WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE BOARD
APPEALS RESOLUTION OFFICER DECISION
DECISION NUMBER: 20100186
OBJECTION BY: The Employer
PARTICIPANTS: Employer, Worker, Worker’s representative
HEARING LOCATION: N/A
ISSUE
The employer objects to the initial allowance of this claim for a low back injury suffered on February 4, 2010.
HOW THE ISSUE ARISES
This claim was submitted by the worker to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB).
The worker reported to the employer on February 8, 2010 that he had suffered a low back strain while performing his duties. The worker related that he had been packing parts when he felt sudden low back pain.
The worker sought medical attention on the date of injury and provided the same accident history.
The claim was allowed by the Adjudication Branch of the WSIB as the employer had confirmed the accident history and advised that they were not objecting to the initial allowance of the claim.
Subsequently, the employer terminated the worker and has now objected to the initial allowance of the claim.
The employer notes that the basis for the objection is that the worker has not been truthful.
The objection of the employer was denied at the adjudication level and the matter referred to the Appeals Branch.
AUTHORITY
Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (the Act) Operational Policy Manual (OPM) Document(s):
11-01-01 – Adjudicative Process
11-01-02 – Decision-Making
ASSESSMENT OF THE EVIDENCE
The Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) adjudicates the initial allowance of claims based on the consistency and significance of the information provided.
In this particular case, I note that the worker immediately reported the onset of back pain on February 4, 2010 to the employer. The worker noted that at 8:30 AM he felt immediate low back pain while packing parts. He reported it to his supervisor at 9:30 AM and sought medical attention on the same date. The family physician has confirmed the accident history.
The employer was contacted by the WSIB’s case manager as documented in memo 1. At the time, the employer stated that he was not objecting to the claim but was objecting to the worker’s history of back complaints which he believed went back to 2007.
In looking at the available evidence on file, there is consistency of reporting by the worker. He reported the accident to the employer and family physician in a timely manner. The immediates are also met. There was immediate pain, immediate reporting, and immediate medical attention.
Having reviewed the evidence, I note that the employer did not immediately object to the occurrence of the claim nor did they do so when they spoke to the WSIB staff on March 23, 2010. The employer subsequently terminated the worker and was found to be in breach of their re-employment obligations. Following this decision, the employer objected to the initial allowance of the claim citing the worker’s lack of truthfulness as their reason.
The evidence does not support the employer’s position. The worker has been consistent in the accident history and noting that the immediates are present, the allowance of the claim is confirmed.
CONCLUSION
The initial allowance of the claim is confirmed.
The employer’s objection is denied.
DATED: December 8, 2010
N. Kissoore
Appeals Resolution Officer
Appeals Branch