This message is displayed because client-side scripting is turned off or not supported in the browser you are currently using.
Please turn on client-side scripting or install a browser that supports client-side scripting.

Ontario Government | Ministry of Labour | Site Map | Accessibility | text resize: A A A

Home | About Us | OWT Library | Forms | Practice Directions | Decision Search | Contact Us | Fran├žais

Established in 1985, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT) is the final level of appeal to which workers and employers may bring disputes concerning workplace safety and insurance matters in Ontario. WSIAT has always been separate from and independent of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board.

Questions?

Decisions

Appeal Process

For Representatives

Finding a Representative

Documents & Publications

Legal/Medical Resources

Popular Topics

Links to Other Agencies

Highlights of Noteworthy Decisions

  Decision 2089 12
3/13/2014
M. Crystal

  • Mesothelioma
  • Transfer of costs (Schedule 2 employer)

A teacher worked at one school from 1965 to 1970 and at a second school from 1970 to 1991. He was diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma in 2007 resulting from asbestos exposure and died in 2008. The Board charged the costs of the claim to the first school board. That employer appealed, claiming that the costs of the claim should be charged to the second school board. Both school boards were Schedule 2 employers. Section 94(2) of the WSIA provides that the Schedule 2 employer that last employed the worker in the employment in which an occupational disease occurs is the worker's employer for the purposes of the WSIA. Thus, if the mesothelioma resulted from exposure that occurred while the worker was employed by both of the employers, the cost of the accident would be charged to the second employer. The Vice-Chair reviewed the four potential sources of asbestos exposure in this case and found that the worker was exposed to asbestos while working for the first employer while taking a course in 1968. The other three sources of exposure were only speculative. The Vice-Chair concluded that it was probable that the worker was exposed to asbestos while working for the first employer in 1968 and not probable that he was exposed to asbestos while working for the second employer. The costs of the claim were correctly charged to the first employer. The appeal was dismissed.