CSR | September 2017 | News
The same day as the physio-
therapist's assessment, the farm
operation presented a written
offer of modified work: making
box lids with no production rate,
or weighing mushrooms on the
production line with a stool and
footrest. The worker rejected the
offer and on Oct. 1, the employer
– believing the modified work it
offered was within the restric-
tions indicated by the physio-
therapist – advised that it would
not be extending his contract.
The next day, a surgeon recom-
mended arthroscopic surgery.
The WSIB rejected the work-
er's claim, finding he didn't prove
that the worker had an accident
at work that caused the left knee
injury. Both the board and an ap-
peals resolution officer agreed
with the employer that "relative-
ly little force is required to move
even the heaviest skids with the
hydraulic hand-truck" and the
employer had reported no other
work-related injuries by employ-
ees in the truck driver position.
They also found the medical evi-
dence didn't support a new inju-
ry arising out of and in the course
of the worker's employment.
The worker's claim went be-
fore the tribunal, which referred
to a medical article provided by
the employer that such injuries
as that suffered by the worker
were caused by "direct trauma"
leading to a twist or sudden blow
to the knee. The worker's de-
scription of his workplace acci-
dent didn't follow such a mecha-
nism, the tribunal said.
The tribunal also agreed that
there was no medical opinion
supporting a causal relation-
ship between the accident and
the nature of the knee injury,
and the MRI showed an injury
inconsistent with the worker's
description of the accident but
consistent with his older injury.
While the worker suggested
the accident could have aggra-
vated an underlying condition,
the tribunal found no medical
evidence to support this, either.
The symptoms could have come
back without an aggravating in-
cident, said the tribunal.
The tribunal also found the
fact the worker finished his shift
on the day of the accident and
worked a long day afterwards
didn't support the fact the work-
er was disabled by the accident
itself. The worker's reasons for
not reporting didn't hold water,
as there was no reason to think
he would be terminated, espe-
cially since he shared details
about his earlier injury. In ad-
dition, it didn't make sense for
him to mention to a co-worker
his injury but not discuss how to
report such injuries.
The tribunal noted that the
worker's delay in seeking medi-
cal attention called into question
the severity of the symptoms he
experienced right afterwards,
and also suggested the worker
was familiar with certain symp-
toms from his older injury. In
addition, it was unlikely the
worker's physician declined to
fill out an injury report but likely
the worker simply didn't report a
work-related accident or injury.
The evidence also showed the
worker had had some training
on the reporting procedure for
workplace injuries because he
had signed off on an orientation
sheet that included training on
incident reporting.
The tribunal found the worker
wasn't entitled to workers' com-
pensation benefits for his knee
pain and swelling, which were
likely symptoms from a pre-ex-
isting condition from his earlier
injury.
For more information see:
• Decision No. 2151/16, 2017
CarswellOnt 8663 (Ont.
Workplace Safety & Insurance
Appeals Trib.).
No worker's compensation < pg. 5
Worker waited nearly 2 weeks to report injury
WEBINARS
Interested in learning more about safety and HR issues directly from the experts? Check out the Carswell
Professional Development Centre's live and on-demand webinars discussing topics such as Ontario's
sexual violence and harassment plan act, chemicals in the workplace, and fall protection.
Visit www.cpdcentre.ca/cos for more information.
©2017 Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd
ISBN/ISSN: 978-0-7798-2810-4
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the written
permission of the publisher (Thomson Reuters, Media Solutions, Canada).
Canadian Safety Reporter is part of the
Canadian HR Reporter group of publications:
• Canadian HR Reporter — www.hrreporter.com
• Canadian Occupational Safety magazine — www.cos-mag.com
• Canadian Payroll Reporter — www.payroll-reporter.com
• Canadian Employment Law Today — www.employmentlawtoday.com
• Canadian Labour Reporter — www.labour-reporter.com
See carswell.com for information
Safety Reporter
Canadian
www.safety-reporter.com
Published 12 times a year by
Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd.
Subscription rate: $129 per year
Customer Service
Tel: (416) 609-3800 (Toronto)
(800) 387-5164 (outside Toronto)
Fax: (416) 298-5106
E-mail: customersupport.legaltaxcanada@tr.com
Website: www.carswell.com
One Corporate Plaza 2075 Kennedy Road
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M1T 3V4
Director, Media Solutions, Canada Karen Lorimer
Publisher/Managing Editor Todd Humber
Lead Editor Jeffrey R. Smith
Assistant Editor Mallory Hendry
Marketing & Audience
Development Manager Robert Symes
rob.symes@thomsonreuters.com
(416) 649-9551
Circulation Co-ordinator Keith Fulford
keith.fulford@thomsonreuters.com
(416) 649-9585
Sales Manager Paul Burton
paul.burton@thomsonreuters.com
(416) 649-9928
