To Whom It May Concern,

On numerous occasions we have attempted to contact individuals within the Alberta government and within the Alberta Worker’s Compensation Board to express our concerns regarding the WCB.

The Worker’s Compensation Board was founded on the Meredith principles and was created with good intentions. However, over time the WCB has strayed from the principles of compensation that it was founded on. The principles and what they stand for have become obscured, impartiality and neutrality are often ignored, and the overall organization has become biased and runs coarse to what it was created to do. The WCB has become an organization focused on the bottom line and has developed a culture of “if they don’t ask we don’t pay” rather than paying the injured worker all of the entitlement owing. It has been stated that “the principles are intended to be a ‘living document’ and will continue to evolve as circumstances necessitate”. The time to evolve has come and we must work together to once again develop a fair and impartial system with the employers and foremost the workers best interests in mind.

The very worker’s rights listed as being of importance to the WCB as an organization have been violated on a number of occasions.  Privacy rights of clients have been abused and Alberta's privacy commissioner recently confirmed that the board had contravened privacy rules by disclosing a worker's personal information to a doctor.  The workers right to be presumed honest has been tested more often than not and a prime example of this is through the use of inaccurate and, frankly, unwarranted surveillance. Furthermore, there is a constant pattern of customer service complaints as clients are not given any consideration or courtesy let alone timely results from the WCB. Clients are often not treated with respect and are referred to and treated like a number- a claim number. Workers are not provided with full access to information of what they are fully entitled to and they are only given the bare minimums unless they are educated on what else to ask for. Fairness and impartiality do not exist. There is no transparency or accountability. The very system created to help injured workers is driving them into poor mental states and in some cases forcing them to resort to drug dependency to control pain, bankruptcy, social welfare programs, and a less than adequate way of life. I believe we can agree that this affects all Albertans not only financially but it also impacts the medical system and society as a whole.

There is a list of concerns we have that are also shared between many injured workers and other stakeholder groups:

Statistics

·        All statistics are derived internally by WCB staff and the surveys are composed by and distributed by the WCB. Where is the objectivity in surveys done on employee and worker satisfaction with WCB services for example? People fear the WCB and will not speak truthfully for fear of being tracked and reprimanded. The surveys will not be representative of the entire population because many individuals will not respond to the voluntary surveys. Furthermore the surveys are handed out to those individuals that have their services completed and not those that are in rehabilitation or still dealing with the claims process. This under coverage of the population in interest is of concern. Not all injured workers are being heard even though WCB paints a different picture. 

·        When was the last time the WCB was externally and objectively reviewed? There are a number of statistics based on internal surveys, however, we do not know the sample surveyed and there have been no external reviews conducted since almost a decade ago. Even then the last MLA review of WCB revealed a lack of accountability and made suggestions such as having the WCB pay for external advocates and giving more power to worker’s treating physicians. These have not been followed up on. 

Freedom of Information and Privacy (FOIP)

·        On several occasions we have had a breach of privacy of our clients. This is in direct violation of FOIP and beyond that, contradicts the right of workers to privacy and confidentiality. How are workers to trust the system when this happens so often? The information is being used unethically and, ultimately, illegally to their detriment. This shows a lack of respect and concern on the behalf of WCB for their clients, inadequate training for WCB staff on FOIP procedures, and a lack of quality assurance or guidance from upper management.

WCB Policies and Guidelines

·        In general, the policies and the WCB Act have not been significantly updated since 1982. This is an issue especially considering the change in the economic landscape and the workplace up to date. The policies and the Act are interpreted with a limited scope and subjectively and this needs to be addressed so that is a fair process.

·        The WCB’s interpretation of what constitutes permanent total disability (PTD) is wrong.  This has been confirmed by Appeals Commission decisions, yet the WCB refuses to change its position on this matter. Furthermore, permanent total disability is too limited. For example, PTD does not include industrial disease which is now becoming more apparent in recent years as older workers who worked with dangerous products or in dangerous environments are developing and coming forward with industry related diseases.

·        The WCB’s time lines are often unrealistic for return to work especially when discussing return to work or modified work availability with the date of injury employer. In our experience, return to work with the original employer rarely happens in the first place or is sustained. However, this year WCB reported that 91.3% of workers do return to work with their previous employer. We question the severity of injuries sustained by this larger group of workers that are able to do so. There have even been times when the WCB will contact a previous employer several years later to inquire about jobs available and then refer the worker back to this job-even if out of province! How is the worker to move on with their life when the possibility of this exists? Why are time lines not in place to prevent the WCB from using the date of injury employer years later?

·        There is a rush to get workers to return to work to keep claim costs down and this is an obvious issue. Predetermined deadlines for return to work pressure WCB staff to rush the clients and create undue duress on the worker as they are trying to heal. Although injuries may be similar, we argue that each individual’s situation and life that effect their rehabilitation is different. This immediacy to return to work becomes a safety issue as some worker’s that are unfit to do so reinjure themselves or become a hazard in the workplace when they are unable to do the job properly and safely. Time loss claim rates are down this year and this may signify that workers are being pushed back much to work quicker than before.

Vocational Services and Rehabilitation

·        Many monetary entitlements provided by the WCB rely on labour market information on positions that the Board find appropriate for the injured worker to return to work as. These positions, however, are recycled, unrealistic, and inappropriate.  Cold calls are made in house to prospective employers asking a predetermined set of questions regarding wage, job duties, and so on. This information is then used for legitimate job descriptions and pay information when deeming workers. There are instances where management is not even talked to in obtaining this information. The labour market analysis (LMA) is suspect at best and because the source of the information, being that of the employer, is not revealed by the WCB, this information is not testable.  The information varies widely and claimants have no way of knowing if the information is accurate or current let alone who this employer is that is hiring so that they may possibly obtain employment.  For example, the WCB provided one LMA that dispatchers get 20 – 25% increases in their first 2 years, and no less than 10% in later years.  This seems ridiculous but there is no way it can be verified.  In this particular example the claimant (with 2 years of dispatcher experience) was deemed to be able to earn $75,000, thereby negating any earning loss entitlement. Full disclosure should be considered and a more objective process of obtaining labour market information is necessary.

·        Vocational services are limited in what they provide in regards to rehabilitation and retraining. Once again vocational rehabilitation (VR) is expedited and ultimately the programs they are using to educate the workers are inconsequential to the positions that they are deeming these workers as. There is little to no retraining provided to injured workers and the courses provided are not acknowledged in the workforce or helpful in the workforce. For example, the computer program teaching clients to type is self monitored and uses programs used in elementary schools. They are not teaching moderate to advance skills in software that many jobs look for such as competency with Microsoft programs. I urge you to consider if many workplaces in this day and age would hire anyone with little to no computer experience that only have “All the Right Type”. 

·        Additionally, modified duties are seen by the WCB to “reduce recovery time, stress and worry” but alternately they may insult the worker by giving them menial work, frustrate the employer who all of a sudden must offer or create an often unnecessary position for the worker, and often results in the worker being let go because they are not needed for modified work...they are needed for the position they held pre accident.

Appeals

·        There are concerns with the time it takes for appeals of WCB decisions to be sent to DRDRB. Rather than forwarding files for review at the DRDRB they then start the adjudication process that should have been done in the first place. In these cases workers benefits should be reinstated rather than having to wait for the lengthy process of getting to appeal. The WCB practice to review their own decisions when an appeal is submitted should be removed to prevent bias and also to expedite the appeal process so that worker’s do not have unreasonable waiting times in which to await decisions that affect their compensation, claim, and overall their life.

·        Legislation states that Appeals Commission decisions must be implemented within 30 days.  The WCB often ignores this requirement, for no apparent reason and this in turn greatly effects a worker’s life while they are waiting for decisions affecting their claims and ultimately their compensation.

Temporary Foreign Workers

·        The issues surrounding temporary foreign workers are a huge concern that seems to be ignored time and time again. Temporary foreign workers are limited to work with solely employers that are approved to hire these temporary workers so when a workplace injury does occur they are often unable to find employment after with the positions WCB deems appropriate. Furthermore, these positions do not often exist in their home countries when they are sent home upon expiration of their visas. When WCB does do reviews of the worker’s case they are required to return at their own expense to Alberta or they will be cut off. The procedures and processes used in dealing with temporary foreign workers are unreasonable and need to be reviewed; especially before Canada considers bringing in more foreign workers to fill positions in the upcoming boom of the construction industry where only half of the jobs will be able to be filled by Canadians.  The WCB needs to take notice that these workers may be less experienced and educated in the fields they are working in within Alberta and the different languages coupled with these factors may present safety issues as well. They must prepare for additional safety training and ensure they are ready with adequate policies for an increase in claims dealing with this group of people.

Quality Assurance Within the WCB

·        There is no internal mechanism to measure accuracy or the ethical behaviour within the WCB. Perhaps an internal ombudsmen or workers advocate would be of assistance to maintain some objectivity within the organization and ensure everyone’s needs, including that of the worker, are being addressed. Quality assurance must exist at every level in the WCB. There have been a number of times our office has received letters where the template is still blank in certain areas or a different person’s name or details are combined with someone else’s. This ignorance is not only a FOIP issue in some cases but clearly shows a lack of concern for quality within the WCB.

WCB Staff

·        It appears that none of the board members have a working knowledge of WCB from direct experience either on the inside or outside.  The effectiveness of a board without this experience is certainly questionable. In appointing the Board members responsible for representing workers it should be a fair process where people can be elected that will actually represent the opinions and voice of the worker. As of now the worker is not adequately represented within the WCB.

·        Case managers are often disrespectful, manipulative and dishonest and this directly violates a worker’s right to courtesy and consideration from all WCB staff.  This behaviour appears to be quite acceptable to WCB management and there appears to be no quality assurance or management from above pertaining to this issue. Furthermore, there is a lack of experience and training within the staff at WCB and whether this is due to a lack of training, the ambiguity of interpretation of policy, or a lack of support from management we do not know. Staff should be hired that fit into the corporate culture and value helping injured workers foremost.

·        Moreover, employees within the WCB have received raises and considering the recession and the resulting poor economic conditions in the province this year this seems unreasonable especially when considering it against the 0% increase for cost of living allowance for workers and the increase in returns to employers. The bonus structure received by WCB employees for decreasing files on their case loads is immoral but used by the WCB in their goal setting. This encouragement to “cut off” workers is not appropriate and the WCB should be providing benefits and support to workers based on the best medical advice and not financial objectives. This is a major conflict of interest.

Worker’s Rights and Concerns

·        When injured workers attempt to deal with their MLA’s they are told that they are at arm’s length and cannot help them. The WCB is supposed to be “a neutral and autonomous administrator of the workers’ compensation system [that] strives to balance the interests of workers and employers by providing fair compensation at a fair price.” How autonomous is the WCB? How autonomous and independent is the DRDRB? How is there to be objectivity and neutrality when the WCB has this much independent control and no one to answer to? The government must play a larger role in overseeing the WCB.

·        There exists a need for stakeholder forums quarterly or more often to hear the opinions of the public, employers, and injured workers that are not permitted to make meetings with representatives from the WCB. Beyond this, there must be a follow up on issues brought up. The WCB has no accountability at the moment in this regard.

·        Worker’s rights to see their own doctor have been taken away as Board appointed doctors and specialists are used to expedite the medical process. How is objectivity to be obtained when consultants paid by the WCB are used in the processes? This occurs across the Board from the rehabilitation facilities they use to the specialists they refer workers to. Additionally, manipulation of the medical professionals used is not acceptable. When disagreeing with the treating physician’s opinion WCB may contact them to suggest that they are incorrect. This persuasion technique is used to disentitle workers and ultimately reduce claim costs. It is never in the worker’s favour and is extremely unethical.

·        The increase in premiums paid back to the employers and the 0% increase in cost of living allowance given to workers is an issue. First of all, considering the poor economic conditions this year and the rise in CPI in Canada surely should affect the cost of living in Alberta. Furthermore, this pay back to employers is of question as the number of injuries reported can affect this. How accurate is this depiction? Are employers neglecting to report injuries so that their premiums stay low and they receive more back at the end of the year? Or are employees being encouraged to sustain from reporting injuries out of pressure from employers or offer of benefits for not doing so? A 25% decrease in injuries reported since 2006 may not only be because of an increase in safety measures being implemented in the workplace- it may be due to extraneous factors not otherwise assessed. For a fair system it appears that one stakeholder group, being of that of the employers, is benefitting more. The WCB is constantly trying to help lower employer premiums as a corporate goal and this is questionable considering Alberta has the lowest premiums in the most dangerous industries.

·        The salary cap of $83 000 may seem like a fair and relatively high cap however when the economy improves this may be an issue for those working in the gas and oil industry who earn significantly higher. Adapting to a certain way of life and then having such a discrepancy between their former wage and their new compensation may make their life uncomfortable which is a direct violation of a worker’s rights. We would also like to point out the lack of caps on WCB CEO’s wages which reached over an excessive $600 000 this year. Considering the WCB is a not for profit organization and is publically owned this is questionable.

·        The WCB has become increasingly legalistic and their use of industry specific jargon in their correspondence and within the Act makes it difficult for workers to not only understand them but to take advantage of all available entitlements. The WCB reported that, as of 2010, 89.9% of workers thought the WCB letters were easy to understand. Once again we question the sample used and if the workers truly understand what is being said and what they are entitled to, or if they are being complacent in reading the letters and naive to what they should truly be getting due to a lack of information. Workers should be informed and educated fully on what they are entitled to and this should be explained to them in a language that is clear to them so that they are aware of what is available to them.

This is just the beginning of our main concerns regarding the WCB. Injured workers and other lobbyists surely have things to add. We encourage you to address this issue on behalf of your constituents. Please don’t misinterpret this correspondence. We do not wish to abolish the WCB we are just striving for positive, justifiable change to an essential system that has lost direction. The majority of injured workers feel like they do not have a say and that the system that is supposed to be there to help them is working against them. The workers need a voice and if they cannot get it from appointed MLA’s and the very organization meant to help them then where they do go? Workers gave up their right to sue and this is their only option of dealing with inevitable and, at times, devastating workplace injury. They are left to fight alone without the comfort of knowing what will happen to them and this is a very, very sad situation to be happening when the resources to help them are available.

Regards,

Julie Hallonquist for Gail Cumming

Cumming Consulting Inc.

(780) 470 3999