- Jurisdiction, Tribunal (overpayment)
- Overpayment (ability to repay)
- Statutory interpretation
- Loss of earnings {LOE} (calculation) (Canada Pension Plan)
The worker appealed the offset of CPP-D benefits from LOE benefits for the period of June 3, 2020 to January 8, 2021.
The appeal was denied. Section 43(5) states that LOE benefit payments must reflect any CPP-D benefits paid to the worker. As per Decision No. 1807/21, the goal is to avoid double compensation. In this case, the worker had received double compensation over the period from June 3, 2020 to January 8, 2021. When the Board found that the worker was entitled to full LOE benefits on the basis of the severity of her psychological condition and untreated low back condition, the overpayment came into existence.The worker's representative submitted that the policy exception not to offset CPP-D while a worker is participating in RTW or WT activities ought to apply in this case. The Panel agreed with the reasoning in Decision No. 1807/21, that "[t]he exception for CPP offset while engaged in work reintegration should be interpreted in light of the overall purpose of the policy and other portions of the policy" and not in an "overly broad fashion." The Panel did not accept that the worker's participation in medical rehabilitation activities as directed by the Board during the relevant time ought to be equated with participation in RTW or WT. Even though one of the goals of medical rehabilitation is to facilitate an eventual return to the workforce, participation in medical rehabilitation is distinguishable from participation in RTW or WT activities. As the worker was not actively engaged in any RTW or WT activities between June 3, 2020 and January 8, 2021, the worker's situation did not fit within the exception as set out in OPM Document No. 18-03-01. Therefore, the offset of CPP-D benefits was authorized.Furthermore, section 123(1) outlines the matters over which the Tribunal has jurisdiction, and excludes jurisdiction over the recovery of overpayments. Jurisprudence is also settled on the point that the Tribunal does not have the jurisdiction to address the recoverability of overpayments for compensable injuries occurring after January 1, 1998 (see Decision No. 1185/00). It was submitted that the Board has adopted a policy on overpayment recovery, and that the Tribunal is required to apply this policy by virtue of section 126 of the WSIA. The Panel agreed with the analysis of the Vice-Chair in Decision No. 78/05, who wrote: "I read section 126 to mean that the Tribunal is required to apply Board policy in determinations that are within its jurisdiction under section 123. By adopting policy, or by failing to adopt policy, the Board cannot affect the jurisdiction that has been provided to the Tribunal by the legislature." Thus, the existence of a Board policy does not provide the Tribunal with the jurisdiction to make decisions beyond the terms of section 123 of the WSIA. As such, the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over the question of the recovery of overpayments, and the Panel did not have the jurisdiction to consider the worker's appeal on this issue.