D. McParland

The employer appealed the allowance of initial entitlement for a worker who suffered an insect bite at work that led to a severe group A streptococcal infection and septic shock.

The employer argued that the incident was not reported immediately and questioned whether the bite occurred on the job site.

The Appeals Resolution Officer denied the objection, finding that the worker's description of the event was consistent and that it was reasonable for him not to report what he initially thought was a minor insect bite.

The allowance of initial entitlement was confirmed.

The worker, who suffered a minor left shoulder strain in 1985 that developed into a chronic pain disability, requested reimbursement for an orthopaedic pillow.

The Appeals Resolution Officer denied the request, finding no medical evidence that the pillow was necessary for the treatment of the compensable injury.

The medical evidence indicated the worker suffered from pre-existing cervical and lumbar degenerative disc disease, which was not related to the minor work injury.

The worker appealed a decision denying full loss of earnings (LOE) benefits from January 28, 2009, and denying sponsorship for an Automotive Business Management course.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that the worker was capable of working within the identified suitable and available employment or business (SEB) based on his organic medical restrictions, and thus was only entitled to partial LOE benefits.

However, the Officer allowed the appeal regarding the course, finding that it would enhance the worker's employability and build on his transferable skills.

The appeal was allowed in part.

The worker's estate appealed a decision denying entitlement for lung cancer, arguing that the worker's employment as a welder/fitter from 1973 to 1988 exposed him to significant lung carcinogens.

The worker died of lung cancer at age 47 and had a smoking history.

Applying Occupational Disease Advisory Panel (ODAP) principles, the Appeals Resolution Officer weighed conflicting exposure assessments from a WSIB occupational hygienist and an occupational medicine physician.

Relying on Ministry of Labour reports and a co-worker's affidavit confirming poor ventilation, indoor sandblasting, and regular use of asbestos blankets, the Officer found the worker had significant exposure to multiple known lung carcinogens.

The appeal was allowed, concluding that the workplace exposures were a significant contributing factor in the development of the worker's lung cancer.

The worker appealed a decision denying her loss of earnings (LOE) benefits from March 2005 to March 2006.

The worker had stopped working in March 2005, initially claiming a heart condition, but later claimed a work-related shoulder injury.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that the worker failed to fulfill her co-operation obligations under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, as she did not report the shoulder injury promptly, failed to maintain communication with the employer, and did not assist in identifying suitable modified work.

The appeal was denied.

The worker, employed in the parts department of an automobile dealership for 32 years, appealed the denial of his claim for occupational noise induced hearing loss.

The worker testified that his work area was exposed to significant noise from the adjacent body shop and service areas, and that he spent several hours a day in those areas.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found the worker's testimony credible and supported by witness evidence, concluding that the cumulative noise exposure over 31 years met the policy criteria.

The worker's objection was allowed, granting entitlement to health care and a non-economic loss award based on the left ear hearing loss.

The worker suffered a workplace injury after slipping and falling on her tailbone.

She was initially denied loss of earnings (LOE) benefits beyond October 29, 2007, because the employer offered modified work.

The worker objected, arguing she was totally disabled during this period.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that the medical evidence supported the worker's inability to return to work until the fall of 2008 due to the nature of her injuries, which included a permanent impairment and a temporary psychological reaction.

The employer also agreed that the worker should be paid LOE for this period.

The worker's objection was allowed, and she was granted LOE benefits from October 29, 2007, to July 7, 2008.

The worker's estate appealed a decision denying entitlement for colorectal cancer, arguing that the worker's 14.5 years of occupational exposure as a firefighter was a significant contributing factor.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that the worker did not meet the presumptive criteria under O. Reg. 253/07 because he was diagnosed after age 61.

Adjudicating the claim on its merits, the Officer relied on epidemiological evidence indicating that firefighting was not a statistically significant risk factor for colorectal cancer, whereas the worker had significant personal risk factors including a positive family history, obesity, past smoking, and diabetes.

The appeal was denied.