Spying on WSIB claimants: Good thing?

[Boges]

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/06/16/workplace_safety_insurance_board_steps_up_spying_on_clients_documents_show.html\

The video is the work of a private investigator hired by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board which, internal documents suggest, was suspicious that Williams was secretly working and faking her psychological illness. Williams was followed a month after a board-ordered medical assessment by doctors at CAMH determined she was in pain, depressed because of her injury and a poor candidate to return to work.

This type of surveillance by the WSIB used to be a rarity, typically ordered when the insurance board received a tip from a caller, according to legal experts.

But documents obtained by the Star suggest the WSIB is spying on clients claiming to be seriously injured, now more than ever and often without cause.

“Now that we are conducting more surveillance related to misrepresentation of level of disability where we don’t have an actual allegation, e.g. call record, there have been lots of questions from compliance specialists around what constitutes sufficient grounds to warrant surveillance,” states a 2011 internal email from Bob Thomas, an employee in the WSIB’s regulatory services division.

Those “sufficient grounds,” according to the email, include dozens of indicators such as chronic pain, language barriers and problems speaking to an injured worker directly, frequent change of phone number or address, recovery times that are inconsistent with usual healing times, anti-social behaviour or overreaction and psychological problems.

I think WSIB should do everything in their power to determine if a long-term claimant is actually able to work. We should all be appalled by people who abuse the social safety net we all pay for.

I'd go so far as to say that anyone who claims for an extended period should have to PROVE they are unable to work.

[Shady]

I agree. I also think anyone claiming Ontario Works (welfare) should be drug tested.

[GostHacked]

I agree. I also think anyone claiming Ontario Works (welfare) should be drug tested.

Alcohol testing too??

[Shady]

Alcohol testing too??

Sure.

[Boges]

Alcohol testing too??

Well considering governments price alcohol at the level of a luxury item, you would have to assume those drinking alcohol have a certain amount of discretionary income. If 100% of their income comes from the government, those two things don't jive.

I'm sure treatment for alcoholism can be covered by OHIP, that would be a far better use of taxpayer money than enabling addiction with taxpayer money.

Thread shift took all of one post.

Edited June 16, 2014 by Boges

[Shady]

Well considering governments price alcohol at the level of a luxury item, you would have to assume those drinking alcohol have a certain amount of discretionary income. If 100% of their income comes from the government, those two things don't jive.

I'm sure treatment for alcoholism can be covered by OHIP, that would be a far better use of taxpayer money than enabling addiction with taxpayer money.

Thread shift took all of one post.

Agreed. If were really interested in turning around people's lives that is the way to go.

[scribblet]

I don’t have a problem with Workers Comp verifying the veracity of claims. However, (Ontario) WSIB has jumped the shark in denying claims along with changing their rules which could be illegal. They check medical records and now deny claims based on an existing conditions, no matter that the injury and subsequent conditions wouldn’t have existed if the accident hadn’t happened. They also take into consideration psychological conditions then use that against the claimant.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/06/16/workplace_safety_insurance_board_steps_up_spying_on_clients_documents_show.html

WSIB has a permanent doctor on board whose job it is to deny claims, along with a CEO who gets 400K a year to do this and reduce claims.

I knew about this from a couple of people who are going through the process of having their claims denied right now and I did hear about it on a talk show. They are going too far in denying benefits to injured workers.

This refers to David Marshall whose job it is to deny claims and bring down the rates

http://www.cpcml.ca/OPF2014/Articles/OP03235.HTM

More info here

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/05/07/proposed_wsib_changes_will_hurt_workers_advocates_say.html

Edited June 16, 2014 by scribblet

[GostHacked]

There will always be people who take advantage of the system. Prosecute those that do. Instead of denying everyone coverage.

[Shady]

There will always be people who take advantage of the system. Prosecute those that do. Instead of denying everyone coverage.

Who's denying everyone coverage? Great strawman though.

[overthere]

I know a guy who investigates claims for the WCB (Workers Compensation Board) in Alberta. He was a city detective for many years previously until he retired after 25 or 30 years service. He does do surreptitious surveillance in many of the cases assigned to him, The only claims they bother with in his area are those that involve plenty o'money, like lifetime pension claims, permanent disability with no possibility of retraining, things like that. He tells me that he has no pressure to get any particualr result, everything he reports has to withstand scrutiny from both sides. Like his work as a cop, he does not reach conclusions or render judgements, just gathers evidence and lets others make decisions based on that.

[GostHacked]

Who's denying everyone coverage? Great strawman though.

Indeed, people here love strawman arguments.

[August1991]

Agreed. If were really interested in turning around people's lives that is the way to go.

There are some 7 billion people in the world - many of them poor. Is this "the way to go"? - as you put it.

Given the choice between a rich person who makes bad choices - and a poor person who has few choices, who would you help? IOW, why do we spend billions helping rich drug-addicts in North America while smart poor Africans receive, well, millions?

Shady, given your limited tax dollars, who would you prefer to give a hand to: North American drug addicts, or African children.

Edited June 18, 2014 by August1991

[Shady]

There are some 7 billion people in the world - many of them poor. Is this "the way to go"? - as you put it.

Given the choice between a rich person who makes bad choices - and a poor person who has few choices, who would you help? IOW, why do we spend billions helping rich drug-addicts in North America while smart poor Africans receive, well, millions?

Shady, given your limited tax dollars, who would you prefer to give a hand to: North American drug addicts, or African children.

I was addressing concerns regarding Ontario, and it's social services, pertaining to Ontario Works, ODSP, and WSIB. However, it most definitely is the way to go, if any of those 7 billion people are registering for said programs.

[scribblet]

Of course not all claimants are denied, but the changes in rules and the hiring of David Marshall whose mission is ' reduce and ultimately retire' the board’s $12 billion unfunded liability is resulting in the denial of legitimate claims. They are using pre-existing conditions as a reason to deny an injury taking a very narrow view of the policy. If an accident results in a work injury causing the employee medical problems that were not apparent or causing problems prior to said accident, then why automatically deny the claim. I know someone whose minor high school back injury which never bothered him before, resulted in denial of an accident claim which resulted in a major back injury. He can no longer work on construction but has been denied compensation. They are sifting through medical records looking for something to hold against the claimant, much like sleazy travel insurance companies are doing.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/05/07/proposed_wsib_changes_will_hurt_workers_advocates_say.html

[August1991]

I was addressing concerns regarding Ontario, and it's social services, pertaining to Ontario Works, ODSP, and WSIB. However, it most definitely is the way to go, if any of those 7 billion people are registering for said programs.

Fair enough. I hijacked the thread. But why should a bureaucrat's "registration" determine whether someone receives my largesse?

=======

Make no mistake. In the future, bureaucrats will increasingly spread the largesse in arbitrary fashion.

Edited June 19, 2014 by August1991

[Boges]

Fair enough. I hijacked the thread. But why should a bureaucrat's "registration" determine whether someone receives my largesse?

Because those people are receiving money from the government because they can't work. But evidence would indicate they can.