F. Pansino

The worker appealed a decision determining that the Suitable Occupation (SO) of shipper/receiver was suitable, which resulted in partial loss of earnings (LOE) benefits based on deemed earnings.

The worker argued that her permanent left foot impairment prevented prolonged standing and walking required for the role.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that the shipper/receiver SO was not consistent with the worker's functional abilities.

The officer determined that a customer service representative role was suitable and ordered LOE benefits to be paid based on the earnings of a customer service representative, granting the worker's objection.

The worker appealed the denial of initial entitlement for a low back injury.

The worker alleged slipping on product dust at work but did not miss time and delayed seeking medical attention for over three weeks.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that due to the delay in seeking medical attention and lack of complaints during the period he continued working, the back injury was not compatible with or related to the workplace incident.

The appeal was denied.

The worker, a millwright with a permanent lifting restriction due to a prior injury, was called into work to repair an elevator gear box.

While carrying a 103-pound gear reducer—an activity exceeding his 50-pound restriction—he suffered a lower back injury.

The employer objected to the initial entitlement, arguing the worker voluntarily removed himself from employment by exceeding his restriction.

The Appeals Resolution Officer upheld the entitlement, finding that the activity was incidental to the employment and the injury arose out of and in the course of employment.

The worker appealed the denial of a Non Economic Loss (NEL) assessment for permanent aggravation of stasis dermatitis and the denial of a 100 per cent Future Economic Loss (FEL) award.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that the aggravation of the worker's stasis dermatitis caused by the workplace ankle injury was temporary and ended in 1998, with subsequent flare-ups attributable to non-compensable pre-existing conditions.

The Officer also found that the modified welding jobs offered by the employer in 1995/1996 accommodated the worker's low back restrictions, as they allowed for alternating between sitting and standing.

The worker's objections were denied.

The worker, a community nurse, was involved in a work-related motor vehicle accident in March 2006.

She continued working but developed anxiety and a fear of driving.

In July 2007, she was involved in a minor non-work-related motor vehicle accident, after which she stopped working and was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that the March 2006 work-related accident was a significant contributing factor to the development of her PTSD, as it left her vulnerable to re-traumatization.

The worker's objection was granted, and she was awarded entitlement to benefits for psychotraumatic disability and 100 per cent loss of earnings benefits from August 2007 to September 2009.