This message is displayed because client-side scripting is turned off or not supported in the browser you are currently using.
Please turn on client-side scripting or install a browser that supports client-side scripting.

Ontario Government | Ministry of Labour | Site Map | Accessibility | text resize: A A A

Home | About Us | OWT Library | Forms | Practice Directions | Decision Search | Contact Us | Fran├žais

Established in 1985, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT) is the final level of appeal to which workers and employers may bring disputes concerning workplace safety and insurance matters in Ontario. WSIAT has always been separate from and independent of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board.

Questions?

Decisions

Appeal Process

For Representatives

Finding a Representative

Documents & Publications

Legal/Medical Resources

Popular Topics

Links to Other Agencies

Highlights of Noteworthy Decisions

  Decision 1064 13
9/13/2013
S. Netten - M. Trudeau - D. Broadbent

  • Available employment
  • Suitable employment or business [SEB]
  • Labour market re-entry {LMR} (suitability of program)

The worker suffered a low back injury in 2000. In Decision No. 113/06, the Tribunal found that the worker had ongoing entitlement. The Board granted a 22% NEL award for permanent impairment, LMR services and LOE benefits. The worker completed a Board-sponsored two-year college program in water and waste water management and attended a job search program but did not find employment. The Board discontinued LOE benefits after basing post-accident earnings on deemed earnings in the SEB. The worker appealed.
The Panel preferred evidence of job vacancy rates and specific recruiting action over speculative unsubstantiated opinions regarding job availability.
The failure to secure employment in the SEB does not necessarily illustrate a general lack of availability of such employment. The Panel found that job opportunities were available in the SEB. In so finding, the Panel considered job postings in the worker's local region, job data information, numerous references to unadvertised positions and eight named employers who had recently hired graduates from the worker's program. There was also evidence of the worker's resistance to certain types of jobs.
The Panel concluded that employment in the SEB was available. The appeal was dismissed.