Canadian Safety Reporter - sample

3 Prosthetic limbs a secondary condition from workplace injury: Tribunal Worker originally denied benefits for injury suffered from slip and fall related to unsteadiness with 2 artificial legs and 1 artificial arm BY JEFFREY R. SMITH AN ONTARIO worker is entitled to additional workers' com- pensation benefits for injuries sustained in a fall caused by unsteadiness in his prosthetic limbs which he had from earlier workplace injuries, the Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal has ruled. The 63-year-old worker was seriously injured in a workplace accident on Sept. 9, 1980. His injuries included severe electri- cal burns which resulted in him having to have both legs ampu- tated below the knee and his left arm amputated below the elbow. The Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) granted the worker a 100 per cent permanent disability pen- sion, an independent living al- lowance, and other benefits. In the wake of the accident, the worker was fitted with pros- thetic limbs for both legs and his left arm. He was able to continue a fairly active life, raising a fam- ily and restoring cars as a hobby, while living off his permanent disability benefits. He also be- came involved in his wife's deliv- ery business. However, the worker often had difficulty with his balance because of his three prosthetic limbs, especially if the surface upon which he was walking changed. When he slipped, he couldn't stop himself from fall- ing without a railing and it was easy to trip. If his balance was thrown off, it was hard for him to react, so he had to concentrate on each and every step he took. In February 2008, the worker stepped out of his truck onto un- even ground. He slipped and fell, hurting his right arm and shoul- der. He visited his doctor a few days later and was referred for an ultrasound of his shoulder. The ultrasound discovered an injury to a tendon, but no tear. The doc- tor reported that the worker's amputations caused him to have difficulties with his balance and the fall may have been caused by those balance issues. The worker applied to the WSIB for benefits from his slip and fall, claiming it was the re- sult of his lack of balance due to his amputations and prosthetic limbs, which constituted a sec- ondary condition arising out of his original workplace injury and therefore arose out of and in the course of employment, as required under the Ontario Workplace Safety and Insur- ance Act. In January 2013, an admin- istrative error resulted in the employee receiving a duplicate cheque of his monthly inde- pendent living allowance. The duplicate cheque had a differ- ent bill identification number from the original cheque, so the worker — who received several different benefit cheques related to his disability and health care expenses related to his pros- thetic limbs — didn't realize the error and deposited the cheque. He thought the larger amount might be to cover mistakes made in the various things covered by the payments and no explana- tion was provided. An appeals resolution officer denied the worker's claim for the secondary injury resulting from his fall but granted a par- tial reimbursement for the cost of a four-wheel drive option for his truck. However, a WSIB case manager deducted the amount of the January 2013 overpay- ment from the reimbursement. The worker appealed both the rejection of his benefits claim and the deduction of the over- payment. Causal link between poor balance and original injury The tribunal noted that the WSIB's operational policy man- ual had a document covering secondary conditions resulting from a work-related disability. This document stipulates that such conditions that are "caus- ally linked to the work-related injury will derive benefits to compensate for the further ag- gravation of the work-related impairment or for new injuries." The tribunal found that the report from the worker's doctor and the worker's experiences liv- ing with three prosthetic limbs indicated it was difficult for the worker to control his balance and prevent himself from fall- ing. Even if there was ice on the ground at the time of the work- er's fall, his condition made it more likely he would fall, said the tribunal. The tribunal referred to an- other policy manual document that covered artificial appliances. The document considered such appliances — or prosthetics — that when worn were exten- sions of the body. The document went on state: "If a work-related accident or disease results in a permanent impairment requir- Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2016 News | September 2016 | CSR Credit: Shutterstock/RUCHUDA BOONPLIEN Lack > pg. 7

• Cover