Mar 042018
 

By Gerald

Yesterday I sent out an e-mail specific to the Appeals Commission denying requests to subpoena doctors and payment of conduct money. Interesting enough the Court of Queens Bench determined that the Appeals Commission cannot simply deny the request and especially when there is a difference of medical opinion and cross examination is required https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2010/2010abqb393/2010abqb393.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAHam9obnNvbgAAAAAB&resultIndex=8

The Appeals Commission appealed the decision of the Court of Queens Bench to the Alberta Court of Appeals who upheld the decision of the Court of Queens Bench https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abca/doc/2011/2011abca345/2011abca345.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAHam9obnNvbgAAAAAB&resultIndex=24

Question is what makes these pathetic people believe that they can make their own rules that contradict and disregard decisions of Alberta’s highest court. One of the reasons why subpoenaing of doctors is necessary is that the system runs entirely on documentary evidence which for the most part is based on false and misleading medical opinions which are then reviewed by lay people with no expertise in medicine. Without any expertise in medicine and without cross examination how then can any Adjudicator determine which doctor or doctors are correct. This is impossible. Whether it is civil law or criminal law, without cross examination, the whole system would fail if documentary evidence was the only method used.

The next question if in fact the Appeals commission does subpoena doctors, who pays their conduct money. The conduct money must be paid out of the accident fund to ensure that all workers are given a fair hearing. The Alberta Rules of Court do not apply as I have explained before as an in person hearing is not a trial, it is a hearing as the rules of civil procedure do not apply in administrative law.

According to the WCA, WCB provides insurance but do not fall under the Insurance Act which means that WCB is the only unregulated business in the province of Alberta who can do as they want as without regulation they have absolute power to do whatever they want. Unfortunately, the Minster in charge of the system is not in charge of anything but collects her extra pay because she is a Minister who is in charge of nothing.

Despite the decision of the SCC in the Martin case, the Alberta WCB still remains one of the few provinces that do not recognize chronic pain. The Government has not enacted regulations to provide PCI ratings for chronic pain, thus denying workers from benefits that are based on chronic pain.

A class action lawsuit in Ontario against WSIB based on misfeasance in public office was settled out of court. The specifics of the class action based on misfeasance in public office was that WSIB were subtracting PCI ratings assessed on pre-existing conditions from a whole person PCI rating resulting in a reduced PCI rating. This is referred to as apportioning. This involved ignoring the thin skull rule of law which means that worker is taken or hired as the employer finds them. The Alberta WCB uses Policy 03-02 Part II Application 1 Question 5 to illegally apportion PCI ratings to reduce a PCI rating resulting in reduced pensions and benefits. Surely, they cannot say this is an honest mistake as any fool knows that the thin skull rule applies in law.

Question is why would the NDP government select and pay three people ( WCB Review Panel)to investigate and make recommendations when they were not qualified. The CIWAA along with long term claim workers would have done this for nothing and in a matter of a few weeks that would have resulted in meaningful changes to the WCA, WCB Policies and WC Regulations.

When I was an Advisor to Justice Friedman, one of my recommendations was to make Appeals Commission decisions totally transparent. My reasoning was that I could track doctors, Case Managers, DRDRB on Canlii simply by inputting their names in the document box and every claim involving these people would come up which is a very valuable tool to determine which doctors were providing contrary medical evidence.which DRDRB members were biased, which Case managers were biased. Questionably if in fact that because of FOIP, as I was told they  could not do this. That being the case then why is it allowed in the courts when researching Canlii, the courts name the worker, the doctors which allows me to check out the doctors as to their medical opinions.I also can if the name of the worker was placed on Canlii, I could contact them if in fact I felt that the Appeals Commission had made an error in law, error on fact, error in jurisdiction etc and explain to a worker how to appeal, request a reconsideration or file for a Judicial Review/Appeal. Being that the names of the Appeals Commissioners can be found on Canlii, I can determine which Appeals Commissioners are biased, are clueless and which are not. The system cannot continue to operate in a vacuum and must meet the public’s expectation of a totally transparent system with nothing to hide.

For example: I can look up Dr. Addington (Psychiatrist) to determine his dossier. Dr. Addington was hired by WCB to conduct a psychiatric evaluation of a worker I represented. From his report specific to the worker I represented and comparing his track record in the courts, I can conclude that he is a good honest doctor. Another doctor who a person can look up is Dr. Louw whose name comes up in Canlii which may interest some people. In fact a case cited as Louw v. Hamelin-Chandler found on Canlii is very interesting. Dr. Louw was a doctor who provided a false and misleading IME on a worker that was contradicted by other doctors. Another doctor that may be of interest is Dr. Darlington who if you enter his name in the document text will provide information. Dr. Plageman can also be found who was one of the defendants who was involved in a lawsuit by the Munros.

While the NDP Government continue to ignore the requests of workers who have long standing claims that have never been resolved even though the evidence suggests that the decisions made by Adjudicators was incorrect, resulting in claims and benefits being illegally denied and some workers committing suicide, having psychiatric problems causing marital and family breakups, tossed onto the garbage pile where they spend the rest of their life. I do not blame the NDP Government as they inherited the problems the former Conservative Government created. To show Albertan’s that the NDP have a conscience, they should honor the Conservative Governments promise to open up long standing claims by complying with Section 157.1 of the WCA regardless of the costs to rehear claims.

Mar 042018
 

By Gerald

On Nov. 8 and 9th of 2016 we attended an in person hearing adjudicated by R. Fong who was the Hearing Chair, D. Jossa and J. McKenna who were Commissioners. On July 6, 2017, they presented a partial decision but as of this time ( 15 months later) we are still waiting for a full decision. Oddly enough, workers compensation according to the Supreme court of Canada, one of the fundamental principles of workers compensation is that compensation is paid to injured workers quickly, yet one of the claims goes back to 1973 and the other one to 1988. Also it is odd that the WCA provides statute of limitations for doctors, workers and employers but there is no statute of limitations on decisions made by a Case Manager, DRDRB or the Appeals Commission. A worker or employer could wait for decades to receive a decision from a Case Manager, DRDRB and the Appeals Commission which questions the SCC as to their belief that compensation is paid quickly.

In the claim at hand, the problem the Appeals Commission are having is attempting to explain why WCB and themselves were equating directly an impairment rating to a disability rating or loss of earnings without incriminating WCB, DRDRB and themselves. WCB, DRDRB and the Appeals Commission have known for decades that impairment ratings do not directly equate to a disability or loss of earnings, yet this was what all three of these bodies were doing despite the Alberta Court of Appeals decision (the Penny decision) that the WCA is specific to determining a disability or loss of earnings, not an impairment. This is explained at the beginning of the WCA Section 1(1)(u) which states in part; “pension” means a periodic payment to a worker in respect of whom a permanent disability has been assessed”It does not state that a pension means a periodic payment to a worker in respect of whom a permanent clinical impairment has been assessed. This was not a mistake, rather it is criminal fraud and a Calgary City Police Commercial Crimes Unit made this decision. The Crown refused to lay charges more than likely at the direction of the Justice Minister who was of the opinion that this would most likely destroy the Alberta WCB if criminal charges were laid.

For convenience of understanding, I have attached in part a page from the AMA Guides to better understand the reference that is used in determining impairment. I attended a recent IME performed by Dr. Rocheleau (Physiatrist) on behalf of WCB. He was dumbfounded that a PCI rating for erectile dysfunction could result in up to a 15% PCI rating which WCB illegally equates to a disability rating and doing this results in a life time pension in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to workers despite a worker not having any loss of earnings. This is what would be like winning the lottery.

When referencing Table 1-2 only a moron would provide a life time pension to a worker who has no loss of earnings but has difficulty getting an erection, orgasm, ejaculation, lubrication, combing their hair, urinating, defecating to name a few difficulties in Table 1-2 which has got nothing to do with work or loss of earnings.

Not wanting to admit they had made a mistake and have to re-adjudicate thousands of claims, WCB, DRDRB and the Appeals Commission in collusion with the WCB Board of Directors decided to continue defrauding workers and employers and went to a dual awards system separating impairment with disability. Rather than use Section 56 of the WCA as they did prior to Jan 1, 1995 by illegally using impairment ratings and equating the impairment ratings to disability ratings, they  separated impairment ratings and disability ratings with impairment ratings now coming under Section 69 of the WCA.

I have no idea when the Appeals Commission will address this issue of if they will continue to insist that an impairment, disability and loss of earnings can be used interchangeably despite the Alberta Court of Appeals decision that using impairment ratings a s a direct method of rating disability is not in compliance with the WCA and we will then have to take this to a Judicial Review based on an error in law. Obviously on Judicial Review, the Court of Queens Bench have no jurisdiction to over ride the decision of the Alberta Court of Appeals in the Penny case and any decision by the C of QB will be in our favor. Unfortunately,  I cannot represent the worker due to the Legal Professions Act and the worker who has a grade 8 education will have to represent himself.

If the the Government provided workers though the proposed Fair Practices Office the right to represent workers, workers would not be forced to represent themselves and especially when most injured or disabled workers are blue collar workers who have no idea how to represent themselves before the courts or have any idea what the issues are and how these issues fit into the WCA, WCB policies and workers compensation regulations.

Section 69 of the WCA which is specific to impairment makes the award discretionary. Who gave WCB the right to change the historic agreement which was based on compensation for loss of earnings, not for impairments. Are employers aware that they are paying out millions of dollars to workers who do not have any loss of earnings but have difficulty getting erections, urinating, defecating, reaching an orgasm, combing their hair, brushing their teeth. I may get myself into trouble by suggesting that any award for an impairment should be stopped and employers be reimbursed unless they agreed to WCB providing millions of dollars in life time pension and lump sum payments for an impairment.

Upon review of WCB policy, there is nothing in policy that suggests that impairment ratings can or should be used s a direct method of rating a disability. At first I believed that the problem evolved from the WCB BoD who according to the WCA enact policies but further review resulted in the fact that WCB policy specific to the use of impairment ratings indicated that impairment ratings were to be used as a starting point as suggested by Mr. Carr, WCB legal counsel in the Penny case and agreed to by the Alberta Court of Appeal in assessing a disability. The AMA Guides stress this as being a very crucial point by stating that impairment ratings are a pre-cursor to a disability, not a final assessment of a disability. This is explained under WCB Policy 04-04 Part II Application 5 Question 1 which states in part and read correctly specifies that the first step is to assess an impairment and the second step is to assume whether there is an earning loss. If there is no assumed earning loss a worker receives nothing other than medical care if necessary. If there is an assumed loss of earnings, the assumed loss of earnings is based on each individuals unique circumstances which considers their age, education and prior work experience. The determination of a disability is usually determined by a certified member of the Fellow of the American Academy of Disability Evaluating Physicians who are trained experts in determining disability.

Policies & Information

Copyright 2017


All rights reserved

1. What is a Permanent Disability Award, and who is eligible for it?

        A permanent disability award is a pension which includes

        compensation for permanent clinical impairment “and”

        assumed permanent loss of earning capacity resulting from

        the clinical impairment.

        The pension is based on a medical determination of the

        extent of the compensable clinical impairment. WCB uses

        the WCB-approved rating schedule (see Appendix D) as a

        guide to determine the extent to which the compensable

        clinical impairment impairs or may impair earning capacity,

        and expresses that impairment as a percentage of disability.

WCB policy 04-04 Part II Application 2 Question 6 states in part;

6. How does WCB calculate the Non-Economic Loss Payment?

        As the Non-Economic Loss Payment is not intended to

        compensate the worker for lost earnings, the payment base

        is the same for all workers, regardless of earnings. The

        payment is paid as a lump sum, and is based on the degree

        of permanent clinical impairment resulting from the

        compensable injury.

Any one with any intelligence would ask, how could a PCI rating equate to a disability and loss of earnings one second before midnight of Dec. 31, 1994 and then one second after midnight on Jan 1, 1995, a PCI rating equates to NELP which is not intended to compensate the worker for loss earnings. Little wonder no one understands the “Act”, WCB policy and WCB regulations when WCB themselves have no idea of how to interpret their own policies.

Using impairment ratings as a direct method of rating disability results in further complications to the WCA specifically Section 42 of the WCA which presumes total disability with the loss of both feet at or above the ankle. Using logic, if A is equal to B, then B has to be equal to A. Using impairment and disability in place of A and B, if impairment is equal to disability, then disability must be equal to impairment. That being the case,, if a worker is totally disabled, then they have a total impairment.If you have a total impairment, then you are dead as death occurs when all bodily functions cease. A worker with a loss of both feet at or above the ankle is obviously not dead, so it is obvious that they are not totally disabled. Loss of both feet at or above the ankle is assessed 25% PCI rating for each lower extremity equaling a 50% PCI rating. When multiplied by 90% of net, a worker would receive a 50% permanent partial disability and yet according to the section 42 of the WCA the worker is totally disabled which means the worker has a 100% PPD, not a 50% PPD.

This is precisely what happened in the Yukon when the worker (Robbie King) suffered an injury to the head and was determined by WCB as being totally disabled and instead of paying compensation for permanent total disability, the “Board” paid him 70% PPD based on a 70% PCI. The Yukon SCC overturned the decision of the “Board” to pay him a 70% PPD and directed they pay him a total disability rather than a 70% disability pension.

With all of this evidence supporting the fact that a PCI rating does not equate to a disability rating, then why is the Government not directing that WCB comply with the WCA and legal precedence? It also would be fair to question why WCB Medical Services and WCB Legal Services are complicit in defrauding workers who clearly know that you cannot equate an impairment to a disability. WCB medical Services should have all their doctors licenses terminated and as well, WCB Legal Services should have all their lawyers licenses terminated.

There is no other body or individual that are allowed to make a mistake. If any body or individual makes a mistake, we are told that ignorance of the law is not a defense, yet WCB. DRDRB ad the Appeals Commission are allowed by the Government to make a mistake and not be held accountable. If I or any one else, gets drunk and kill or injure some one, we are not allowed to plead that we made a mistake. When workers are given the benefit of doubt in all cases, it is impossible to make a mistake as a person always errors on the side of the individual who is given the benefit of doubt.

Case Managers, DRDRB and the Appeals Commission are supposed to be experts according to the Courts. Experts don’t make mistakes and if a person who is supposed to be an expert makes a mistake, they clearly are not experts. In order to adjudicate a claim, a Case manger has to be an expert in law and medicine, the same for the DRDRB and the Appeals Commission.There are no Case Managers, DRDRB or Appeals Commissioners who are experts in law and medicine and it is far too easy for these people to deny a claim or benefits knowing that workers do not have the knowledge and financial capability to hire a person who is knowledgeable in law and medicine.  In the Penny case, the Alberta Court of Appeals stated” Presumably the Appeals Commission have expertise in medicine, because most of the questions before it have a large medical component, and in other fields related to the assessment and valuation of claims” 

The problem with the whole system is that no one including WCB, DRDRB or the Appeals Commission have any expertise in medicine and as well as law, the largest component in all claims involves the field of medicine. Because Case Managers, DRDRB  and the Appeals Commission have no expertise in medicine, they in turn consult Medical Advisors who are not experts in medicine with many of them not even practicing medicine for decades and still provide medical opinions that date back to their early days of medicine and have since been corrected in medical journals which these doctors have never read.

The courts are not presided over by mechanics, painters, plumbers, brick layers so why would lay people with no expertise in law or medicine be allowed to preside over claims within the workers compensation system.  None of this makes any sense at all but the Government continues to place band aids on fixing a system that is terminally ill.

The correct way of fixing the system is to consult with employers and workers and renegotiate a sick system and get back to the original system where workers receive medical care and lifetime earning loss pensions if necessary. If permanently disabled workers cannot return to their former job, train them to perform some meaningful job not simply provide assistance in how to write a resume, make phone calls etc. which is not cost effective at all as being able to write a resume or use proper telephone techniques will not result in a disabled worker getting a job over some one who is not disabled, has the experience and employers could care less whether some one can write up a better resume than another person. Studies in Ontario confirms that their approach in this manner was a waste of time and money.

Jan 202017
 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/2-died-of-gunshot-wounds-in-edmonton-murder-suicide-1.3942900

“Deutscher most recently worked in Edmonton as a medical consultant with the Alberta Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB), where his name is among the 10 highest earners on the 2015 compensation disclosure list.”

Jan 142017
 

By Gerald

Many people wonder as to why workers are forced back to work on the opinion of a “Board” doctor as opposed to a workers primary care doctor which happens all the time. Here is the answer. WCB Medical services provided all doctors with what were called medical duration guides which quite simply was the average length of time it should take for a full recovery from a work related accident. WCB Medical Advisors who never examine a worker would use these guides to determine when the worker should make a full recovery. As any one who is familiar with medicine knows, some people recover much earlier than others and some may recover much later or not at all. A WCB Medical Advisor would be asked by the Case Manager if the worker has recovered from an accident or illness and the WCB Medical Advisor would go to the duration guides and determine that the worker should have fully recovered despite the primary care doctor who has a duty of care to the worker and will not sign the WCB form indicating the worker can return to work. The worker is told that the WCB Medical Advisor has determined that the worker has recovered and they must return to work or have their benefits terminated. This evidently happened to Patrick Clayton who injured his knee and was sent back to work based on medical duration guides.

The Alberta WCB redesigned their web site and in doing so like everything else that could incriminate them decided to eliminate any trace of the medical  duration guidelines. I have searched for these guides and unless I have missed them, they are gone which is a good thing for workers now but evidently was not a good thing for workers who were forced to return to work and re-injured themselves more severely than the original injury.

Changing the System

 Our Blog  Comments Off on Changing the System
Jan 092017
 

by Gerald

Determining causation to have a claim accepted is and has to be the stupidest condition of disability insurance. One hundred years ago causation involved only a half dozen causes and primarily physical causes and a hundred years later we have thousands of causes, both physical, mental and diseases caused by thousands of toxins int the work environment and outside of the work environment. Other than guess as to how or what level these toxins are within safe limits, no one knows what levels are safe or when there are a mixture of toxins, what the risks are. In reality, the system has become a money making scheme  for doctors to guess what the cause may be because medical science lags far behind what is considered to be medical certainty. Workers face a quagmire of unsupported medical opinions that rarely result in established fact resulting in extreme costs to the system for unsupported medical opinions and is why WCB systems have reserves for unfunded liabilities to pay benefits to workers whose claims were illegally denied because the medical opinions were not valid. If in fact medicine was an exact science, there also would be no need to have reserves for unfunded liabilities.

When doctors provide medical opinions that are found to be invalid, there should be consequences with suspensions of their licenses, incarceration, or fines. The same should apply to Adjudicators who use unsupported medical opinions to illegally deny claims. The whole reason why workers are supposed to receive the benefit of doubt is to avoid any mistakes and when there is a difference in medical opinions, the benefit of doubt should be used rather than to beat a dead horse by having more doctors involved who provide more unsupported medical opinions. A system that was supposed to be for workers is under total control of doctors who determine the duration of injuries or diseases and send workers back to work before they have fully recovered, doctors determine work restrictions. Doctors determine whether a worker can perform sedentary work, light work, heavy work. Doctors determine whether a worker has chronic pain or whether workers are malingering.  Doctors determine whether a worker has a psychological diagnosis or if they are faking. Doctors perform functional capacity evaluations that result in severe permanent injuries by forcing workers to perform activities they are not capable of performing. ( A doctor performing a FCE forcefully rotated the neck of a worker I am representing during an FCE and x-rays performed after the forceful manipulation of the neck determined the reason why the worker could not rotate his neck is that the worker had severe cervical spine problems) In actuality the medical costs of all workers compensation systems cost more than the benefits workers receive. Obviously the system has changed over the last hundred years and rather than change the system a hundred years later, the government continues to provide band aids to an ugly and gaping wound.

Lay people especially Adjudicators have this idea that doctors are experts in causation which they are not. Most doctors or all doctors receive their information from medical journals and text books rather than performing any studies of their own. What they read in these medical text books or journal is in many cases not true for the simple reason that there have been many incidences of ghost writers who write medical information in these text books and journals which are not based on any scientific studies or the medical information is written by writers employed by pharmaceutical companies and companies providing toxic materials to retailers who sell this toxic material to consumers. If a person can read and has access to medical libraries, the same information that these so called experts is available in all medical libraries and if a person does go to a medical library which I have done on numerous occasions, you will find doctors researching the same material as a lay person. I have read thousands of pages of medical literature that I was able to read with no difficulty at all in the Foothills Hospital Medical Library where in numerous cases the text books were outdated and had never been revised.

How many people are aware that pharmaceutical companies pay doctors millions of dollars to have their patients act as guinea pigs for new pharmaceutical products that have never been thoroughly tested. Doctors receive new cars, swimming pools, houses etc. to prescribe new prescription medications to unsuspecting patients who take these medications and become deathly ill or die. Take for example Bayers who introduced Baycol as a cheaper cholesterol lowering medication that when taken with gemfibrozil resulting in numerous deaths before it was pulled by the FDA but not before 31 deaths were reported. As with all statins, there is a risk of rhabdomyolysis which can lead to kidney failure and muscle wasting. This is only the tip of the ice burg as no one knows the cause of the interaction between any drug or toxin. Although many toxins when used by themselves pose relatively little danger, when mixed with something else becomes deadly. Mix bleach and ammonia and then get ready to call an ambulance. Take any statin with grapefruit and chances are you also would be faced with a risk of dying.

There are solutions to this hundred year old problem and that is to provide workers in the private sector the same dual disability insurance as workers in the public sector have such as fire fighters, police, paramedics as well as all other public servants by making all employers carry dual disability insurance so that if a claim is not work related, then a worker is not left to fend for themselves. This could be on a cost shared basis just as it is in the public sector. The other option is to abolish the antiquated workers compensation system and make it mandatory that all workers be provide disability insurance without any conditions such as proving causation which in most cases is impossible as no one knows what causes any medical condition as genetics always play the biggest role in all medical conditions whether psychological or physical. WCB could continue to provide disability benefits for all workers. This could also be on a cost sharing agreement between employers and workers thereby eliminating paying millions of dollars to doctors for unsupported opinions and also significantly reducing the number of employees in the workers compensation system and as well reducing costs to employers.

I must admit that I always had difficulty as to how presumption is supposed to work in all workers compensation systems and in review of workers compensation systems across Canada, I finally have figured that out by reading various decisions from WCAT and especially those that use Dr. Terence Ison’s book “Workers Compensation in Canada 2nd Edition”. It seems that New Brunswick is one of the only provinces in Canada that relies on Dr. Ison’s explanation of how presumption works. All claims begin in a neutral state and some one has the burden of proof but no one knows whether it is the “Board” as suggested by Dr. Ison or the worker. Whoever has the burden of proof in determining causation must trigger the presumption by determining on a de-minimus standard  meaning that to support causation, there only has to be a very trivial relation to the work environment. This then triggers the presumption that then has to be contradicted by some one, either the “Board” or the employer which again is unknown who then has to prove that the injury or disease arose outside of the work environment by specifying the risk outside of the workplace along with the time and place. According to WCAT decision derived from Dr. Ison’s book as a legal guide, it is illegal to provide a negative opinion without supporting evidence that would provide the risk factor and the time and place the accident occurred outside of the workplace. All of this makes sense when explained by well trained WCAT members in workers compensation law using Dr. Ison’s explanation of how presumption is triggered. Unfortunately in Alberta there are no well trained Adjudicators as witnessed by the number of claims that are denied as opposed to the number in New Brunswick that have been over turned by the New Brunswick WCAT because the the de-minimus standard was successful and there was no evidence to the contrary. Obviously something is rotten in Alberta when claims are denied without knowing who has the burden of proof, what is considered to be de-minimus and if successful triggers the presumption, who then must prove contrary and what evidence is required to prove contrary. While there are numerous decisions supporting my interpretation, rather than citing a two or three hundred WCAT decisions, if you go to Canlii and click on the following links  http://www.canlii.org/en/nb/nbwcat/doc/2016/2016canlii88896/2016canlii88896.html?resultIndex=1 

http://www.canlii.org/en/nb/nbwhscc/doc/2016/2016canlii54508/2016canlii54508.html?resultIndex=1

After review of 103 decisions made by the New Brunswick WCAT by inputting Dr. Terence Ison in the document text area on Canlii, I received 103 decisions specific to my search specific to Dr. Terence Ison as my search criteria. Out of the 103 decisions there were 88 appeals accepted and 15 denied which I have reviewed and agreed with the decisions. The number of appeals accepted results in an acceptance rate of approximately 85% as compared to the Alberta Appeals Commission acceptance rate of appeals that is considerably lower than 50% which I suspect is due to the fact that the Alberta Appeals Commission do not understand how presumption is defined by the courts. Both the New Brunswick WCA Section 7 and the Alberta WCA Act Section 24 (4) are identical so how then can two different Appeals Tribunals interpret the “Acts” differently   I will be reviewing other WCAT decisions in other provinces as to how they interpret their presumptive legislation and will send my review to all my e-mail contacts.

Jun 172012
 

Is This The Truth
Posted on July 24, 2010 by JLS

WCB Employees Paid To Commit Fraud

For most Canadians it would come as a big shock to find that the government(s) runs organizations like the Workers Compensation Board for the sole objective of cost reduction for big business, with itself as one of the largest employers taking full advantage of the conflict of interest.

The Federal Government instituted the Meredith Principle as law into Canada approximately 80 years ago. Today, even though the Federal Government passed on authority to manage Workers Compensation to the provinces, it remains itself one of the greatest benefactors of the new perverted version of Workers Compensation.

Today there is hardly a trace left of the principals set out by Chief Justice of Ontario, Sir William Meredith. It would not be an exaggeration to say that they have taken this legislation, turned it inside out to become a one way street to ensure injured workers have no rights at all. Workers Compensations today uses its own kangaroo courts to insure every right injured workers had are decimated.

The four parts of the principles set out by Chief Justice of Ontario, Sir William Meredith are that employers bear the direct cost of compensation, receiving protection from lawsuits arising from injuries; workers give up the right to sue their employers and receive compensation benefits at no cost for work-related injuries; negligence and fault for the cause of injury are not considerations; and a system administered by a neutral agency would have exclusive jurisdiction over all matters arising out of the enabling legislation. This neutral agency became the Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB).

Today before an injured worker even gets to where they are allowed to ask the Supreme Court for justice, every appeal in the WCB kangaroo courts must be exhausted, one thing is certain, that by the time injured workers are entitled to ask for justice, the injured worker will be either dead, or dead broke. The time that passes can easily take up to or exceed a decade of abuse, a psychological, and financial bashing that is unparalleled in any other form of law today.

Nearly every lawyer today rejects claims for the following reasons, first that WCB law does not comply or need to comply with the standards of our real courts of law. The second is that it’s a complete waste of a lawyers time, and clients money, there is no chance of winning. There is however the odd exception to the rule, and that’s what is thrown if the face of every critic of the WCB.

One lawyer wrote to the BC Bar asking for someone willing to take on a case where fighting WCB was like having gone into an Alice in Wonderland form of judicial law. The complete absence of any resemblance to law whatsoever, where WCB makes up and changes the rules, ignores its own rules, and imposes a twisted versions of rules on any lawyer foolish enough to stand up for injured workers.

In a nutshell WCB does the following, in about 90% or more of all of its claims it pays in full with no complaints, these consist of everything from a sliver of wood in the hand to minor cuts and bruises. All those minor claims are WCB’s claim to fame that they are doing their job and doing it well.

Now on the other hand, injuries like Chronic Regional Pain Syndrome or other debilitating injuries that last for decades, or even for life, those are the costly claims, and are also the claims WCB has no hesitation to spend a million dollars to insure a claimant will not set a precedent by getting what is owed to him/her. The crux of the matter lies in long term and permanently injured workers, everything else WCB talks about is smoke shows to divert the public from the real truth.

Well if what I am about to say might offend you, too bad, we as a society need to wake up, grow up, and take some responsibility for the mess we have allowed to exist in our country. It’s your fault we are in this mess because you and your neighbor never spoke up when someone you knew got shafted by the WCB. My fellow Canadians, you are a bunch of idiots if you think, we as a society can gain dignity abroad fighting the Muslims in Afghanistan while on the home front we treat our injured workers as bad as the Taliban treat their women.

Let me say this, do you think the same idiots who designed WCB, will actually make an exception for our permanently disabled veterans? If you do you better crawl back under the rock you have been hiding under. Do some research; they are already being tossed to skid row.

Pardon me for not doing the “heel toe dosey doe” for the Liberal in Alberta who was honest enough to tell the story about how the WCB employees get paid to screw injured workers over.

Pardon the blunt language but common courtesy in the past and present, has meant inhuman treatment for fellow injured workers to a society too busy with their own self preservation to do anything about it.

Is there not some bitter irony that this story exposed by the Liberal Party in Alberta comes hot on the heals of the Patrick Clayton story. Will someone wake up before we have to nominate Patrick Clayton as the only man willing to stand up and tell the truth about what is going on inside the Workers Compensation system, not only in Alberta, but all of Canada? Sorry make that two people in Alberta now, let’s not forget Hugh MacDonald.

Well it was good of the Alberta Liberals to expose this crime, only the Liberals should have said that Patrick Clayton indeed had little options left and the path he chose and may have been for him the only option he could find left. This admission by the Alberta Liberals also gives powerful credibility to the claims made by Patrick Clayton and that indeed all he really wanted was to find a way to expose this story, he was a first hand witness, he was a victim of crime.

Ask any injured worker who has tried to tell their story to the press, and found they were just banging their head against a brick wall. Patrick Clayton was right in regards to the fact it was the only way people would listen to what he had to say.

The second issue is, where is the call for a police investigation into this crime, and while they are at it, they can find this crime duplicated in each and every province and territory in Canada? It’s a Pandora’s box that nobody has guts enough to take on because to do so would jeopardize a relationship with big business and industry, not to mention the cost of having government employees.

Now I also have to ask what gives with the names of our political parties. Has anyone besides me noticed that when it comes to shafting injured workers, all three major party names are very big on the list of making promises to treat injured workers fairly, then in return you might well have urinated down their throats if your actions could speak for you.

Take for example in British Columbia the Liberal Party had one member in particular who really road the band wagon of justice for injured workers. Do you know what the Liberals did once elected? After all once you defeat the existing government, what else can you do to put the truth about WCB back into hiding? The Liberals did what they all do in every province when the WCB’s looking like the criminals they really are; they had a review, and guess who represented the big business in this review?

Well it was none other than Allen Hunt, and guess who the Liberals hired to implement the findings of that review?

Well to bad you can’t have Charles Manson as head of your justice committee, using your logic it would have made very good sense.

Isn’t it amazing when you have a government that hires one of two disputing parties to write the new rules, insanity obviously is hitting new heights and to this day no one has had balls enough to do anything about it?

Look again at the words in the Meredith Principle Agreement and try find any form of neutral party in the name Allen Hunt.

Oh, by the way, check up and find out if Allen Hunt is even a Canadian, he was not at the time our governments hired him. And pray what the hell were the Liberals in British Columbia thinking when they hired an American to re-write Canadian Law?

The citizens of Canada got what we paid for, it’s called “Screwed” and corporations all across Canada were laughing all the way to the bank. Its not just Canadian corporations, the vast benefactor of these new WCB policies befit foreign investors even more, as today the vast majority of big business is majority owned outside of Canada.

So then we must ask, what the hell is a Liberal? Not that they are better or worse than the NDP or Conservatives, they are all a bunch of liars who will say anything to get elected, and then my mind asks me if Patrick Clayton, did or did not have alternative options.

There simply is not enough space here to post the crimes each party has committed against the permanently disabled injured workers. Each and every party n power has a long standing legacy of balancing its books on the backs of injured workers.

Ask yourself this, when the government and the WCB does not have to follow the law, should the citizens of Canada be required to? Would you still condemn Patrick Clayton if you understood what he was up against? It is still against the law to endorse crime so we won’t go there.

Please don’t answer that, instead lets hammer those responsible for this mess and have them tossed out of their offices, without their lucrative pensions as penalty for the crimes they committed against fellow Canadians.

Seriously just how corrupt can our WCB Boards get before someone will say enough is enough?

Why does government continue to balance its books on the backs of the disabled?Why do those working to screw injured workers over have such mind boggling pension plans paid for with injured workers blood?

Time For a Reality Check

Injured workers are being told on a daily basis for decades now that if the adjudicator cannot see pain, there is no claim. Blatantly adjudicators have said directly to the face of injured workers, “we have unlimited resources, we don’t care if you try seek litigation”.

Nearly every injured worker has been sneered at with the following comment, “Workers Compensation is not required to pay for pain, and it pays only for lost wages”.Now we know they don’t pay for either pain or lost wages.

We have seen instances where adjudicators have bragged to employers that they have a ZERO track record for anyone staying on WCB benefits, then being promoted by coincidence for their outstanding achievements.

We have thousands of cases in Canada where Chronic Regional Pain Syndrome is being denied after having been classified as fakes by people who subcontract for WCB as physical therapists. The irony is that these people were already certified as suffering from Chronic Regional Pain Syndrome by licensed doctors, or in some cases expert medical doctors whom are specialists in the field.

The way injured workers with CRPS are being treated today makes a joke out of the Supreme Court ruling on that very same topic.

A history of DENIAL by compensation boards regardless of medical evidence proving injured workers were honest in regards to their medical history. Yet the Workers Compensation will spend hundreds of thousands of injured workers dollars to show the rare case of a fraud claimant.

The reality is that for every fraud claimant, there are about 1000 frauds committed against injured workers. The WCB Boards have hired in nearly every serious injured worker claim, a spy to watch and video or document injured workers movements, regardless of the traumatic impact this type of investigation has on honest, and law abiding citizens of Canada, even if there is evidence that investigators fabricate evidence, they continue to be rehired.

WCB Boards have a history of hiring or refusing to rehire private investigators, rehab consultants, or any persons dealing with reporting on the condition of the victim if they do not end up getting cost reduction. Nearly in every case where WCB contracts out work, the work entails a form of denial of claim, and its not a secret this business of denial is one of the most lucrative startup business today.

Hiring drop out doctors from med school to find in favor of reduction of cost of claims, period, and to heck with the real truth, they are the backbone of WCB’s medical review panels.

WCB to this day refuses injured workers the right to have a witness present when their own privately hired doctors do the assessment to determine permanent injury. They have the right to refuse not only the witness but the obligation to pay injured workers for their injury as forfeited by the injured worker for refusing to be examined if you refuse to be examined in the presence of a witness.

The very AMA Guide they use states clearly the rules for using that information, yet WCB allows these doctors to violate those very rules in order to reduce WCB costs.

The doctors they use are the same ones used to fight injury claims in auto accidents, so as a doctor, their job is to make a liar out of the injured worker, to negate the claims of injury are the objective of these doctors who defy the oath made by doctors to protect and serve their patients best interests.

The Hippocratic Oath is one of the oldest binding documents in history. Written in antiquity, its principles are held sacred by doctors to this day, however these doctors are paid to slander what other doctors gave diagnosed, to refute the true extent of an injury.

Ask yourself how the actions of these doctors are not the most flagrant violation of the Meredith Agreement, and it flies in the face of everything that legitimized the Workers Compensation System in the first place. Refer to the Meredith Principal.

In British Columbia the Workers Compensation Board writes letters to injured workers doctors, demanding that in order to get paid; they must conform to rules that are withheld from the public, a form of extortion that makes doctors afraid to write anything supportive of injured workers claims.

Doctor’s behaviors after receiving these letters is 180 degree shift in attitude towards their patients, they absolutely refuse to write anything that can be used in a courtroom to prove an injured workers claim. Some specialists will only agree to see you if you agree not to use their findings in a courtroom.

Regardless of how honest injured workers are, WCB adjudicators are notorious for using the “laughing in your face” tactic to elicit a reaction out of you that could be used to terminate your benefits. Another common tactic injured workers must endure is the comments “your just too lazy to return to work” again to elicit a violent reaction they can use against the injured worker.

Instances of where adjudicators are suggesting patients (injured workers) use opiod drugs to be able to return to work, that despite the danger it poses to both injured workers and fellow workers.

Instances where adjudicators refuse to follow the advice by a patient’s doctor, to be referred to a specialist, and then the patient is also not allowed under WCB regulation to sue for the consequential injuries.

The WCB refuse to be responsible for any injuries that occur as a result of an injury. Example is when you have one leg that is unstable or a head injury that causes a loss of balance, the injury that occurs due to a fall is not recognized by WCB.

The WCB also like to use a chart to determine what they owe injured workers; however the very first statement in that chart says that the contents are not to be used to evaluate the disability of injured workers. I refer to the AMA charts that are being used (abused) systematically with only one objective in mind, ironically they never use the words to deny a claim, and they use the politically correct version of “cost reduction.”

Let me stop here, because if any investigation needs my help I can over them about 20 pages of abuse by WCB without ever having to repeat myself. Look up Workers Compensation on CBC or CTV and read the comments left by hundreds if not thousands of Canadians who have been burned by none other than their own government, because they had an accident at work. A crime they must pay for by living in poverty for the rest of their lives.

In closing I would like to thank Hugh MacDonald for having been honest enough to step forward with some truth in regards to the WCB. Canada is in need of more honest men and women with the courage to stand up for truth, even if it’s more cost effective to shut up and hide as most politicians do.

As for evidence to back up what I have said, I have a box that weighs over 80lbs of paper, video tapes, audio tapes, legal documents to back up everything said in this article and would be happy to hand it over to any lawyer with the integrity and courage to fight this abuse.

As for the common Canadian citizen, please have the courage to stand up and tell these political hacks to their face that their days of abuse need to end…..immediately or face the fury of the electorate.

Fight for people who have been treated worse that the victims of abuse overseas that we claim to be fighting to liberate. Fight to liberate our injured workers from a lifetime of poverty and verbal abuse from both WCB and the governments who allow them to abuse disabled injured workers.

The RCMP should put locks on the WCB offices until a complete investigation is done into the behavior of all WCB employees, likewise no unions should be allowed to negotiate excuses for crimes committed against WCB victims.

Dereliction of duty charges should be laid in the case of every upper level management position found to be supporting the current corrupt WCB system. Criminal charges should be brought against every person who willingly and knowingly reduced or removed injured workers benefits.

Charges of deliberate psychological abuse charges should be laid against all adjudicators who have verbally abused their position to reduce costs for the WCB.

Finally all charges against Patrick Clayton be placed on hold until the investigation into the WCB is completed, in the mean time Patrick Clayton needs to be sent to a rehabilitation center and compensated for the abuse committed against him. If in fact the WCB is found to be guilty, all charges against Patrick Clayton should be dismissed.

JLS ……For What It’s Worth