Decision Search Results
Searching, please wait...
| Decision No. 2081 03 | 22-Dec-2009 | R. Nairn - B. Wheeler - R. Lebert |
| The employer was originally classified in Rate Group 468 for electronic parts. In 1994, the Board reclassified the employer into Rate Group 421 for motor vehicle electrical parts. In Decision No. 499/00I, the Tribunal found that the best fit for the employer was in Rate Group 468 for the period from 1993 to 1997. The question of classification after that date was returned to the Board. Effective 1998, the Board amended Rate Group 468 to exclude items manufactured for the motor vehicle industry. The Board again reclassified the employer into Rate Group 421 as of 1998. The employer submitted that the Board did not have authority to make such an amendment to Rate Group without appropriate approval from the Board’s board of directors. Considering the provisions in ss. 118(1), 118(2), 159(2) and 183(2) of the WSIA, the Board has a duty to maintain the insurance fund in a viable position and bears the responsibility for making its best efforts to classify employers without imposing a burden on them. The Board has exclusive jurisdiction to design a classification scheme and place employers within the various classification units. The Tribunal’s role is not to attempt to re-write or modify the classification unit descriptions but to determine which of the classification units is the best fit for a particular employer. As a general proposition, it was clearly open to the Board to amend its description of Rate Group 468. Neither the statute nor the regulations specifically addresses how the Board is to design and amend the classification scheme. As a result, the Board has the discretion to amend or modify the classification scheme to ensure that business activities are correctly classified. Given that Rate Group now specifically excludes items manufactured for the motor vehicle industry, which is the essential character of the employer’s business in this case, the best fit for the employer is Rate Group 421. The employer suggested that the amendment by the Board of its policy to add the exclusion was an intrusion into the federal sphere by creating a greater tax on the employer. However, the Panel agreed with the recent trend in jurisprudence to characterize the Board premiums as an insurance premium rather than a tax. The appeal was dismissed. |
| View Full Decision Text 17 Page(s) |
| References: | Act Citation Other Case Reference |
| Neutral Citation: | 2009 ONWSIAT 2985 |
