Injured workers deal with accident aftermath

Written by  Michelle Morra 27 June 2008
When a worker gets injured on the job, the issues that the victim and the family face can be challenging. In addition to the physical and psychological hardships, difficulties can also arise from the process involved in filing a claim, getting assistance and getting back on the job. 


What goes wrong
Aside from the pain and confusion that result from a workplace injury, worker representatives report a litany of other issues:

 
Staying in touch. Injured workers and their employers are required by law to be in regular contact while the worker is recovering. Sometimes that works. Other times, says Emmink, workers feel harassed, or the employers feel like it’s a waste of time to keep checking in, especially if it’s something like a routine case of repetitive strain injury. “There’s basically a real lack of understanding amongst the parties regarding the goals and objectives around the injured worker,” he says.

 
Deeming. When early and safe return to work is unlikely, the compensation board assesses the need for a “labour market re-entry” (LMR) plan or “vocational rehabilitation.” The worker is “deemed” to fit a certain kind of job, based on his or her functional abilities, skills, and pre-injury salary. Often, jobs are hard to find or the injured worker might not get hired. That’s a real bone of contention, says Jorma Halonen, director of the Office of the Worker Adviser in Ontario. “Whether you get this type of job or not is immaterial,” he says.

Ontario has responded to this problem by adding the word “available” to the legislation. The proposed or “deemed” work must not only be suitable but “available.” It helps, says Emmink.

Another common concern is that of low wage earners, says Steve Mantis, a long-time injured worker advocate who has received awards for his contributions to the cause. “If you were earning $10 an hour or less, the LMR could say you could pump gas, you don’t need help, goodbye, you’re not entitled to any benefits,” he says. “And we don’t know what happens to those people. They’re no longer part of the compensation system.”

New problems with an old work-related injury. “What we have seen so often,” says Mantis, “is people will get hurt, recover over time, go back to work, get hurt again because accommodations or conditions weren’t appropriate, and they have limitations or residual injuries. Over a series of incidents, the disability gets progressively worse.”

Failure to retrain. The injured worker usually has a time limit and must be retrained by a set date as outlined in the LMR plan. “We’ve heard lots of stories of people getting sent for school while still on heavy medication,” says Mantis. These people can’t concentrate and have trouble retaining information. If they start missing days or falling behind, they may be deemed to be uncooperative. “All along the way, people seem to kind of fall off the wagon.”

 
Poverty. Halonen says there’s a myth out there that injured workers profit from their injuries. Unless you’re the widow of someone who worked in a uranium mine and receive retroactive benefits after years of appeals, he says, don’t expect a windfall. Even inflation protection, which workers had in the past, is no longer provided. “There are some who are successfully rehabilitated, but some don’t and become very poor.”


On the right track
For years injured worker groups have raised numerous concerns, alleging that the boards are being partial to the interests of their financial stakeholders – the employers. But Halonen, who represents worker’s interests at workers’ compensation appeals, believes the boards are generally fair. “They do have to deal with the employers in dealing with the assessments, and there’s pressure to keep the assessments down.” Still, at least in his own jurisdiction, Halonen says no one could rightfully say the WSIB has an employer bias.

<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 Next > End >>
(Page 2 of 3)
Last modified on Friday, 26 September 2008 06:20

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

 

Reader Poll
Should Canada impose a total ban on manufacturing and exporting of asbestos products?