Highlights of Noteworthy Decisions

Decision 258 17 R2
T. Mitchinson
  • Board Directives and Guidelines (chronic pain)
  • Chronic pain
  • Fibromyalgia
  • Reconsideration (clarification of decision)

The worker applied for clarification of Decision No. 258/17, in which the original vice-chair denied entitlement for chronic pain disability.

The worker submitted that the decision did not deal with entitlement for fibromyalgia and that, accordingly, the worker should be able to pursue entitlement for fibromyalgia at the Board. The worker further submitted that chronic pain and fibromyalgia are different conditions, and the fact that these two conditions may be adjudicated under the Board's chronic pain disability does not mean that they are the same condition with the same entitlement criteria.
The Vice Chair found mentions of fibromyalgia in Decision No. 258/17 in the context of referencing medical reporting. However, the Vice-Chair found that those references fell short of what could reasonably be interpreted as an analysis and decision on entitlement for fibromyalgia. The decision made no reference to the policy requirements for fibromyalgia set out in the Board policy nor did it make specific findings clearly linked to a fibromyalgia claim.
The application was granted. Decision No 258/17 did not make a finding on entitlement for fibromyalgia. The worker can pursue entitlement for fibromyalgia at the Board.