R. Sheridan

The employer appealed a Case Manager's decision granting the worker initial entitlement for inhalation exposure to barbeque fumes and denying the employer's request for Second Injury and Enhancement Fund (SIEF) cost relief.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found no objective medical evidence supporting the worker's claim of allergies or sensitivities to fumes or cooking exposure, noting inconsistencies between the worker's reported symptoms and the medical records.

Consequently, the worker's entitlement for inhalation exposure was revoked, rendering the SIEF cost relief issue moot.

The employer's objection was allowed.

The worker suffered a compensable low back injury in 1974 and was subsequently awarded a 35% permanent disability (PD) rating.

Following two spinal surgeries, the worker requested a PD reassessment, arguing his condition had deteriorated.

The Appeals Resolution Officer compared the physical findings from the last PD reassessment in 2009 to the most recent medical report in 2014.

Finding that the worker's flexion and reflexes had improved post-surgery, the Officer concluded there was no objective medical evidence of deterioration and denied the request for a PD reassessment.

The worker claimed to have suffered low back and left knee injuries while pulling a 600 lb. skid at work.

The employer objected to the initial allowance of the claim, arguing that the worker provided inconsistent accident histories and that photographic evidence showed the alleged mechanism of injury was physically impossible.

The Appeals Resolution Officer reviewed the evidence, including video surveillance and multiple conflicting statements from the worker, and concluded that proof of accident could not be established.

The initial entitlement was rescinded, rendering the worker's appeals regarding loss of earnings benefits moot.

The worker appealed a decision denying full loss of earnings (LOE) benefits from July 8, 2010, arguing that the identified suitable employment or business (SEB) objective of cashier was not suitable due to his limited education and compensable chronic pain disability.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that despite the worker's limited education and impairment, he had successfully completed a labour market re-entry program and work placements as a cashier.

The worker had also demonstrated a willingness to secure employment.

The appeal was dismissed, and the SEB of cashier was deemed suitable.

The worker, a personal support worker, appealed the denial of entitlement for a cervical condition she claimed was caused by her work duties.

She reported a gradual onset of pain and was diagnosed with disc herniations.

The employer argued she did not report the incident promptly and had a pre-existing degenerative condition.

The Appeals Resolution Officer denied the appeal, finding that proof of accident could not be established, noting the worker's delayed reporting, her pre-existing degenerative condition, and the fact that she returned to regular duties without further symptoms.

The worker appealed a decision denying initial entitlement for a bilateral knee condition and loss of earnings benefits.

The worker claimed the condition was caused by repetitive duties as a drywall installer.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found insufficient proof of an accident, noting a lack of reporting, contradictory medical history regarding a twisting incident, and insufficient evidence of the repetitiveness of the job duties.

The objection was denied.

The worker, a ski instructor and Alpine race coach, suffered bilateral knee injuries in a workplace accident.

The WSIB initially provided loss of earnings (LOE) benefits and labour market re-entry (LMR) services, but discontinued them after a medical report suggested the worker could return to his pre-injury employment with a knee brace.

The worker objected, arguing he could not perform the physical demands of his pre-injury jobs.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that the worker could not return to his pre-injury employment due to the risk of further injury and inability to perform advanced ski instruction.

The worker was granted full LOE benefits from the date they were discontinued, resumption of LMR services, and continuation of his physiotherapy program.

The request for weight loss and strength training programs was denied.