and trying to resolve issues. They do a pretty good job of that, quite frankly. But it's a lot of energy spent that they're not spending on the front end, which is going and talking to big employers that have their challenges, that don't have a hazardous prevention program, that haven't built a culture with that. Spending time and energy and effort there has a bigger and a longer-term payoff, in our view. So by moving to this model of an internal responsibility system and freeing our officers up to spend more time in that domain, we think it will have greater results. We have been moving towards that model for quite some time, and you can see the rates for disability and injuries have steadily declined.
Imagine if we can spend more efforts on that, because the accidents and the injuries that are out there are not acceptable. We don't want to see more. We want to prevent them.
