A. Danos

The worker claimed to have suffered a low back injury while lifting a box at work.

The employer objected to the initial entitlement, arguing the injury was not compatible with the described incident.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found no evidence of a work-related accident, noting the worker did not experience pain at the time of the incident and the symptoms were not compatible with the minor activity described.

The employer's objection was allowed, and initial entitlement was reversed, rendering the worker's appeals on other issues moot.

The worker, a warehouse associate, claimed WSIB benefits for trachomatous conjunctivitis and dry eyes, alleging the condition was caused by his shift schedule, blinking LED lights, and the dry, humid environment of the warehouse.

The Eligibility Adjudicator denied initial entitlement.

The Appeals Resolution Officer dismissed the worker's appeal, finding no objective medical evidence or information to support a work-related cause for the diagnosed condition, and therefore no compatibility between the diagnosis and the disablement history.

The worker, a caseworker, appealed a decision denying initial entitlement for a right L4-5 paramedian disc herniation.

The worker claimed the injury resulted from prolonged sitting and repetitive pivoting required by his job duties.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that the worker's condition emerged gradually over time and was medically compatible with his pre-accident job duties, which involved sitting for an average of 6.5 hours per day.

The appeal was allowed, granting initial entitlement for the disc herniation.

The worker appealed a WSIB decision denying a permanent impairment award for bilateral shoulder injuries, denying entitlement for chronic pain disability (CPD), and denying initial entitlement for various other upper body conditions.

The Appeals Resolution Officer allowed the appeal in part, finding that the medical evidence supported a permanent impairment for the bilateral rotator cuff tendonitis and right biceps tendonitis, entitling the worker to a Non-Economic Loss (NEL) review.

However, the appeal for CPD was denied because the worker's pain was not inconsistent with organic findings.

The appeal for initial entitlement to the other upper body conditions was also denied due to a lack of causal relationship with the workplace accident.

The worker, a personal support worker, appealed the denial of initial entitlement for left lateral epicondylitis and right de Quervain's tenosynovitis.

The worker claimed the conditions resulted from repetitive heavy manipulation, pushing, and massaging required to care for a client with severe spastic paralysis.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found the worker's job duties were compatible with the diagnosed conditions, supported by medical opinions.

The worker's objection was allowed, and initial entitlement was granted.