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.



Appeal Process

For Representatives

Finding a Representative

Documents & Publications

Legal/Medical Resources

Popular Topics

Links to Other Agencies

Highlights of Noteworthy Decisions

  Decision 459 15
M. Crystal

  • Board Directives and Guidelines (maximal medical rehabilitation)
  • Permanent impairment {NEL} (arrears)
  • Maximal medical rehabilitation (multiple dates)

In Decision No. 199/05, the Tribunal found that the worker had entitlement for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The Board assessed the worker for a NEL award, but divided the permanent impairment into separate components and granted the NEL award for the skin condition component and musculoskeletal condition component retroactive to July 1993, and the NEL award for the respiratory condition component retroactive to May 1995.
The worker appealed a decision of the Appeals Resolution Officer denying retroactivity of the respiratory component to July 1993.
The Board policy on maximal medical rehabilitation is Operational Policy Manual, Document No. 11-01-05. It is apparent from the policy that, where a single compensable condition is comprised of more than one component, where each component reflects a set of symptoms which is distinct from the others, each component may be associated with a different MMR date, particularly where the onset of symptoms for the respective components does not occur at the same time.
Where a worker suffers an organic injury which reaches MMR on a particular date and subsequently develops a psychological condition due to emotional reaction to the injury, which reaches MMR at a later date, the appropriate MMR date for the psychological condition will be determined according to the medical information for the psychological condition. The same applies to a case where different sets of symptoms, all associated with the same compensable condition, arise at different time. The fact that all the various symptoms arise from one compensable condition does not mean that all aspects of that condition will necessarily have the same MMR date.
On the evidence in this case, the worker was experiencing significant respiratory symptoms in July 1993, related to the diagnosis of SLE. In the circumstances, the MMR date for the respiratory component of the worker's SLE entitlement should also be in July 1993. The appeal was allowed.