Act Now - The Report of the WCB Legislative Review Panel to the

More documents

Recommendations

Info

STAKEHOLDER QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUMMARY OF RESPONSESf) If yes to (a), should employers have to give a recoveredworker back their old job?g) If yes to (a), should employers have to give a recoveredh) Ifworker a different job if the worker can’t do their oldjob?yes to (a), should employers have to providespecialized equipment (like a voice-activated computer)for a recovered worker so that they can do a job?i) If yes to (a), should there be a time limit after the workeris injured for an employer to re-employ the worker?Yes = 31No = 22Yes = 43No = 6 Should be PolicyYes = 32No = 15Yes = 40No = 8j) If yes to (i), how long? 2 years after the date of injury =101 year after the worker is recovered = 26 Should vary case by case 2 x 6 months When capable to return ASAP after worker has recoveredk) Should the WCB pay employers to “top-up” a recoveredor recovering worker's wages if the only job they can dopays less than their old job?l) Should an employer be stopped from firing a worker whohas come back to work after an injury?m) If yes to (l), for how long after the worker comes back towork?Yes = 61No =17Yes = 48No = 31 Not if fired for a legitimate reason.3 months = 73 to 6 months = 86 months = 17 3 x Depends on circumstances 3 x 1 year 4 x Indefinitely 2 years + 3 x neverAppendix C Page C24 of C33WCB Legislative Review Panel Report December, 2001
STAKEHOLDER QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUMMARY OF RESPONSESFramework for Administration37. The Acts describe what the WCB must keep in mind when decisions are made. For example, any decisions will be made on the merits ofeach case and not on any other case. Also, when looking at evidence and medical opinions, any interpretation will be in favour of theworker. There is concern that the Acts are not clear about what the WCB must do.a) Should decisions be based on precedent (what wasdecided in other cases) rather than on the merits of eachcase?b) If yes to (a), should this be described in the Acts? Yes = 35No = 2c) It has been suggested that there should be a “Client Bill of Rights”? Do you think this is a good idea?Yes = 62No = 17d) If yes to (c), should a client bill of rights be described in the Acts?Yes = 62No = 8Yes = 29No = 58 Except in matters of law38. When the WCB is making decisions about an injured worker’s condition, the injured worker has to see the doctor the WCB wants themto see. The WCB has hired a Medical Advisor (a doctor) to help make these decisions. It has been suggested that the Medical Advisormay not be fair to the worker when there are disagreements about a worker’s condition because the Medical Advisor works for theWCB.a) Do you think that the injured worker should have somesay about the doctors who are making decisions abouttheir medical condition?Yes = 73No = 19 His doctor he sees on his own doctor's advice and not WCB medicaladvisorSAFETY ACTSAuthority and Accountability of the Workers' Compensation Board of Directors39. The responsibility for administering the Safety Act was given by the GNWT to the WCB in 1996. Before that, the territorialgovernment was responsible. In some provinces the government is responsible for safety; in others, it is the WCB.a) Do you think the WCB should keep the responsibility foradministering the Safety Acts?Yes = 68No = 2740. It has been suggested that the Ministers responsible and the WCB need to have advice from employers and workers about workplacesafety on a regular basis.a) Should an Advisory Council on Workplace OccupationalHealth and Safety be established?Yes = 85No = 7Appendix C Page C25 of C33WCB Legislative Review Panel Report December, 2001
Page 1 and 2:
Accountable…to stakeholdersCompen
Page 3 and 4:
Table Of Contents3.4.3 Employers’
Page 5 and 6:
Table Of Contents5.0 A FINAL WORD 1
Page 7 and 8:
The Legislative Review Directorate
Page 9 and 10:
3.0 Workers’Compensation Acts3.1
Page 11 and 12:
2.0 General ThemesDuring the course
Page 13 and 14:
The Panel has generally adopted the
Page 15 and 16:
The Panel did receive positive comm
Page 17 and 18:
wanted was to return to work and st
Page 19 and 20:
2. Are there workers in specific in
Page 21 and 22:
Panel feels legislation should be p
Page 23 and 24:
3.2 WCB Authority and Accountabilit
Page 25 and 26:
WCB Board of Directors may chose to
Page 27 and 28:
3.2.6 Regular Reviews of the Worker
Page 29 and 30:
Recommendations: 3.2.8 Liability Pr
Page 31 and 32:
Legislation in 2 other jurisdiction
Page 33 and 34:
The legislation in other jurisdicti
Page 35 and 36:
ones held accountable for a decisio
Page 37 and 38:
members may be reappointed to the W
Page 39 and 40:
Some suggested that having a compen
Page 41 and 42:
Recommendations: 3.4.2 Workers’ A
Page 43 and 44:
The WCB Board of Directors made the
Page 45 and 46:
esolutions committees, under the au
Page 47 and 48:
The Appeals Tribunal must give the
Page 49 and 50:
The Panel considered the establishm
Page 51 and 52:
Recommendations: 3.5.5 Time Limits
Page 53 and 54:
are not familiar with some of the u
Page 55 and 56:
The Panel was interested in the Ont
Page 57 and 58:
Workers’ compensation payments ar
Page 59 and 60:
3.6.3 Year’s Maximum Insurable Re
Page 61 and 62:
The Acts are very specific in some
Page 63 and 64:
3.6.5 Indexing Compensation by Comm
Page 65 and 66:
2. The legislation should be change
Page 67 and 68:
The Panel considered whether the in
Page 69 and 70:
The Panel heard from some stakehold
Page 71 and 72:
The Acts require any employer, whet
Page 73 and 74:
Respondents to the Stakeholder Ques
Page 75 and 76:
The Panel agrees. We see prior cons
Page 77 and 78:
3.9.3 Authority to Make Investments
Page 79 and 80:
Respondents to the Stakeholder Ques
Page 81 and 82:
The duty to accommodate is not an o
Page 83 and 84:
payments such as income tax or payr
Page 85 and 86:
3.13 Environmental ChangeThe Acts h
Page 87 and 88:
construction permits is a matter of
Page 89 and 90:
date sections, reordering the “pa
Page 91 and 92:
The Panel has recommended changes t
Page 93 and 94:
the WCB when it is contemplating ch
Page 95 and 96:
4. The legislation should be change
Page 97 and 98:
The Panel was asked to consider rec
Page 99 and 100:
No other jurisdictions regulate wor
Page 101 and 102:
4.2.5 Safety InspectionsSome stakeh
Page 103 and 104:
4.4 Employer Responsibilities4.4.1
Page 105 and 106:
The Panel feels that the instrument
Page 107 and 108:
Recommendation: 4.6.2 Consistency w
Page 109 and 110:
others have experience as employers
Page 111 and 112:
While the Panel heard positive comm
Page 113 and 114:
5. Operational versus Legislative I
Page 115 and 116: 3. The legislation should be amende
Page 117 and 118: 3. It is suggested that the first r
Page 119 and 120: 2. The legislation should be change
Page 121 and 122: Recommendations: 3.5.5 Time Limits
Page 125 and 126: Recommendation: 3.7.3 Rewarding Saf
Page 127 and 128: Recommendation: 3.12.4 Employer Rec
Page 131 and 132: Regulations (see also Recommendatio
Page 133 and 134: 5.0 A Final WordThe Panel has recom
Page 135 and 136: Glossary and DefinitionsAccident Fu
Page 137 and 138: Glossary and DefinitionsNet annualr
Page 139 and 140: WCB Legislative Review Panel Terms
Page 141 and 142: WCB LEGISLATIVE REVIEW PANELTERMS O
Page 143 and 144: STAKEHOLDER QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUMMA
Page 165: STAKEHOLDER QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUMMA
Page 177 and 178: SUMMARY OF ISSUES FROM PUBLIC HEARI
Page 183 and 184: Key:SUMMARY OF ISSUES FROM PUBLIC H
Page 193 and 194: Key:SUMMARY OF ISSUES FROM PUBLIC H
Page 199 and 200: smoke.Key:SUMMARY OF ISSUES FROM PU
Page 203 and 204: SUMMARY OF FORMAL PRESENTATIONS AND
Page 205: SUMMARY OF FORMAL PRESENTATIONS AND
show all

Act Now - The Report of the WCB Legislative Review Panel to the

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?