Canadian Payroll Reporter

Published 12 times a year by Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. Subscription rate: $179 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/Editor-in-Chief Todd Humber Editor Sheila Brawn sbrawn@rogers.com Editor/Supervisor Sarah Dobson News Editor Marcel Vander Wier Sales Manager Paul Burton paul.burton@thomsonreuters.com (416) 649-9928 Marketing Manager Robert Symes rob.symes@thomsonreuters.com (416) 649-9551 Circulation Co-ordinator Keith Fulford keith.fulford@thomsonreuters.com (416) 649-9585 Payroll Reporter Can R Can R adian adian a www.payroll-reporter.com ©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). Return Mail Registration # 1522825 | Return Postage Guaranteed Paid News Revenue Toronto Canadian Payroll 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 News September 2017 | CPR Report calls for end to WCB surplus distribution terminates their wage-loss ben- efits via deeming." However, business groups, such as the Canadian Associa- tion of Petroleum Producers, questioned the need for a rein- statement requirement, saying: "If an employee believes they are not being accommodated, the appropriate remedy is under hu- man rights legislation." In its report, the panel recom- mended that a return-to-work obligation be limited to employ- ers of a certain size (it did not specify the size), with small em- ployers possibly exempted. It also suggested that the re- quirement apply to employers for 24 months after an accident or illness. To fulfill the obliga- tion, employers should have to employ the workers for at least a year after they returned. Continuing coverage under an employer's health benefits plan (dental, vision care) would be another way to alleviate work- ers' financial worries, the report recommended. The recommended length of time for maintaining benefits would depend on whether the government implemented the return-to-work recommenda- tion, the report said. If there was an obligation to reinstate workers, the report said health benefits coverage should continue through the pe- riod employees are off and then return to work. If there is no obligation to re- employ the workers, the report said employers should have to maintain benefits for one year from the date of the illness or ac- cident. This would be similar to a requirement in Ontario. Looking at benefits and em- ployer assessments, the panel advised the WCB continue using a maximum insurable earnings ceiling when calculating wage- loss benefits for injured workers and employer premiums. Labour groups had called for the government to eliminate the ceiling and base benefits and premiums on workers' full gross earnings. To address concerns about injured workers whose earnings are higher than the maximum, the report suggested that the government implement an addi- tional special graduated benefit. "This additional benefit would increase the worker's total WCB benefit for a period of time and help compensate for wage losses in excess of those covered by typical WCB benefits under the maximum insurable earnings cap," the report said. The report also touched on the WCB's practice of distribut- ing surpluses from its accident fund to employers when the fund exceeds its target range. Every employer registered with the WCB pays premiums into the accident fund for work- ers' compensation coverage. The board uses the fund to pay cur- rent and future workers' com- pensation claims costs. The board also invests the funds in financial markets, with a policy of keeping the fund's as- sets between 114 per cent and 128 per cent of total liabilities. If the fund falls short, the WCB collects additional amounts from employers. If it exceeds the target range, the WCB can choose to return some of the surplus to employers. The report called for an end to distributing the surplus, saying it was not an appropriate use of the money. "Under the current practice there is no way to ensure that the distributed money will be used for workers' compensation pur- poses. It flows to employers with 'no strings attached,'" it said. The report recommended that the money only be used to support the workers' compen- sation system, keeping the sur- plus in the fund to pay for future claims or to help offset increases in employer assessments that may result from implementing the report's recommendations. The panel also looked at expe- rience rating programs that the WCB uses to help set employer premium rates. Experience rat- ing enables the board to provide discounts or add surcharges to employers' premiums based on their individual accident claims history. During the consultations, the AFL called for the programs to be eliminated. "The purpose of workers' compensation is to compensate injured workers, not improve workplace safety. There is good evidence that employers respond to experience rating by engaging in claims management behaviours," it said, adding that this could include suppressing claim reports. While the panel agreed that there were questions about the effectiveness of experience rat- ing, including whether it discour- ages accident reporting or actu- ally results in safer workplaces, it was against elimination. Beyond experience rating, the report said the WCB needs to examine how it sets employer premiums: "There are many questions and concerns swirl- ing around the way in which the WCB calculates assessment rates. Without being able to clearly discern how rates are be- ing set, stakeholders have come to be suspicious that some kind of 'funny business' happens behind the scenes. There is an urgent need for openness and clarity, otherwise trust and confidence in the rate-setting process risk being further undermined." While the panel said an in- depth examination of the rate- setting process was too complex for the scope of its review, it advised the WCB board of di- rectors to commission an inde- pendent study to examine some issues further. from PANEL on page 3 Beyond experience rating, the report said the WCB needs to examine how it sets employer premiums.

• Cover