D. Peddle

The worker objected to a decision denying initial entitlement to benefits for a low back injury allegedly sustained while changing a snowplow blade.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that while an incident occurred at work, there was no clinical evidence demonstrating a new injury or an aggravation of the worker's pre-existing spinal pathology.

The appeal was denied.

The worker appealed a Case Manager's decision denying loss of earnings (LOE) benefits from December 9, 2021 onwards.

The worker had suffered a left ankle injury and was instructed by an orthopedic surgeon to remain off work and wear an air cast.

The employer offered modified seated duties, but the medical evidence supported a brief period of rest and time off work during the acute phase of recovery.

The Appeals Resolution Officer allowed the appeal, finding the worker was entitled to LOE benefits from December 9, 2021 through January 20, 2022.

The worker objected to three decisions by the WSIB: the determination of a suitable occupation, the recalculation of their long-term average earnings rate, and the final lock-in rate for their loss of earnings (LOE) benefits.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that the worker had successfully maintained employment in the identified suitable occupation for over four years, demonstrating its suitability.

The recalculation of the long-term average earnings rate was deemed appropriate due to the worker's non-permanent employment pattern.

Finally, the locked-in LOE rate was correctly based on the worker's actual earnings at the expiration of the 72-month review period.

The worker's objections were denied.