10.07.2015 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

2. <strong>The</strong> legislation should be changed <strong>to</strong> require <strong>the</strong> Minister <strong>to</strong> set <strong>the</strong> remuneration for<strong>the</strong> Vice-Chairperson when <strong>the</strong> Vice-Chairperson is acting for <strong>the</strong> Chairperson inregulation.3. <strong>The</strong> legislation should be changed <strong>to</strong> require <strong>the</strong> Minister <strong>to</strong> set <strong>the</strong> remuneration formembers <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Appeals Tribunal, including <strong>the</strong> Chairperson, in regulation.3.4 Stakeholder AdvisorsIn principle, <strong>the</strong> <strong>Panel</strong> believes <strong>the</strong>re should not be a need for stakeholder advisors. Ifthose administering <strong>the</strong> legislation are doing so in a manner that embodies <strong>the</strong> spirit andintent <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Meredith Principles and treats stakeholders with <strong>the</strong> respect and compassionthat is deserved, why is ano<strong>the</strong>r layer <strong>of</strong> bureaucracy required? <strong>The</strong> <strong>WCB</strong> administrationshould all be stakeholder advisors. <strong>The</strong> <strong>Panel</strong> understands that administra<strong>to</strong>rs can makemistakes. However, this is why <strong>the</strong>re is an appeals process.Stakeholder advisors are not going <strong>to</strong> address <strong>the</strong> inherent problems with administrationor legislation that have come <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Panel</strong>’s attention.As stated earlier in Section 2.5, Operational Versus <strong>Legislative</strong> Issues, <strong>the</strong> <strong>Panel</strong> believesthat an independent operational review is required immediately <strong>to</strong> examine <strong>the</strong>operational and administrative issues brought <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Panel</strong>’s attention. <strong>The</strong> <strong>Panel</strong> fur<strong>the</strong>rbelieves that until <strong>the</strong> legislative issues brought <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Panel</strong>’s attention have beenresolved and <strong>the</strong> spirit and intent <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> legislative direction is reflected in <strong>the</strong>administration <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Act</strong>s, <strong>the</strong>re is a reason <strong>to</strong> continue with stakeholder advisors in someform.3.4.1 Compensation AdvisorIt was suggested <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Panel</strong> that instead <strong>of</strong> a workers’ or employers’ advisor, <strong>the</strong>position <strong>of</strong> “compensation advisor” should be legislated. Respondents <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> StakeholderQuestionnaire were evenly split on this suggestion.<strong>WCB</strong> <strong>Legislative</strong> <strong>Review</strong> <strong>Panel</strong> <strong>Report</strong> Page 33 <strong>of</strong> 128December, 2001

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!