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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Recommendations: 3.11.1 Authority to Set Financial Penalties1. The legislation should be changed to remove the specific amounts of financialpenalties.2. The legislation should be changed to enable the Minister, on the advice of the WCBBoard of Directors, to set the level of financial penalties by regulation.3. It is suggested the WCB Board of Directors review the current level of financialpenalties with a view to bringing the amounts of financial penalties up-to-date andadvise the Minister of the results of their review.3.11.2 Application of PenaltiesSome stakeholders told us that they experienced hardship when those required to performan action under the Acts failed to do so. An example given to the Panel was a healthcentre failing to report to the WCB.The Acts are clear that all who fail to comply are subject to penalty. Therefore, the Paneldoes not see this as a legislative issue. We agree that those named in the Acts must liveup to their responsibilities. If they do not, the Acts provide for consequences.3.12 Employer Responsibilities3.12.1 Duty to AccommodateAn employer’s duty to accommodate a recovered worker is one that has been introducedinto the legislation of 5 other jurisdictions. Essentially, an employer has a legislated dutyto re-employ a recovered worker. Whether the worker is re-employed in their previousjob or in another job is dependent on the recovered worker’s capability to perform thework.WCB Legislative Review Panel Report Page 75 of 128December, 2001
The duty to accommodate is not an open one. The length of recovery time after a workrelatedaccident, the size of the employer, the length of time a worker had been with theemployer, are all examples of limiting circumstances. The legislation does not oblige anemployer to create a job if the recovered worker is not able and capable of performing anexisting job.The duty to accommodate is also found in the collective agreements between someworkers and employers.The Panel heard from stakeholders who promoted a duty to accommodate in almost allcircumstances and stakeholders who did not support the duty to accommodate at all.Respondents to the Stakeholder Questionnaire were almost evenly split in their views,with a slight majority in favour of the principle that an employer should accommodate arecovered worker.In keeping with the Panel’s view that one of the purposes of the workers’ compensationsystem is to see a recovered worker return to work, we support the principle of anemployer’s duty to accommodate. The Panel also believes there should be limitationsplaced on an employer’s duty to accommodate:These limitations include:1. An employer should not be forced to create a job. The duty to accommodate arecovered worker should not impose an economic hardship on the employer.2. The job itself should be meaningful work. It may not be the same work the recoveredworker performed before the work-related accident, but it must be a “real” job.3. The size of the employer’s regular workforce is a factor to consider. ManyNWT/Nunavut employers operate seasonal businesses where the size of theirworkforce changes dramatically. Many other employers operate small businesseswhere a duty to accommodate would be a hardship.WCB Legislative Review Panel Report Page 76 of 128December, 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: Respondents to the Stakeholder Ques
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 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 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 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
SUMMARY OF ISSUES FROM PUBLIC HEARI
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Key:SUMMARY OF ISSUES FROM PUBLIC H
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Key:SUMMARY OF ISSUES FROM PUBLIC H
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
smoke.Key:SUMMARY OF ISSUES FROM PU
Page 201 and 202:
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?