Highlights of Noteworthy Decisions

Decision 342 22
2025-01-08
G. Dee - P. Greenside - K. Hoskin
  • Class of employer
  • Executive officers (directing mind)

The employer sought to have the earnings of four of its senior employees assessed under Rate Group 764, Classification Unit 1000-012 Non-Exempt Partners and Executive Officers instead of under Rate Group 764, Classification Unit 2011-099 Home Building Operations.

The Panel allowed the appeal. The Panel found that the four employees in question were in form, and in substance, executive directors of the employer in 2015 and 2016.
There is no definition of executive officer contained within the WSIA. The matter of who should and should not be considered an executive officer is, however, addressed in the WSIB's OPM Documents No. 12-01-06 and 12-03-03.
The Panel concluded that the individuals were executive officers given the following facts: a) They were listed in the official corporate documents of the employer as executive officers; b) They each reported directly to the Chief Executive Officer (and owner) of the employer and had been delegated the authority to act independently on behalf of the organization on matters of substantial significance to the employer; c) They each had a broad scope of authority to make decisions for the company as a whole; and d) They each had the authority to bind the corporation.
The Panel noted that certain factors with respect to the owner's right to exercise control over risk/reward decisions affecting his company, for example, were not inconsistent with the individuals under consideration being executive officers of the company. While the CEO also exercised a degree of supervision and retained primary authority over certain decisions, the individuals acted as essential directing minds of the company. These individuals had authority to act and to bind the company to agreements and to do so without prior approval. All of the individuals were also performing tasks which were of fundamental importance to the company and its success. In addition, all of the individuals had a direct reporting relationship to the CEO and were able to contact the CEO without going through any other individual in order to do so.

View Decision in CanLII