- Second Injury and Enhancement Fund {SIEF} (severity of accident)
- Second Injury and Enhancement Fund {SIEF} (vulnerability)
On January 17, 2017, the worker, an emergency dispatcher, reacted in an aggressive manner when his fan was taken away by his co-workers. The worker was hospitalized due to suicidal ideations. The worker said this incident was the tipping point due to a culmination of traumatic events encountered while at work. The worker developed psychological issues approximately 2-3 years prior to the incident; at that time, he had handled a call from a grieving mother of a child who had committed suicide. His condition gradually worsened until the breakdown on January 17, 2017. Entitlement was accepted for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) due to cumulative trauma with an accident date of January 17, 2017.
The issue on appeal was whether the employer was entitled to an increase in the quantum of Second Injury Enhancement Fund (SIEF) cost relief from 25% to 75%.The Vice-Chair allowed the appeal, in part. Based on a moderate accident and a moderate pre-existing condition, the employer was entitled to 50% SIEF cost relief. The employer was also granted a retroactive adjustment in their NEER account. In determining the severity of accident, Decision No. 1021/12 confirms that the actual injuries are not considered, but rather the extent of disability the mechanics of the accident would reasonably be expected to cause. The Vice-Chair agreed that there are Tribunal decisions which have found that "accidents in the course of a First Responder's regular duties should be seen as minor accidents"; however, found the accident in this case to be of moderate severity. The Vice-Chair noted that the SIEF Policy, which is the applicable policy in this case, required a consideration of the severity of the accident "in terms of the accident history and approved definitions". The Vice-Chair found that the accepted mechanism of injury in this case was expected to cause a disabling injury. The worker's reaction to hearing the grieving mother was not extreme or unexpected. While the worker had pre-existing disabilities of depression and stress, these did not cause or make a significant contribution to his compensable conditions. However, the employer's representative pointed to the worker's poor relationship with his father as making the worker vulnerable. The Medical Discussion Paper on "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder", states that [t]he most adverse outcomes are associated with childhood traumas that are repetitive." The Vice-Chair found that as the worker was exposed to an alcoholic and angry father throughout his childhood, adolescence and into his 20s, this constituted childhood trauma that was repetitive. Thus, the evidence demonstrated that it was more likely than not that the underlying condition, the worker's vulnerability due to childhood trauma, prolonged or enhanced the worker's PTSD resulting from the workplace accident. The medical significance of the worker's pre-existing condition was classified as moderate.