Good Morning Mr. Chair,
CEP Local 848 in Corunna represents about 200 members employed in oil refining, oil movements (tank farm), specialized and general maintenance, provision of steam and other plant utilities and laboratory testing services. Occupational disease is of great concern to our local, and we thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Report of the Chair of the Occupational Disease Advisory Panel.
It is clear that the WSIB is failing to recognize some Occupational Disease. CEP was of the view that the ODAP process initiated by the Board could make some substantial changes for the unacknowledged victims of occupational disease.
As recently as this weekend a 30 year worker at my work site has called to let me know that his Repetitive Strain Injury claim, previously accepted by the board, has now been denied. The worker has cancelled scheduled surgery that may have relieved his pain. He feels without the protection of the board his job may be in jeopardy as his surgeon has insisted that he not return to the same work he has today Sometimes workers are hurt and in pain. They feel powerless in the face of unintelligible decisions made about them. The appeal process can be long and difficult and all the while the worker and their family and the employer continue to suffer.
As a complex oil refinery our work site is influenced by many factors. Hydrocarbons, chemicals and combinations of each, under heat and pressure, creating a cocktail of unknown results, are commonplace in our work site.
Petroleum Products
Treatment Chemicals
Radioactivity
Solvents and soaps used in equipment maintenance
Metals, including vanadium and other heavy metals
Temperature
Silica and Asbestos
Noise and Vibration
Mercaptans
Carbon monoxide
Carbon Dioxide
Sulfur Dioxide
Hydrogen Sulfide
Ammonia
Pyrophorics
Smoke
Dust
Repetitive Strain Injury
Organic Land Farming
These are but a few of the hazards that we as workers are subject to in our workplace.
At our work site I feel that sometimes CEP Local 848 has been virtually alone in trying to inform workers of their rights and obligations under the Act. Often we have had to encourage workers to report an injury to the health center and then we send them back to insist that the employer complete a form 7 for the board. I know that these are basic expectations under the act but it still happens where opinions differ or a short explanation form the company nurse conveys to the worker that a formal report just isn't necessary. When events are handled properly by the worker and the health Center in our workplace, other hurdles often occur. For instance, when medical evidence is required and a worker asks for a copy of their medical file, from our health Center, that file is first sent to the head office in Alberta for a review and only then is it given to the worker. This causes questions and distrust between the health center nurse and the worker. Also when doctors and specialists reports are part of a medical file they cannot, under the rules of our employer be given to the worker without first securing individual permission of the physicians involved. This can make the gathering of medical evidence a cumbersome and time consuming exercise.
When the worker has to deal with the board it seems that any problem at all no matter how minor is enough to deny benefits. It has been my experience that a worker can have many individual pieces of medical evidence to support their claim, as well as peer testimony and yet the board with a simple doctors review that focuses on one conflicting medical or non-medical opinion may deny benefits. I believe that sometimes the board hopes the worker will just go away if they the board, put up enough resistance.
Any insights that you gather from these hearings that can be used to bring back a degree of fairness and justice to injured workers will be a step in the right direction. To do otherwise will leave some workers on a path towards disease, depression and bankruptcy. Thank you for listening to me.
Dan Hennaert CEP Local 848
