Back to Article
Index
May 8, 2008
NDP wants WSIB program scrapped
"The McGuinty government is being asked to scrap a
controversial workplace insurance program that gave financial rewards to
companies guilty of fatal safety violations. The New Democratic Party has put
forward a motion, scheduled to be debated at Queen's Park next week, that also
calls for an audit of the so-called "experience rating" program that critics
claim entices companies to hide injuries and rush injured workers back on the
job. . . NDP Leader Howard Hampton says he wants to know how much money went to
undeserving companies, adding that he has no faith the McGuinty government will
attempt to make any serious changes as part of the review already underway.
" Incentive
plan gives rebates to some companies that have been prosecuted for safety
violations David Bruser Staff Reporter
The McGuinty government is being asked to scrap a
controversial workplace insurance program that gave financial rewards to
companies guilty of fatal safety violations.
The New Democratic Party has put forward a motion, scheduled
to be debated at Queen's Park next week, that also calls for an audit of the
so-called "experience rating" program that critics claim entices companies to
hide injuries and rush injured workers back on the job.
An ongoing Star investigation recently found the
Workplace Safety & Insurance Board has given millions of dollars in rebates
to companies that have been prosecuted by another arm of the provincial
government and ordered to pay fines.
In many cases, the amount of the rebate far exceeded the
value of the fine. The WSIB announced a year-long review of the program and
labour groups called for the firing of its chair, Steve Mahoney.
While Premier Dalton McGuinty called the Star's
findings an "embarrassment" that needs to be fixed, he said Mahoney stays
put.
Mahoney yesterday said the NDP motion is "nothing more than
grandstanding," and Liberal Labour Minister Brad Duguid dismissed it as
unproductive posturing.
"I think the NDP should keep their powder dry and wait until
we get the facts," Mahoney said.
"It's a little disappointing, frankly, and I don't know what
purpose it will serve. We have already launched our own thorough
examination."
But NDP Leader Howard Hampton says he wants to know how much
money went to undeserving companies, adding that he has no faith the McGuinty
government will attempt to make any serious changes as part of the review
already underway.
The incentive program known in WSIB circles as the
"experience rating system" began in 1985 to make companies safer by
using a penalty-rebate ("carrot-stick") approach. The system looks at the
"experience" of each company.
Premiums are based largely on the expected cost of a
company's claims for the year. If lower than projected, the company gets a
rebate. How much lower determines the amount of the rebate.
If a firm's insurance costs exceed expectations, it is hit
with a surcharge. The program does not add any extra penalty when there is a
death.
Loss-time injuries that is, injuries that cause a
worker to miss at least one shift can be more costly to a company than
injuries that do not lead to lost time. Generally speaking, the longer a
loss-time injury persists, the greater the cost under the experience rating
program.
Defenders of the system say it encourages most companies to
make workplaces safer, and they underscore the ministry of labour's claim that
loss-time injuries have gone down 20 per cent since 2004.
But Hampton and others say the program's emphasis on the
cost of loss-time injuries is creating an increasingly common problem:
Companies coming up with degrading, meaningless jobs designed to prevent the
injured worker from missing a shift.
Rushing an injured worker back to work, they say, often
makes the injury worse.
"It's a widespread problem. I know from my own experience
there are a number of significant industrial employers in my constituency where
when you talk with workers they say this goes on all the time," Hampton said.
"You're injured, you're called in, asked to come sit in the
office a few days, all as a means of under-reporting the actual (lost
time)." http://www.thestar.com/article/422790
Back to Article Index |