- Supplements, transitional provisions (permanent) (commencement)
- Supplements, transitional provisions (review)
The worker suffered a low back injury in 1982, for which he was granted a 30% pension, increased to 40% in 1990 and 45% in 2008. At that time, the Board also granted supplementary benefits under s. 147(4) of the pre-1997 Act, effective November 2007. In 2010, at the 24-month review, the Board found that the worker no longer had a wage loss, as he was working. At the 60-month review in 2013, the worker was no longer working, and the Board recalculated again to restore the supplement.In Decision No. 1107/11, the Tribunal found that the worker was entitled to the supplement prior to 2007, and granted entitlement retroactive to 2001.The worker now appealed a decision of the Appeals Resolution Officer denying supplementary benefits in 2010, at the 24-month review.The worker submitted that, due to Decision No. 1107/11, the 24-month and 60-month reviews must be referenced as of the retroactivity date for the start of supplementary benefits in 2011 and that, if so, the supplement could not be reviewed after 2007 and the worker would be entitled to ongoing supplementary benefits in 2010.The Vice-Chair noted s. 147(13), which provides that the Board must review the supplement in the 24th month and 60th month "following the award." The Vice-Chair found that this meant the date on which a decision was made to grant a worker a pension supplement, not the date on which the benefit was deemed to begin running. The decision to grant the pension supplement was made in 2008. Therefore, the Board was required to conduct the 24-month review in 2010. The recalculation in 2010 was appropriate and correct.The appeal was dismissed.