Manitoba Committee Hansard — 12 January 1995 (Public Utilities Committee, Sitting 2, 35th Legislature, 6th Session)

35-6-pu2

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Sixth Session - Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources Chairperson Al~Alarcel~rendeau Constituency of SL Norbert VoL XLIV No. 2 • 10 a.m., Thursday, January U, 1995 ISSN 0713-9454

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation ~ ASJITON, Steve BARRHIT, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DBRKACH. Leonard, Hon. DEWAR. Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRlEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerald, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul BNNS, Hany, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. BVANS,Ciif BV ANS, Leonard FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN,Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER. Harold, Hon.

GRAY, Avis HELWER, Edward HICKBS, George KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LA THLIN, Oscar LAURENDBAU, Marcel MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWAY,Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug MCALPINE, Gerry MCCORMICK, Norma MCCRAE. James, Hon. MCINTOSH, Linda, Hon. Mrs. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. Mrs. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PALLISTER. Brian PENNER. Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROBINSON, Eric ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad SCHELLENBERG, Harry STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. SVEINSON, Ben VODREY,Rosemary, Hon. Mrs. WOWCHUK.

Rosano CoDStituency Thompson Wellington Radisson Kildonan Ste.Rose du Lac Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach (Minister) Riel (Minister) St. James Lakeside O!arleswood Interlake Brsndon East Tuxedo Springf'tcld Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Crescentwood Gimli Point Douglas The Maples Inkster The Pas St. Norbert St. Johns Elmwood Morris (Minister) Burrows Sturgeon Creek Osborne Brandon West Assiniboia River East Pembina Portage Ia Prairie Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St.

Vital Rupertsland Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Rossmere Kirkfield Park La Verendrye FortGany Swan River River Heights FlinFlon fm:!l NDP NDP NDP NDP P.C. P.C. P.C. NDP NDP P.C. P.C. P.C. Lib. P.C. P.C. NDP NDP P.C. P.C. NDP Lib. P.C. Lib. P.C. NDP Lib. Lib. NDP P.C. NDP NDP P.C. NDP P.C. Lib. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. NDP P.C. NDP P.C. P.C. NDP P.C. P.C. NDP NDP P.C. P.C. P.C. NDP Vamnt Vamnt

55 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC UTILITIES AND NATURAL RESOURCES Thursday, January 12, 1995 TIME -- 10 a.m. LOCATION ··Winnipeg, Manitoba CHAIRPERSON -- Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert) ATTENDANCE -11 --QUORUM • 6 Members of the Committee present: Hon. Mr. Orchard Mrs. Dacquay, Messrs. Edwards, Helwer, I...amoureux, Laurendeau, Martindale, Reimer, Mrs. Render, Messrs. Rose, Schellenberg Substitutions: Mr. Pramik for Mr. Orchard at 10:07 a.m Ms. McCormick for Mr. Lamoureux at 10:08 am. Ms. Barrett for Mr. Schellenberg at 10:08 a.m. Mr. Reid for Mr. Martindale at 10:09 a.m Mr.

Gaudry for Mr. Edwards at 10:09 a.m Mr. Penner for Mr. He1wer at 10:09 a.m. Mr. Ashton forMs. Barrett at 11:34 a.m.

APPEARING: Wally Fox-Decent, Chairperson, Workers Compensation Board Alex Wilde, Chief Executive Officer, Workers Compensation Board Teny Edgeworth, Executive Director of Assessments, Human Resources and Communications, Workers Compensation Board Sid Rogers, Senior Director of Oaims Services, Workers Compensation Board Kam Sandy, Executive Director, Corporate Services and Research, Workers Compensation Board Don Paul, Senior Director of Claims Services, Workers Compensation Board MA TIER UNDER DISCUSSION: December 31, 1993, Annual Report of the WorlrersCompensation Board and 1994 Five Year Operating Plan *** Mr.

Chairperson: Good morning. Will the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources please come to order. This morning the committee will be considering the 1993 Annual Report of the Workers Compensation Board. Prior to COlDDl::nCing consideration of the report, we have a number of committee substitutions. I have before me the resignation of the Honourable Don Orchard as member of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources effective immediately. Are there any nominations to replace the Honourable Mr. Orchard? Mr. Jack Reimer (Niakwa): I move that Mr. Orchard be replaced by Mr.

Pramik. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Reimer moves that Mr. Orchard be replaced by Mr. Praznik. Agreed? [agreed] I have before me the resignation of Mr. Lamoureux as a member of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources effective immediately. Are there any nominations to replace Mr. Lamoureux? Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): I move that Ms. McCormick be a replacement for Mr. Lamoureux.

56 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 Mr. Chairperson: It has been moved by Mr. Edwards that Ms. McCormick replace Mr. Lamoureux. Agreed? [agreed] I have before ~ the resignation of Mr. Schellenberg as a ~mber of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resomces effective immediately. Are there any nominations to replace Mr. Schellenberg? Ms. Norma McCormick (Osborne): I move that Ms. Bairett be a replaQ':Jll"..lt for Mr. Schellenberg. Mr. Chairperson: It has been moved by Ms. McCormick that Ms. Banett replace Mr. Schellenberg. Is it the will of the committee?

Agreed? [agreed] I have before ~ the resignation of Mr. Martindale as a ~mber of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resomces effective immediately. Are there any nominations to replace Mr. Martindale? Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): I move that Mr. Reid be a replace~nt for Mr. Martindale. Mr. Chairperson: It has been moved that Mr. Reid replace Mr. Martindale. Agreed? [agreed] I have before ~ the resignation of Mr. Edwards. Is there so~one to replace Mr. Edwards? Ms. McCormick: I move that Mr. Gaudry replace Mr. Edwards. Mr. Chairperson: It has been moved that Mr. Edwards be replaced by Mr.

Gaudry. Agreed? [agreed] I also have before ~ the resignation of Mr. Helwer. Are there any nominations to replace Mr. Helwer? Mr. Reimer: I move that Mr. Penner replace Mr. Helwer. Mr. Chairperson: It has been moved that Mr. Penner replace Mr. Helwer. Agreed? [agreed] It is also the usual practice when considering the Annual Report of the Workers Compensation Board to also consider the Five Year Plan of the board Does the committee give unanimous consent to also consider the Five Year Plan?

Agreed? [agreed] I also understand that the officials present from the Workers Compensation Board would like to make an audio-visual presentation to the committee during the meeting. Does the conmittee give unanimous consent for an audio-visual presentation? [agreed] We shall now proceed Does the minister responsible for the Workers Compensation Board, the Honourable Mr. Praznik, have an opening statement, and would he like to introduce the officials in attendance from the Workers Compensation Board, please? •

(1010) Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister charged with the administration of The Workers Compensation Act): Mr. Chair, I would like to ask if I could have our CEO and our chair, and we have two board members with us today, if they could join us here please up at the front. Let me introduce to members of the committee, certainly no stranger to members of the Legislature, Professor, former rear-admiral, Wally Fox-Decent, who is chairperson of the Workers Compensation Board. We have with us Mr. Alex Wilde, who is the chief executive officer. We also have Mr. Bruno ~. who is a board member, and Mr.

George Chapman, who is also a board member. Mr. Zimmer is a board ~mber nominated by employees. Mr. Chapman is a public interest board member. We also have Ms. Kam Sandy joining us at the front, who is the corporate secretary. We also have other staff available as needed to meet specific questions of detail on any particular branches or departments of the board.

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 57 I am going to change my regular routine here sOireWhat and have very brief opening remarks.

I just want to say that the financial picture, I think. by any of the three criteria which we often judge workers compensation boards, their financial stability, their financial situation being one, their rates and rate sttucture being a second, and thinlly, and some would argue perhaps most importantly, the service delivery to its clients, by those three standards, I am pleased to say that in my opinion, at least, I think the Workers Compensation Board of Manitoba bas made major improvements over the last number of~ in all three areas. We will get into that detail shortly.

I want to say, though, to our board and all of its members, employee, employer and public interest representative and our cllair and to all the staff, my congratulations and thanks publicly here today because there really has been a team effort on the part of all of the players, employee reps, employer reps, all the various parties involved, our public interest people, to work together to achieve success in all three areas by which boards are judged The success that we have is due in part to that tremendous effort by so many at the board.

I hope members of the committee will share that view following this report, and in keeping with my suggestion of being somewhat brief on my part today, I would now defer to you, Mr. Chair, and the procedures for this process. Mr. Chairperson: I thank the minister for that short statement. Did the critic from the second opposition party have an opening statement? Does the critic from the official opposition party have an opening statement? Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Mr. Chairperson, I am the member representing the official opposition here, along with my colleague the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett).

I will be very brief in my comments because I think it is important that we move as quickly as possible into the presentation that the members of the boa1d have for us here today. I look forward to that presentation. We also have a number of questions dealing with policy decisions by the board, but also, this year, I am going to take a bit of a different tactic in that I am going to move into some questions relating to the finances of the board itself and their future projections and some of the problems that may be anticipated with that.

So I am going to cover at least two different areas with respect to the board's operations that I may not have covered thoroughly enough in past committee meetings. I want to note too that this committee has not sat since the spring of 1993, so it is some two years since we have meL We did not meet in 1994. It was my understanding that this committee was supposed to be meeting at least on an annual basis. That did not occur in 1994. I was disappointed that we did not have that opportunity to JD!et to bring forward the concerns that we had.

We bad looked forward to this committee convening around the sununer of 1994, but unfortunately, that did not happen. It could have been held in the fall of '94; that did not happen as well. So while we do welcome the members of the WOikers Compensation Board here today, we want to put on record that we were concerned that the minister did not see fit to convene this committee in 1994. Point of Order Mr. Praznik: On a point of order, and it is a moot point, I would suggest, but still ~ worth making. 1he convening of this committee is not something that is within my power as minister responsible. Mr.

Chairperson: The honourable minister did not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. *** Mr. Reid: I will leave my comments, as brief as they are, to what I have already put on the record. Mr. Chairperson, and look forward to the presentation and the opportunity to ask ~ questions.

58 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Reid. Did the critic from the second opposition party have an opening statement? Ms. McCormick: No. Mr. Chairperson: No? Thank you. Did the representatives present from the Worla::rs Compensation Board have a statement to present to the committee? Mr. Wally Fox-Decent (Chairperson, Workers Compensation Board): Mr. Clair, the Minister, honourable members, I am pleased to appear before you with a number of my colleagues today to disruss the 1993 Annual Report of the Workers Compensation Board, together with the Five Year Plan.

Let me begin by saying that I believe that 1993 was a year of some improvements for om organization. You have already heard the minister say a few words about the financial well-being of Workers Compensation. We had a surplus of almost $23 million on operations in 1993 and therefore were able to reduce the unfunded liability quite significantly. 'Ibe assessment rate to emplO}US remains stable during 1993, and indeed, as Mr. Reid suggests he might like to discuss a bit later, the assessment rate announced for 1995 is the same as that which was in place in 1994 and 1993.

Our CEO, Alex Wilde, is going to give you some visual indications of the organization's financial status as we finish our rematks today. I will have a few things to say by way of introduction, and then Alex will give you a little bit of a visual presentation. Then we will be delighted to receive your questions. Some of the most important gains made by Worla::rs Compensation in 1993 will not appear in the statistical portion of the annual report.

They are somewhat harder to measure. 1bey are the advances we have hopefully made and continue to make in the areas of service, in providing reasonable, effective and fair delivery of services to our clients, injured workers and employers alike. As you know, I am talking about the kind of changes that do not show improvement overnight. We recognize, at Workers Compensation, that we have some problems. We recognize that those problems relate to issues of service delivery and delays in the delivery of service within our system In 1993, we tried harder to learn from our mistakes.

We tried to make improvements designed to make recovery from injury and paying for the system a little easier for injured workers and employers, the people that we are here to serve. S01re of you will know that we formed a service delivery committee in 1993, a committee that includes representatives of om clients. In addition, we solicited extensive comments from employers, workers and their advocates through our ongoing consultation process. This service delivery committee has undertaken a review of the claims process on a step-by-step basis.

We recently held a service delivery fonun called, People in Crisis, bringing together some 30 local service providers, joined with our board members and Workers Corq> s~ to examine common issues and, more important, to identify strategies for assisting workers and their families in a time of crisis. •

(1020) Suggestions received from unions and from others representing workers led the board to institute a number of service initiatives, including the 24-hour worker crisis line. This same committee took time to examine issues addressed by the provincial Ombudsman, again attempting to make past errors or mistakes a teaming experience.

The service delivery committee invited the chief appeals commissioner to share some time with us discussing all matters related to the conduct of business before the independent appeals commission. 1brough our work on service delivery and in the conmittee dJarged with that special responsibility, we have seen a number of significant themes emerge on a consistent basis. 1bey include the

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 59 following. These are the challenges, I think, to our system that have emerged from discussion in the service delivery committee. First, we need to energize or humanize our system by increasing personal cmtact between our clients and staff, thus ensuring a :tnOie caring, courteous treatment. As a result, we have instituted personal contact programs whereby staff have telephone contact with clients on a regular recurring basis.

It is now a rule that a new client will be contacted within two weeks by telephone to be given a status report oo their claim by the individual involved as adjudicator. We discovered as we looked at issues that came to the service delivery committee-and incidentally we had a broad consultation process. We sent out invitatioos to the commmity to come to the service delivery committee personally or send us written submissioos with regard to the issues of concem in Workers Compensation. Manitoba.

We discovered the need to ensure clear, concise and compassionate communication to help clients understand our system, their rights and any decisioos that might affect them. Too often in the past we have heard clients say' rve got a letter from Workers Compensation, I don't even know what it Ireans; it's just gobbledegook as far as rm concerned Through a careful program, including a lot of staff training toward the writing of clear, concise, fair and understanding correspondence, I believe that we have gone some way toward addressing issues that had plagued us with regard to conmnmication.

We were told that we must reduce delays in adjudication and the appeal process. We were told of the need to increase worlrer and employer involvement in the claims process, especially in vocational rehabilitation. We were made aware of needs to ensure that there is adequate training of our staff to meet the challenges of serving our clients. We were made aware of the need to increase public education and training to encourage injury prevention. We know that injury prevention is a special responsibility of Workplace Safety and Health within the government envelope, and I am pleased to say, Mr.

Chair, that we have a very close working relationship with Workplace Safety and Health. A member of our staff sits on the Advisory Council, Workplace Safety and Health. There is a regular interaction between staff of our organization and Workplace Safety and Health. I think that kind of co-operation is just simple commoo sense if you are trying to deal with preveotioo as a primary issue. Of course, the more prevention that is effective, the less you will have to deal with the cure at the other end of the process. The service delivery committee's work is far from over.

We cootinue to wOik on an active basis today, lD!eting on an average of every three to four weeks. Beyond the current mandate, which is service to the injured worker, the intent is to undertake a similar initiative to address employer related issues. Gains in con:mmicatioo for our board translated into increased direct communication and contact with our stakeholders through consultation. and if I may say, Mr. Chair, the result of which has been a fiUr degree of consensus building in terms of how the organization should proceed on a number of issues.

By acknowledging that ours is not always the ooly or the best approach to solutions, we were able to enjoy a series of direct discussions with our stakeholders. For example, through consultation with employers, the process of assessment and collection of what they pay us in premiums has been thoroughly examined and changed. Further change is planned when our latest round of consultatioo is complete. At this very moment, we have another consultation paper out in the constituency with regard to the process related to assessments.

This ongoing consultation with all our parties of interest is an opportunity for our stakeholders to not ooly be heard but, more importantly, to have input and a real impact on our board's policies. I say that because these consultations have resulted in changes and adjustments to our

60 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 policies. We recently expanded our process to include a written feedback to those who have taken the time and effort to share their views with us. Mr. OJ.air, 1993 saw the laWlch of a new high school safety program, a co-operative venture financed by Worlters Compensation. This instructional video presentation with supporting classroom and teacher material is designed to provide high school students with exposure to workplace safety education. Another important communication project we are working on involves heritage languages.

We are trying to ensure language is not a barrier to applying for Workers Compensation benefits or participating in rehabilitation and retum to work. We continue to strive, to translate all our printed material into a number of heritage languages. As responsible stewards of the program we operate, we can pay only what we believe to be legitimate claims under our act. If I may say, Mr. Chair, that really is the essence of what Workers Compensation is all about. It is paying legitimate claims of injured workers in a prompt, fair, courteous and compassionate manner. However, sometimes we have to say no.

Not eveiy claim can be accepted under the terms and conditions of our act and under the terms and conditions of the regulations and processes that flow from our acL So sometimes we say no and som=times our claimants are unhappy when we say no. There is, as you know, a process for unhappy or unsatisfied claimants to make appeals through the system There are various levels of appeal, ending, as you know, with the case before the independent appeal commission.

We do, however, although we have to say no from time to time, take steps to learn from decisions which are modified or overturned as a result of our appeals process. There is room for more improvement. I am pleased to note, and I hope I do not speak too soon, and I certainly have my hands very firmly on the wooden table when I say this, that the complaints to the provincial Ombudsman are down related to Workers COIDpC'JlSation, as are requests for reconsideration to our review office. Statistics show a substantial reduction in the number of appeals that have been filed with the independent appeal commission.

Now, all of that, that I have just said to you about a decrease in complaints to the Ombudsman, a reduction in review office applications, and a quite substantial reduction, about 25 percent reduction in the number of appeals that have gone before the appeal commission, that is 1994 over 1993. So I have strayed slightly beyond the 1993 period. I give it to you as a hopeful sign that we may be having less dissatisfaction by our clients as a result of the decisions we make. I spoke earlier of measuring our progress not in dollars but in serving our customers. I did that because we know we have not reached our goal.

We do, however, undertake to continue our efforts to meet the challenge of providing excellent service to our clients. •

(1030) Now, Mr. OJ.air, if I may, I would like to call on our chief executive officer, Alex Wilde, who will continue our presentation. Mr. Alex Wilde (Chief Executive Officer, Workers Compensation Board): Mr. OJ.ainnan, Mr. Minister, members of the committee, this is the focus on the financial and the operational portion of our presentation this rooming. Wally spoke about the quality services, a fimdamental component of the Workers Compensation program To be a viable operation though. the service has to be combined with some financial stability and operational effectiveness.

We mentioned some of the improvements in service tbat we have been working on, and we also feel we have made some good results, some solid improvements in those other areas as well. First of all, in the area of financial stability, what we have here is an extract from the 1993 annual statement. The third line from the bottom

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 61 on this chart shows the decrease in unftmded liability in 1992 and 1993. And see, in 1992 we vvere able to reduce the unfunded liability by $9.8 million and in 1993 that jumped to nearly $22 million; '93 was an exceptional year. As Wally commented earlier, we are drifting a little bit into giving you some view of 1994. Because of the timing of the presentation, '94 certainly is not going to be as good a financial year as 1993, but certainly we are still on target with the long-term projections to deal with the unfunded liability.

This next slide simply deals with the balance sheet as of the end of '93, and that identifies that the unfunded liability, again third line from the bottom, in 1992 we ended the year with $93 million left in our unfunded liability which was reduced then by that $22 million down to $71 millic:n at the end of 1993. I guess, too, to put that in perspective for you, you have to look at where we have been coming from. This chart here shows the unfunded liability beginning in 1988 and bringing us up to date.

Where we are at the end of 1993 then is at this point where we had the $72 million in our unfunded liability and obviously major decline from four or five years ago. Our current projections for 1994 are for a small increase in the unfunded again, not, as we mentioned, as much as we were able to achieve in '93, but nonetheless continuing to reduce that deficit. Our projections then for '95 and continuing, for our long-term objective being the end of 1999, to have eliminated that unftmded liability.

To put this in context, this is a little more difficult to read, but what we wanted to give you was a sense of how we compare to the rest of the industry across Canada. Now, in Manitoba, our unfunded liability then represents a shortfall of 9 pen:ent against our liabilities, and that is what we have to, over a period of time, work at eliminating. Across the country, unfunded liabilities are a very major problem and you will see, particularly in the Maritimes and Quebec, very, very substantial shortfalls. Ontario is sort of the worst case in the country right now. They have an extremely large unfunded liability.

We unfortunately use them as a bit of a bad example in some cases, but the trend and the priority of all of the boards is to deal with the unfunded liability of one of the major priorities of the organization. The slide we have here then is moving into the future with our results. What we have here is a chart that really represents the accumulated claims over the course of the last three years, so the onmge bar represents 1992. So you can see, over the period of a year, our reported claims were slightly over 42,000, and in 1993, we had a fairly substantial drop.

In 1994, though, we have gone back to the 1992 levels. Now, this is particularly significant. This is what is driving the financial results that I reterred to earlier, that 1994 will not see the same decline in our unfunded liability as we have had in '93; '93 was an exceptional year. We spent a great deal of time looking at what was happening in clai.tm. What we found was, in May and June, we noticed that we had a significant increase beginning in the trend of the claims that were reported relative to '93.

We worked closely with Workplace Safety and Health, who did a lot of analysis at that time to try and sort out just what was going on. What we found was a mixed blessing. There was some good news there in that we did a lot of very detailed checking back with some of the firms that were showing particularly large increases and found that in many cases it was as a direct result of significant increase in economic activity. That was the good-news side. •

(1040) The bad news part of it was that in some of those cases and in other cases where there had not been the economic growth, what we were seeing were some cutbacks that had occurred in the past year on training, safety programs. We were seeing inexperienced staff who had not been observing the same safety standards. We worked with Workplace Safety and Health, with the employers involved, and in several cases, for example, they reinstituted safety training programs. In fact, in a

62 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 couple of cases, they actually added to their safety department. The bottom line, though, is that 1993 seems to have been an anomaly in that dip in the claims and that 1994 is tracking very closely on that '92 result all the way through, so that at the end of 1994, we actually have a 14 percent increase in claims over 1993 but only 2 percent over the '92, which seems to be a nme the normal pattern.

The other balf, of comse, of financial stability is not just that you are making money, so to speak, to reduce your deficit so that you can cover your liabilities but to do it without having to raise the rates as you go along. What we have here is a graph showing the average rates that are paid in this province over the last half dozen years. There were some substantial increases in those early years, when the unfunded liability peaked at very high levels. As it started to come down, obviously, it was also possible to make some small decreases in the average rates that were paid over the last several years now.

With our plans for 1995, we are maintaining the same average rate. Now that is not to suggest that individual firms-if you go out and talk to employers, most people's rates do change.

We have an experience-rated system so that people's rates are based on the results that they have in their own industry and, in some cases in their own individual companies, so any particular employer may well see the rate go up or down every year in these two or three years where we say the average rate for the province has not changed Again, to put this in a bit of a perspective for you, this is a little difficult to read, but the rates in Manitoba, that average assessnr.nt rate, from 1988 we were the eighth highest rate across the country, and in '94 and '93, had the third or fourth lowest rates.

So the lowest rates in the country for the last couple of years have been in the province of Saskatchewan. If we were to go back on that chart I showed you earlier about unftmded liability, they do not have an unfunded liability. So they are fully funded, and that is one reason that allows them to enjoy that position of having both low rates and no funding shortfall. The other piece of the puzzle we talked about tim was the operatiooal efficiency. It is important that we run an effective operation, that we control our costs, that we have good productivity from our staff.

What we attempted to do here was to give you one of the measures of productivity for the people we have, where we stand here on a global basis, and we are talking here about time-loss claims which are a main measure of activity relative to our total staff. So the board in Manitoba averages 40 time-loss claims per staff member. Drawing that line across the piece you can see that, relative to other boards across the country, that is a pretty high productivity level. The interesting thing-I was really impressed the first time I came across this statistic-we have got a huge productivity number there in Nova Scotia.

On the surface that looked really great. I went back and tallred to them about it, and interestingly, that is a very deceptive kind of number. In fact, in their 1993 annual report they went so far as to say that was a big mistake on their part, that they were so preoccupied with controlling the admin costs and getting the worldoad levels up to the maximmn that it was a major contributor to their unfunded liability and to backlogs in the worldoad So that, in this particular case, higher worldoads are not necessarily better. We are very pleased with the level we are at.

We would be very concemed if the number starts to go up because that would tend to deteriorate our service and create delays in managing the claims, which also has some fairly negative financial implications. The other measure of effectiveness then is overall admin costs per claim. Again, you can see here for the province of Manitoba, our average admin cost per claim is $1,541. That is all of our admin costs. That is salaries, computers, everything, divided by the time-loss claims we have.

Again, we draw that line across the country and you can see that, relative to the other provinces, we have a very cost-effective system.

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 63 1bere is always room for improvement, and we are constantly looking at that, but certainly we are in a good position now and no reason to feel that is a crisis area right now. It allows us to continue to work at operational effectiveness but to give priority to the human side of the operation which we feel is really the core element. That kind of gives you a quick perspective on the financial side of the operation, but I would like, in my remarks though-back on service. The last slide here really lists the values of the WCB.

This statement was developed in consultation with our staff and the board. What it does is it emphasizes the human side of the compensation system. These values define how we expect our people to behave when they are out there representing the WCB. We expect them to treat people with respect, to listen carefully, to be honest and fair, to comomnicate openly.

They also represent the undedying principles that guide the development of our policies and our procedures and our day-to day administration of The Workers Compensation Act What I of course cannot show you in any graph or slide is the skill, the commitment to the staff, that we have in our organization.

In smmnary though, I guess, from my perspective, the story here is that an unfunded liability is under control, that our rates are stable and competitive, our admin cost control and our pnxluctivity level is above average for the country and, I think most importantly, that we have set ourselves a very clear priority on providing quality service to our clients. Now I would like to turn the presentation back over to the minister. Mr. Praznik: Mr. Chair, I have to note on the values, and I am sure my colleagues- I look to the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid).

He and I have had many conversations on Workers Compensation, and I do not make this comment in any partisan way but as fellow MLAs who have had to work with the WCB system and have to work with constituents who have been claimants.

I think that we both would agree that there was a point in time-and I am not going to point any fingers because I think quite frankly a lot of it has to do with structure and other things where the values that were listed-many in the public would probably have argued and did to both of us that the values were probably the opposite of what is listed there, that there was not a willingness to listen and that there are hosts of problems.

The point that I make in raising that is to say very clearly that I think all of us who, as MLAs who serve our constituents who either are claimants or are employers who pay the levy-that there has been a recognition over the years that the system had problems. In the last number of years efforts have been made. I want to stress vety clearly that those efforts have involved a great deal of work by all of the stakeholders to ensure that a balanced approach was taken in Manitoba to addressing these problems, and the success that we have seen today, we are still not where we want to be on all of those issues. •

(1050) I know, on the service side, there are still service improvements to be made. Members of the Legislature of all parties remind too of that from time to

titre when tbey bring forward claims on behalf of constituents, but the effort that was made to get where we are today-! want to say very clearly that there are many, many people of all stakeholder groups who have invested a great deal of time and energy. Certainly, on the labour side, the members of the board we have worked with have been very, vety strong in putting forward suggestions and solutions on the service side. Our boani members as a whole, our service committee, everyone has pulled together the common objective of improving in those three particular areas that I outlined earlier, those three standards by which WCBs are judged to improve the performance in Manitoba.

64 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 My hope in the long run is we will continue to have that co-operation and that effort and be able to achieve in a number of years the best Workers Compensation Board, not only in Canada but I would hope in North America, to be judged by those three standanls. I want to say very clearly that service to our clientele has to be one of the most important parts of this equation. 1he financial is important certainly because everything is based on that ultimately. I mean, you have to have a solvent board.

Ontario, as we have seen over many, many years and many administrations, has reached a point where it is in deep trouble in the nation because it was not managed, as some would argue, as it should have been. But at the end of the day we strive to have the best by all standards where all of our stakeholders, employers and employees alike, are in agreement that the board is doing its job and doing it well on behalf of the people it is there to serve. We may from time to time disagree on certain issues that are in the legislative package, levels of benefits, benefit packages.

Those are matters for the Legislature and we, as members of the Legislature, to debate, but within the parameters and frameworks that are established in the legislation, we are meeting those standards. I want to convey my thanks again to the chair of the board, all of the board members, the administration and all of our staff at WCB for their tremendous efforts and contributions, and I look forward seeing the work continued to see more improvements made in the years to come. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Minister. How shall the committee consider the report, on a page by page or in its entirety? Mr.

Reid: Its entirety. Mr. Chairperson: Agreed? Mr. Pramik: Mr. Chair, I have no problem with that. I hope we can have an opportunity that all members will be able to put their questions and move from area to area and be addressed so we can have a nice free-flowing discussion today. Mr. Chairperson: Okay, we will consider it in the entirety then. Mr. Reid: I look with interest on the presentation that was made and I have several questions that arise out of that, but I want to key in on one area directly. It was dealing with the administration costs.

H I recall the number conectly from the slide presentation, I think it was around just a little over $1,500 per claim, if I am correct in my comments on that. That was the administration costs comparison that was given here. What is included in the administration costs? Mr. Praznik: Mr. Chair, members of the committee are in agreement obviously, the CEO and chair of the board will take the questions directly. I just ask my staff to remember they have to be recognized by the chair so they are identified on the recon:ling system Mr.

Wilde: The total costs referred to in that chart would include all of the costs of the WCB exclusive of direct claims-related charges. So that would be computer systems costs, that would include all of the salaries, rent of facilities, every cost we have other than the actual benefit costs that are paid to or on behalf of our claimants. Mr. Reid: Would that also include then, or exclude, the medical aid expenditures? Mr. Wilde: That would not include medical aid expenditures. Mr. Reid: So I take it, Mr.

Chairperson, then that-and I am looking at the document here in front of me, the Five Year Operating Plan for 1993-where the expenditures for the medical aid portion of the board's operations, external professionals and supplies, program administration for a subtotal of $18.9 million, is not included in that administration cost. Floor Question: Is that on page 25, Mr. Reid?

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 65 Mr. Reid: 31. We have excluded. Mr. Olairperson, the medical costs from that and the services that are provided from the overall administration costs of the boan:l, so that figure I take it then of $1,519 or $1,591, whatever it was on the slide presentation, does not include that extensive amount of fund expenditures in the overall administration costs? Mr. Wllde: In response to your question, the medical aid costs are part of the benefit program.

The day-to-day administration medical aid costs include primarily the payments for medical services for doctors, hospital services, rehabilitation and that related to injuries to workers, so that they are not part of the administrative ovethead of the operation, they are not staff costs. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Reid. just to inform you, the '93 report was passed last year. Mr. Reid: We never bad committee. Mr. Chairperson: The '93 was passed last year. Mr. Reid: We never had committee last year. Mr. Chairperson: The Five Year Plan [interjection] No, not the annual report, but the Five Year Plan was.

Floor Comment: The figures are going to be in your annual report anyway for '94. Mr. Chairperson: But it is easier if you refer to the '94 plan. Mr. Reid: I can do that, Mr. Olairperson. Can members of the Compensation Board tell me, do other jurisdictions in Canada include the medical costs in their consideration for the administration cost portion, with reference to your slide presentation that was made here today? Do other jwisdictioos include those nr.dical costs when they determine what their administration costs are on a case basis? Mr.

Wllde: To the best of ID:Y knowledge, that comparison is an apples-to-apples comparison. There are some differences from one board to another as to the number of staff physicians 1hey may have, but when we are talking the large dollars that are in the area of medical aid costs, those are health care benefits that are provided Normally they are on non-time-loss claims, and they are consistently reported and compared from one jurisdiction to another. Mr.

Reid: Well, then from what I determined from those comments, we cannot ascertain with any degree of certainty that other jurisdictions are compared apples to apples. We have nothing to confumnordcny that that is actually taking place. Can the members of the Compensation Board tell me, when did Manitoba move to eliminate or remove the medical portion of the costs from the administration cost consideration on a claim basis? Mr. Wllde: [inaudible] Mr. Praznik: Yes, just to clarify Mr. Reid's question because he asked about the medical aid which, from ID:Y understanding, the woid, and I gather from Mr.

Wilde's answer, was talking about the medical aid that we provide a claimant in terms of their rehabilitation, their recovery from the illness. As Mr. Reid may or may not be aware, when a person is injured and on the WCB system, the cost of their medical care is bome by the system as opposed to the health budget. I think what Mr. Reid is trying to get at, and I look for his clarification, is the medical consultants that we retain who assist in the adjudication of a c1aUn, who assist in providing an assessment to the adjudicator as to the medical coodition, as opposed to medical aid or treatment. Is that what Mr.

Reid is looking for? Mr. Reid: That is essentially it, Mr. Chairperson. I have a number of questions in that area with respect to the health services of the boan:l, and I just want to determine whether or not the administration costs of the board also include the xred.ical staff, whether they would be current staff under payroll and contract staff that you have working for the board in an advisory capacity or

66 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 other, would be included in your administration costs of the board itself, because they do assist with the adjudication of your claims. I want to know if those costs are included in the slide presentation that you made to us here today with respect to your administration cost per claim. •

(1100) Mr. Wilde: First of all, with respect to the comparison to other provinces, to the best of our .knowledge, that is as good a comparison as can be made. 'Ibe Associatim of Workers Compensation Boards of Canada compiles the information from all of the boards and has a working group that has established reporting standards in order to ensure that the information they are collecting is comparative from one jurisdiction to another, so we have simply taken their numbers to provide that chart. To the extent possible, that is a fair representation.

To answer your question specifically about the health care department within the Workers Compensation Boanl, about 1992, there was a change in the internal process, where a portion of the costs of the health care department are charged directly to the claims, where the doctor is giving a medical opinion on a particular file. So if they are doing an assessment on a file, providing a medical opinion on that, there is a direct charge to the file rather than simply leaving it all in administration. If I am answering your question, it is neither 1 00 percent administration nor is it 100 percent charged to claims.

What our health care department does, and most of them are doctors under part-time contract with us, they do collect time sheets and charge a portion of their time to administration, where they are working with adjudicators, where they are doing medical research and that, but they will also then identify time that is directly chargeable to assessment m files or examining claimants, and those will be charged to the cost of the file, not to administration. Mr. Reid: I am just ttying to determine here, Mr.

Chairperson, that the figures that we saw on the slide presentation were a fair and accurate comparison between the various jurisdictions of Canada, to determine not so nmch whether or not the m.xfical costs are accurately apportioned to the administration cost but to ensure that we have a fair picture of how we are doing with respect to other jurisdictions in Canada. That is the area that I am driving at here.

I get the sense that we are not exactly sure that there is a clear understanding that all of the jurisdictions do their administration cost comparisons or inclusions of certain costs into that administration cost the way we do it here in the province of Manitoba. That is why I am driving at that area there, to ensure that we have a fair comparison, and I want to make sure that is the case. Mr. Fox-Decent: Mr. Reid, I agree that we cannot give you unqualified assurance on that issue.

I think what we would best do, if you would find this acceptable, is we will get this information for you very quickly, and we will be happy to provide you the information. You obviously want to know whether it is oranges and oranges and oranges that is being compared when you are looking at a graph of the administrative cost related to claims. I do not think any of us can give you 100 percent assurance that that is the case. We obviously hope it is, but if we may, we will provide you the information very quickly. We can find that out quite easily. Mr. Pramik: I would just like to add a comment. I appreciate Mr.

Reid's question, certainly very valid One of the issues I have always raised with staff when getting comparative statistics as· minister, and I just want to attach the caveat to all of our mtterial, is Dlllllbers do not always compare exacdy because of circumstance. For example, Saskatchewan has a less industrialized economy than Manitoba. Ontario's is more industrialized. 1hese factors fit into play. 1he point of these numbers, as I have always used ~and sorneth:res we take that for granted

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 67 in displaying them publicly, so I put this caveat onto all of them today-is they demonstrate trends and they demonstrate some relative comparisons, always taking into account, of course, that there are going to be some differences, some anomalies here or there, that do not make them exact comparisons. Mr. Reid: I am agreeable to the board representatives coming back with some information, hopefully in the near future, on this so that we can have that comparison. Floor Comment: Give us 48 hours. Mr.

Reid: Well, if you can do it in 48 hours, which may be a bit tight for your staff- I do not want to put that immediate pressure on them. Within a reasonable period of time, I would be agreeable to that. I believe my colleague at this committee also has sorre questioos in that area, and I will defer to her at that point. Ms. McCormick: Can you tell me what was the net effect on the administrative costs when you tnJVed to separate out those medical review costs?

Did the admin costs change, go up, go down or stay the same from a year-to-year comparison when you changed your procedure of extracting out some of those medical review costs? Mr. Wilde: I cannot give you the quantum of that. That change actually happened several years ago. What the effect would be is that of the dollars being spent, the administrative dollars would have gone down and the claims dollars would have gone up by a similar amount.

The total expenditure would have been the same, but we would have taken some dollars that had been previously classified as admin expenses and shown them as medical expenses on the claims. The shift would have happened in the comparison between 1991 and 1992. If we are looking at, in this case, 1993, the comparative numbers for 1992 are a legitimate comparison where costs have been allocated the same way. Ms. McCormick: Perhaps I am not making myself clear. When you take what was formerly included in the admin cost portion and separate it out, was there a net effect to reduce your admin cost per claim? Mr.

Wilde: Yes. That would have happened and that would have happened in 1992. Ms. McCormick: So then if I were to look back into the amma1 reports and see the admin costs for the 1991 fiscal period and then the 1992 fiscal period, I would have seen a decrease in the amount called admin costs charged per claim? Mr. Wilde: I do not have those numbers with me and I must admit that predates my employment with the board, but that effect would have happened in there, yes, and the numbers should demonstrate that. •

(1110) Ms. McCormick: So if we accepted there was a decrease between 1991 and 1992, then we could anticipate that the admin costs reflected in '93 and then what we will see eventually in '94, would have held at the lower level or have the admin costs crept back up? Mr. Wilde: 'Ihe admin costs have only changed marginally over the '92-'93-'94 period of time. Obviously some of our costs have gone up as suppliers have provided services to it, but most of our costs have in fact been either restrained or in some cases reduced for that period of time. So I can get you the exact comparisons for those years. Ms.

McCormick: I have sorre other very specific questions with respect to the use of medical services, but I think at this point I will tum it back to the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid). Let him lead in the question areas and then I will take them back as it is appropriate. Mr. Reid: To go back to the administration cost portion here, I am looking at the 1991 annual report. It is a financial statement for the board, and it shows Program Administration and includes compensation cost, rehabilitation and medical aid, all under the umbrella there, and other

68 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 Administration Expenses for a total allocation for the Class E of, I believe, it is $19 million. How does that compare with today's total administration costs for the board? Mr. Wilde: I would appreciate it if you could repeat the question because I am not sure, as you p1uased that-I do not have 1991 statements here I am not sure if we are talking about program costs or administration costs in 1991. Mr. Reid: I am trying to get a comparison and get an historical perspective here on where we were with our administration costs.

As I have asked earlier, I want to ensure that there is a fair comparison jurisdiction to jurisdiction in Canada, but I also want to see where we have come from historically. I hope there has been some improvement, although I do not know that, and I want to ascertain whether or not there has been any in:Jprovenrnt in the administration cost portion or if indeed they have escalated from what appears to be my understanding here, looking at the total program administration costs from comparison, say, of '91, or if you want to include all of the classes, I think it is some $21.7 million total.

I want to know how that compares with the current, the 1994 administration cost total. Mr. Wilde: I cannot refer to the 1991 numbers. I am sorry, I do not have that. What I can refer you to, in our 1993 statement that we are looking at is that the admin costs in '92 were $24,532,000 and, in 1993, were $24,947,000, so a very moderate increase in those costs. I am just checking right now to see if we have with us the 1994 admin costs. Mr. Reid: I will not belabour the point, Mr. Chairperson.

I just want to get an idea here if those administtation cost increases-because it has moved from $21.7 million up to $24.9 million for total administration costs, I want to know, in a general way, if this is related to staff salaries, et cetera, or is there some other criteria that has caused the increase in the total administration costs? Mr. Wilde: Again, with an increase from '91 to '92, I cannot give you a very accurate notion, but I can tell you that it is not related to staff salaries. Both our management and our in-scope salaries have not increased over the last two or three years.

We have had a collective bargaining agreement with no increase in it, and I have had no [intetjection] I stand corrected on that. In 1993, there was a salary increase, but obviously, given a net increase of only 1. 7 percent in our total admin costs, there was no major cost increase in the '93 year. I could certainly go back and look at the increase from '91 to '92 and try then and find the major components of that. Mr.

Reid: Maybe members of the Compensation Board could come back with some information relating to the reasons for the $3.2-million increase, '91 to '93 figures, that you have got here in the total administration costs to give me some idea, because if the adjustments in the salaries for the staff of the board have not consumed that full amount-and I take it that the salary adjustments for the employees would have been minimal considering the rates of inflation these days and the cost-of-living factor built in there for salary adjustments-that it may not have consumed that full $3.2 million.

I would like to know why those administration costs have increased to that point. H they could come back with that information, I would appreciate that. Mr. Fox-Decent: What we can do with pleasure, Mr. Reid, is provide you with a chart that will show the comparative administration expenses over the period. Do you want us to start with 1990, we will go '91, '92, '93, '94, and show you what the dollar amounts are and the differences? Then I take it you would like us to give some explanation of why it is that the administtative expenses are higher than they were the previous year, wherever that is the case. Mr.

Reid: That would be fine, Mr. Chairperson. I look forward to that information coming from members of the board. Ms. McCormick: For my purposes I would be interested to see the associated medical

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 69 professional fees factored out. So that is the parallel piece of this that I would be interested in seeing. •

(1120) Mr. Reid: I would like to move back a bit to the total number of claims. In 1993, it is my understanding that we saw what appears to be an aberration in the total number of accident claims made to the board wherein the number of claims that were filed was some 37,000, slightly over. Looking at the comparative figures for 1994, it appears that the number of claims have moved back up to what had been, by the infonnation I have here, a historical point of 42,000, slightly over that. I take a look at the statistics that come out from Stats Canada.

When you do a year-over-year comparisoo, December '93 we had 492,000 actual employtrent in the province of Manitoba; in December of '94 we had an actual of 492,000 in the workforce, yet we have seen a substantial increase in the m.unber of accident claims that have been made to the board. Can you give me some kind of an indication on why we are seeing claims increases, where we are seeing them and what we are doing to mitigate those claims increases so that we can have some assurances that some activities are taking place to stop that increasing trend? Mr.

Fox-Decent: 1he accident rate is up this year about 14 percent by the end of the year taking us back, as you say, Mr. Reid, to 1992levels. So the odd year out seems to be 1993. Why is this happening? We were interested in a number of answers that might flow to that question because obviously there is a concem of what has happened. If I may give you smre indications, first of all, it does not seem to be any particular type of injury. It is not as if one injury or a couple of injuries have suddenly had this very dramatic increase. We seem to see the same spread of injuries as before.

It is however to be found more in the manufacturing sector than anywhere else in terms of the sectors of employment with some increase in construction that is substantial and some increase in service that is substantial, particularly the health care or hospital situation .

When we identified the individual employers who were responsible for substantial spikes in their claims record, what we did in co-operation with Workplace Safety and Health is visit or telephooe, or both. those facilities and talk to them about the fact that their accident record was substantially different than it had been the year before, what problems were they encountering, were they even aware of the fact that their Workers Compensation claims were substantially up in number? Of course, the other aspect of contact with all of these targeted employers was, what can we do to help you?

It has been a very closely knit endeavour with Workplace Safety and Health, Geoff Bawden and the staff group at Workplace Safety and Health. Why has the increase OCCUired? It is clear that in some cases companies have decided to downgrade resources related to safety. Safety professiooals, safety training, those kinds of things have in some cases been reduced and no doubt have a conclation to the increase in the number of injured workers.

We found, secondly, that many overtime hours are being worked It is not necessarily a matter of increase in staff, but staff are working longer hours, and you get the fatigue factor. Of course, with the fatigue factor, you get the increase and the propensity for someone to have an injury when they are on the job. The third thing is, we found in a number of companies-! would prefer not to mention any individual companies, but a number have employed large numbers of new people.

It does not mean that their numbers have necessarily been added to, but they are new hires, and newly hired people are also more prone to accidents, particularly if they have not had adequate training in safety before they go on the job. These are the factors that we have been able to identify. I think, through a joint effort, a strategy if you like, between ourselves and Workplace

70 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 Safety and Health, we have been able to cover eveiy single empl~ who has had a spike in their accident rate, who is of sufficient size to be of significance. It is not that the small employers are not an area of interest This province has a multitude of small employers.

The multitude of small employers have been discussed between ourselves and Workplace Safety and Health, and they will be the target for our ongoing program, but we wanted to in:mediately identify some of the large employers where we saw dramatic rate increases, in some cases, 50 percent, 60 percent and even more over last~· Those were the ones that we thought should get the immediate attention. Mr. Reid: Mr. O:lairperson, the chairperson of the boaid indicates, Mr.

Fox-Decent indicates, that there are several factors, including fatigue from employees that are working overtil:re and the possibility that there may not be adequate training for new employees coming into the employ of certain companies, whether they be small or large employers.

I am wondering, does the board, in conjunction with the Workplace Safety and Health Branch of the Department of Labour, undertake to advise employers that there is a certain responsibility on their part to ensure that there is adequate training of new employees prior to those new employees commencing the duties of their employment to ensure that we could hopefully eliminate the lack of training in the proper job procedures to ensure that those employees do not undertake improper WOik procedures that could lead potentially to their injury?

I am wondering what activities the board has, in conjunction with Workplace Safety and Health, to ensure that those employers are undertaking and fulfilling their obligation, their responsibility to the new employees? Mr. Praznik: Mr. O:lair, I am very glad that the member for Transcona has asked this question, because I share with him the concem about the ability to deal with proble~m specifically and solve them as I know he does. He has that concem as well.

When I took over this portfolio of Labour and then a few months later Workers Compensation, back in '90-91, one of the great concerns that I discovered, actually to my horror, was that the relationship between the Workplace Safety and Health Branch and the Workers Compensation Board, over many, many years, had somewhat grown apart, or never grown together is more aptly · the term One of the problems was, they never had the technology links and the kind of processes that allowed them to work together to be able to get on matters quickly as they were rising and deal with them Because of a great investment by the board in computer technology and links with Workplace Safety and Health, which I am also responsible for, we now have a much improved data system.

If you notice this year when our claims started to increase in the summer, as Mr. Wilde pointed out, within a very short period of time, after a month, two months, our tracking system was able to not only identify that we had a claims increase but also provide a list of the workplaces and employers where the claims were increasing. Our linkages with Workplace Safety and Health are such now that we were able to get on those very quickly.

We in fact held a joint meeting between Workplace Safety and Health and the board and myself because we now had the ability to find out we had a problem quickly, exactly where it was with our data, and get into those workplaces on a vel)' quick basis to find out where we had problems. And you are right, Mr. Reid, the member for Transcona is very right, that employers have a responsibility to ensure that their employees are properly trained That does not always happen.

What is important for us as government is to be able to have the ability to find out when it is not happening, whether it be a report from a worker or it be because there is an increase in the accident rates, to be able to get in there very quickly and deal with the problem. For the first time in the relationship between those two bodies, we have been able to have the

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 71 technology and the working relationship to see that happen. Quite frankly, if we had had that increase two or three years ago in claims, our systems would not have been in place to be able to handle it as quickly and, quite frankly, we probably would not have been able to tell you even about it today because we would not have known until at the close of the financial year. We are working towanls that. We have the improvements. Professor Fox-Decent may wish to expand a little bit on it, but I share the same conremhe has.

We have been moving to address it, and we are now starting to prove that things that we have done to address it are starting to work, and that is one of the lessons that we have learned from this that our systems are able to let us get on to these problems quickly when you have an upsizing or increased number of employees coming on to wolk for it full times, yes. *

(1130) Mr. Fox-Decent: Just a footnote to what I said to you about this initiative between ourselves and Workplace Safety and Health to identify the dramatic increase, employers, and deal with them. I just was reminded that we have actually had a very positive response from employers to this. They have been happy to have the matter brought to their attention. Some of them did not know. Some did, but some did not.

I could mention a major health care institution in the province that probably because of the decentralization and jurisdiction within that facility really did not recognize the extent to which their accident claim numbers had increased But once informed, we received nothing but co operation in terms of how can we help you. You wanted an answer to a question, and the question you asked was, are new employers informxl of the need to train staff, or is there some initiative whereby we say to an employer, look, it is in your own interest.

Staff training should be the component of that which occurs before production begins. No, we do not do that, Mr. Reid I think that there is in this context a little bit of a jurisdictional issue. Wolkplace Safety and Health, as you know, is a subdepartment of government. That is really I think within their jwisdictional mandate. I hate to throw jurisdiction at you because it is so wasteful. You know, we cannot do it because the line stops here, and they should do it because their line begins there. I can say to you that I think it is a good idea.

How it would be accomplished, I think, is something that we ought to take a look at. Is it something that should happen through the board? We register the new employers for the purpose of coverage so we get pedlaps the fastest word of anyone that new employers are coming on-line. If that became part of our mandate, we could certainly do it. We sometimes chafe a little bit, and I do not want to make too much of this, but we chafe a little bit about the fact that the co operation, as good as it is, is not the same as recognizing the fact that there are two jurisdictions here.

One is under The Workplace Safety and Health Act and the other is under The Workers Compensation Act, and of course they have different bases of jurisdiction and function. Mr. Chairperson: I have before me the resignation of Ms. Bazrett as a member of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources effective immediately. Are there any nominations to replace Ms. Barrett? Mr. Reid: Mr. Olairperson, I would like to nominate Mr. Ashton to replace Ms. Bazrett. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Ashton replace Ms. Bazrett. Agreed? [agreed] Mr. Reid: I am happy to see that it was unanimous, Mr. Olairperson.

Floor Comment: I do not know. Mr. Reid: To get back to the question at hand here, because I get the sense that there are some jurisdictional problems here as Mr. Fox-Decent has indicated- Mr. Fox-Decent: If I may interject, I am not trying to pose problems, because I think the

72 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 relationship with Workplace Safety and Health is really excellent, but we are ultimately two distinct jurisdictions, and the issue of training employers with regard to safety has really been in the jurisdiction of Workplace Safety and Health. Mr. Reid: I may have not adequately chosen my words for that lead-in, Mr. <llairperson. I apologize for that. My concem here is that, and it has been~ perception that Worlcplace Safety and Health is the eofon:etllf211 arm of the Depllitlrent of Labour with respect to worlcplace safety and health.

But I want to ensure that the employers are first notified that they have a responsibility to their new employees, and then if there is some follow-up that can take place with the Workplace Safety and Health Branch to ensure that the new employees have received the adequate training and that there is indeed the required safety precautions and safety equipm:ot, if it is so required, that that is provided to some employees.

I can tell members of this committee that since I have been a critic for our party on Workers Compensation programs, I have encountered a number of employees that work for private companies that have not first been informed of what their rights are as employees. They have not even been informed as to what their safety equipment entitlements are with respect to the perfonnance oftheirduties. There are cases where employees go in and perform duties and there should have been safety equipment provided I do not know what the reasons were. I could surmise what the reasons are.

One may be cost But I think it would be incumbent upon us as a Compensation Board and Workplace Safety and Health as part of the Department of Labour to ensure that both arm; of the Department of Labour are fulfilling their responsibilities to the employees by informing the employers what their obligations are towatds those new employees, and that is what I am asking here. Mr. Praznik: The member's suggestion and comment has I think triggered for myself and two of our board members who are here-we have had the opportunity of a little private chat about it.

Given the fact that most employers-the Workers Comp Board is one of the first points of entry because they have to file obviously or make a file with us to register and to pay their dues, et cetera, that we are always prepared to look at new ways of improving our service and I think the member has made an excellent suggestion. We provide now some pamphlet information from the Compensation Boan:l to new employers when they register with the board, I understand, and perhaps that can be added to. It is an excellent idea and one that we are certainly going to pursue. Mr. Reid: I thank the minister for that.

I hope that we can move in that direction because I think it will help save some accidents and lost time, and I am sure some heartache for some of the employees that would be involved in those accidents-and to the employers, I might add, because they are obviously affected as well. I want to get back a bit--because with the numbers that we are seeing in the increase in the number of accidents and considering that the workforce numbers have been stagnant year over year, I look to the Five Year Operating Plan that the board has put out.

Looking on page 9, it says that we are moving away from a goods-based economy to the lower risk jobs in the service sector economy. Is that what we are seeing within the employment picture of the province now? If that is the case, it is my understanding that the service sector is essentially less risk and therefore we should be seeing a flattening out or a plateauing of the Dll1llber of accidents versus an increase, that we have moved back to historical levels now.

I am wondering, if that is the case, that we are moving towards the service-based economy, should we not be expecting that those numbers should be moving and staying down at the lower Dll1llber that we saw in 1993 versus returning back to the historical highs. Mr. Fox-Decent: What you are talking about, Mr. Reid, is, of course, a forecast of what might be expected. I think what happened in '94 is that we had a substantial growth, not necessarily in people

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 73 employed. but we had a substantial growth in manufacturing and a substantial growth in construction. Those areas proved to be more active than our forecast suggested they would have been. In the case of the service industries, you say, should these not be relatively more benign in terms of workplace injury? Well, some and some. If you are talking about service and it is a hospital service in the health care sense-then, of course, the experience has been that the workplace, which is a hospital, is a reasonably high-risk workplace in terms of injury to employees. *

(1140) Mr. Reid: Mr. Chairperson, I am glad the chairperson of the board has raised this, because I have had and dealt with a number of cases with respect to nurses working in the health care facilities of our province. Some of them are extretrely serious cases with respect to back injuries. I feel for these individuals; they are trying to perform their duties to the best of their abilities. Some of them are being asked to retum to their employment before their recovery is full and complete.

Yet there does not appear to be, to ~ understanding, ways that we can help prevent some of those types of injuries to those employed in the nursing profession within the hospitals, whether it be staff mix within the hospitals, the health care institutions, for individuals that are capable of lifting greater weights or more individuals to assist with the care of the patients within the hospitals. I think we have to take some serious looks at how health care facilities staff care for the patients so that we can prevent injuries to nurses.

Back injuries, I can tell you, for the cases that I have dealt with. dealing with nurses, are very, very serious, and I hope the board is undertaking or may look at undertaking some consultation with the hospitals to ensure that they have adequate provisions or steps in place to protect the employees, particularly the nurses in these cases, from sustaining any of those future back injuries. I would like to know if the board has had any discussions with the hospitals with respect to that matter. Mr.

Fox-Decent: We are fortunate in that we have a nurse as one of the 10 members of the board, Marla Niekamp, and she certainly is eloquent on the subject of health care and matters related, such as nursing. The other thing I might just note, Mr. Reid, is that we now fully fund from the board an ergonomist who is shared between ourselves and the W orlcplace Safety and Health division, and she is, I think, going to be a very interesting and useful resource in terms of workplace design and the design of worlqJlace applications that will ease the strain on particular groups of workers, namely, backs of nurses.

Again, I would say to you that the matter of designing safety devices or devices that will make it safer for nurses to work puts us into that interesting situation between Workplace Safety and Health and ourselves as Workers Compensation. We certainly have had some discussions recently with individual hospitals that have had this very high increase in injury reported during 1994, but we do not have an overall strategy with regard to the matter of nurses, back injury and the prevention thereof.

Again I think we nm into a situation where we would see this as more the responsibility of Workplace Safety and Health than ourselves. But again I think you make a very interesting observation and I will undertake to take that observation and deal with it just the same way as the last observation you made with regard to general issues of prevention, new employers saying to their employees before they begin to do some kind of productive process. This is with regard to nurses and hospitals and I take it as a subset of the last question, and I promise you that the matter will be examined

74 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 We have a board planning symposium, the annual planning symposium. These issues will be part of the agenda; they will go onto the agenda for that. Mr. Reid: I appreciate Mr. Fox-Decent's cotDJDents. I hope that the board will review that as one of several matters. The nurses have already indicated to me, the ones that I have dealt with, that it is serious and I hope there will be some involvement there by the board I would also like to see the Minister of Labour (Mr.

Pramik) who is responsible for Workplace Safety and Health consult with the Workplace Safety and Health Branch of his departn:Jent to determine that they too are worldng with the health care facilities and working with the nurses organizations within the province too to get a better grasp or understanding of the problems that are encountered in that particular workplace or worksites to find ways to eliminate the problems before they happen, those back injuries before they happen.

So if we can get the two anns of the Department of Labour worldng together on that, then hopefully we can move to some resolution of that problem and put the proper staff mix in place if that is one of the solutions to prevent those types of injuries from occurring. Maybe the minister can cotDJDent on that. Mr. Praznik: Mr. OJ.air, first of all, the whole ergonomics field is one that the Workplace Safety and Health Branch has taken up as one of our target areas to address.

We are very well aware of the difficulties we have had in nursing, and we have been providing our hospitals with a fair bit of assistance in trying to address this problem Thetrember's suggestion is a good one. We are already in process.

I would like to just re emphasize that although there is a jurisdictional issue, the relationship between Workplace Safety and Health and the WCB, when I became minister of both four years ago, four years ago about this time of the year, there was not, shall I say to be diplomatic, there was not the kind of a good ongoing worldng relationship between the two that I think all members of this Legislature would want. That has improved dramatically, very much so, in the last four and a half years and we have a host of issues to address, certainly the nursing issue is one of them The member raises it.

We have done some work in that area. We have a lot :rmre worlc to do in that area, and we will continue to do it. I appreciate his suggestion, his comments and his support for that type of priority because it is important to know that that is supported by members of this Assembly, including the opposition members.

I just want to say to him, as a minister, of all of the various areas in the workplace to tackle in tenm of risk to employees, health care, particularly nurses on the ward has been and I think will continue to be one of the most difficult to address because of the nature of the worlc and the relationships between the client and the worker. This is not a case where you can as easily refuse to work because you can slmt down the welder or you can shut down the lathe or what have you.

It is han:ler because you have a patient whom you have to get out of the bathtub or a patient that you have to move, and while the member makes some reference to money, it is not just money. We have had cases, I had cases where nurses have spoken to me who have injured their backs and have been in situations where a patient has tried to get out of bed or a patient has not been in a mental state that has been conducive to co operation.

One case that I recall is where a nurse was quite badly injured by a patient who was in a very tough situation, was not of a clear state of mind and was lashing out and, in the process of trying to restrain the patient, was quite badly injured 1bat is not a situation where, as a human being, a IllJISC in that situation can stand back and say, no, I am going to refuse to worlc. 1bey may have the right to do that, but I think most people are compassionate enough that they are not going to. So how you deal with that is very difficult because it is the nature of the hospital profession.

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 75 1be only reason I say that is not an excuse for not trying to do s~; it is more to emphasize the difficulty in finding ways of dealing with it that work. Certainly, lifting devices are part of that in lifting. There is no doubt about that. Having a staff mix or staff~ with the physical ability to lift becomes important. 1ben you have other problems with that as well, as I know the member appreciates, with what conditions to use for hiring and those type of things, and certainly that affects union relationships as well. That is part of the scenario.

The toughest area is not even lifting. It is dealing with patients who are not of a clear state of mind and not c<r<>perative.

I find some of the JOOSt difficult cases are now occurring in personal care homes, particularly when one is dealing with psychogeriatric patients, Alzheimer patients, et cetera, where your option to stand back and not deal with a patient who is physically abusive of the caregiver is very difficult I appreciate his emphasis, and I say to him, because I know he always has many suggestions and comments as to how some of these things can be dealt with, and I know the member appreciates the complexity of some of these, we are certainly always willing to hear from him.

My commitment is, we will continue to try and address them, but they are not easy issues, particularly the tough ones that I mentioned, but I thank him for his comments. *

(1150) Ms. McCormick: Mr. Clair, there are couple of things that have come out of the previous discussion that I wish to pursue a little further. The first is with respect to the communication between the Worlrers Compensation Board and the division with respect to areas in which there are increasing problems. My understanding of The Workplace Safety and Health Act is that in fact the employer is obliged to report to TheW orkplace Safety and Health Act if there is a serious injury. That report must be made within 24 hours, and the litany of the things that are serious injuries is considerably long.

I must say, it does surprise me that in fact Worlrers Compensation Board is in the position to advise the Workplace Safety and Health division about accidents occurring because, if the law is being followed, the division should already know with respect to where those clusters are occurring. I would like to have a comment, given that this is not Departnrnt of Labour Estimates and we are not really chasing down detail of the Workplace Safety and Health division. I would like a perspective from Mr.

Fox-Decent as to whether or not the division is becoming increasingly reactive as opposed to doing routine inspections. If in fact the division increasingly responds to concerns registered either by employees who phone in on rights to refuse or your people who say, go look here or go look there, is in fact the net outcome that we are doing less and less preventive preinjury or preaccident enforcement out of Workplace Safety and Health? Mr. Praznik: I want to make a couple of comm::ots because of the relationship between the two divisions. The relationship in providing the data, the member is right.

A serious injury is reported to us. H it is not, it is illegal But the majority of claims that we have, if you look through the claims list, and the member, I know, is very familiar with this, is the strains and sprains. They are the things that occur on a regular basis, tbat are not serious maybe as individual accidents, or "dramatic" maybe is the word. 1bey are not dramatic, but they are very significant to the individuals if they are severe back injuries and, over a period of time, are the bulk of our types of claims. Those will not necessarily be reported to W orlq>lace Safety and Health.

They represent the majority of accidents-or claims at least-in the province. And so the computer link, the data link that we have been able to develop has allowed the branch to be able to target not only industries, but specific employers and specific wodq>laces that have a host of these less dramatic injuries, but are very

76 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 significant to the system and to the people involved, to go in there now and deal with those problems where before it was much more hit and miss. I know from the experience of many involved in this field-I know Mr.

Zimmer earns a living in working in this particular field It is where yw might have I 0 or 20 minor strains or sprains, injuries with not a long ~ loss that may never elicit a call to the Workplace Safety and Health Branch, but in the long haul that is a serious loss of~ and cost and injury to employees that could be addressed with maybe some ergonomic work, et cetera.

Those may never come up through the system and before we had this link we would have never likely found them unless a union representing those people would have noticed it or a Workplace Safety and Health committee would have over ~ felt it was worth reporting to us. So my comments about the benefits of those linkages are really felt in those particular areas.

With respect to larger prevention programs, I guess one could argue that there is always a lot more that the branch can be doing and I would say, yes, there are a lot of areas that we certainly would like to address, but we have at the Workplace Safety and Health Branch made some major efforts in the last years on the prevention side. I am thinking about the arrangements we have made in the construction association, the agreement there with the safety program, with the safety audits that we feel, and the board is part of that obviously, and Mr.

Fox-Decent may want to comment on that, the ergonomics initiative, the safety and health conference that we have been involved in, the dissemination of information. All of that, I think, has been new thrusts or expanded thrusts. 1be general walk-in spot inspections-the branch over ~ I think has been doing less because more of its time has been spent on those specific thrusts in prevention and dealing with the kind of data and targeted inspections that we are now able to do. So I appreciate the member's concem.

Maybe Professor Fox-Decent would like to comment on some of those initiatives that the board has been involved with, with Workplace Safety and Health and outside groups, on a proactive basis. Mr. Fox-Decent: Ms. McCormick, I want to be careful because the question you asked was really addressed I think maybe to me as chair of the Advisocy Council on Workplace Safety and Health, and I am not appearing, as you know, in that context today. Maybe another time.

We are certainly satisfied at Workers Comp that we have established a vecy strong interactive and proactive relationship with Workplace Safety and Health, and Tercy Edgeworth, who is one of the staff here today, is the senior liaison person with Workplace Safety and Health, knows what is going on over there. They know what is going on in our shop with regard to the prevention issues with regard to the accident rates and where they are happening and so on.

So I think that we could not look for a better relationship with them; it is excellent With regard to the issue of proactive versus reactive when it comes to what they are doing as safety and health officers, I think I really should pass on that because I am not in a position as chair of Workers Comp to know what is happening there. Mr. Chairperson: Can I just get clarity from the conmittee? At twelve o'clock, does the committee wish to break for one hwr for lunch? It is agreed? Mr. Pramik: Mr.

Chair, if I could just ask if the critics of the two opposition parties could just give us some indication if we are going to break for lunch and~ at one, what their time frame is in dealing with the report today, simply so that others who have commitments this afternoon can rearrange and plan a little bit. That is all I ask staff, Professor Fox-Decent. Mr. Fox-Decent: It would be a little difficult for me at 1:30, but that is my problem At the pleasure of the committee- Ms. McCormick: I need to be finished by 3:30 today.

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 77 Mr. Reid: I have no problems. My day is dedicated to this committee hearing, Mr. Chairperson. Mr. Praznik: If we could, in fairness to all, if one wants to break maybe just for half an hour for lunch, and then if we know we could be completed, we all try-1 will even try to keep my answers short so that we can be completed by 3:30-it would be most appreciated. I have an appointment in Thompson tonight. Mr. Fox-Decent: I will have to make some arrangements to change my afternoon, but I certainly will do it. Mr.

Chairperson: Okay, well, let us call it twelve o'clock then and break till 12:30. Agreed? [agreed] The committee recessed at 12 p.m. After Recess The committee resumed at 1 p.m. Mr. Chairperson: The hour being 12:30, the committee is back at it. Ms. McCormick: I thank Professor Fox-Decent for his clarificatioo. of his roles. I am aware--! just want to express my frustration that I am not sure we will be able to have at the Department of Environment in the Estimates process, so it was my interest in getting some of that at least asked.

I am interested in knowing that your two areas of increase in accidents are in the manufacturing and the construction sectors, both of which are areas with sector-specific safety initiatives. So I am interested in knowing whether the evaluation of those program; has tmned up any explanations for the growth in accidents, both number of claims and duration of claims, in those two sectors. Mr. Wilde: In terms of specific programs, I presume you were referring to the- Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. Mr. Wilde, could I ask you to bring mike No. 7 up closer there? Mr.

Wilde: Presuming your comment about specific initiatives, you were referring to the safety officer programs that the construction association has. We have certainly been co-ordinating the programming that we do with them, but they do not have the database to analyze specifically what is going on in terms of accident trends and that. So they tend to rely a little more on individual requests ftom fums who are looking for programs, and then they sponsor general educational programs for the membership of their group. There is not anything specific in the manufacturing sector of a similar nature.

But our analysis of what was happening in both those sectors was, as was mentioned earlier, a combination of more economic activity and, to some degree, a bit of backsliding in the safety programs that had been in place several years before. We found-for example I could mention two specific instances where the firms involved had, in the last~ and a half, eliminated or substantially cut back on their intemal safety department. And having seen the results that had come from that, they very quickly reinstated the resources that they had in that department. Ms.

McCormick: With respect to the construction safety initiative, my understanding is that all employers participate in an additional levy being forwarded to that program. Can you give me some indication as to what the take-up rate is? How many assessed employees are actually participating in some form or other in the building trades construction safety initiative and the Manitoba Heavy Construction association? Mr. Fox-Decent: Terry Edgeworth, who is the executive director responsible for the safety officer program, among other things, will answer the question. Mr.

Terry Edgeworth (Executive Director of Assessments, Human Resources and

78 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 Communications, Workers Compensation Board): The question was the number of employers who are assessed the levy. In terms of numbers of employers who participate in their programs, I do not think we would have an answer to that We could get that. Ms. McCormick: Just for clarification. I am interested in the number of contributing employers and the number of participating employers, the number of employers who have taken up the opportunity to have some service from that construction safety program. Mr.

Edgeworth: All employers in the construction sector would be assessed the levy. There was a vote of those in the construction sector when the program was created so all employtTS get assessed the levy. In terms of those who participate in the various programs, I would not have that data. We could obtain it. Mr. Fox-Decent: We can find that out, and will. Mr. Edgeworth: Sure. Ms. McCormick: The other question I have actually relates to your time-loss claims per WCB staff, and I appreciate I am taking us into a new area here, so perhaps-is this fine? Okay.

You put a slide up in your presentation which indicated that there were approximately 40 claims per total staff, right? Now, is this all staff, or is this simply the complement of people specifically to deal with claims? Mr. Wilde: No, that statistic is specifically related to all staff. In order to make a comparison across the country, that was a basis that all the boards agreed would be appropriate. Ms. McCormick: My understanding is that the board is progressively moving to the use of extemally contracted staff.

How would those people who are providing service on a contractual basis, for example, for case management services, be factored into }'OlJl' ratio of total time-loss claims per WCB staff] Mr. Wilde: I think you are probably misinformed We are not progressively moving to contracting out worlc. Several years ago we did, because of demands, particularly in the rehabilitation area, start to contract out some of the work, but the amount of worlc that is contmcted out has been stable for some period of time. Ms.

McCormick: My Wlderstanding then is that while previously the board was contmcting for long-term claim management, you have recently also moved into the area of contmcting for short term claim management as well. Is that correct or not? Mr. Sid Rogers (Senior Director of Claims Services, Workers Compensation Board): In terms of the long-term claims project, the number of files that are out with external contmctors is actually much less than the peak a couple of years ago. There have always been a few files that voc rehab units will put out simply because there is someone out there who has an expertise.

For instance, the Canadian Paraplegic Association looks after all of our spinal cord injuries. We are doing an early retum to work, gmduated retwn to worlc program because of a bit of a workload problem, and some of those are going out, but in terms of the magnitude, it is relatively low compared to the previous couple of years and coming down rather than going up. Ms.

McCormick: Now, you have referred to an increased worlcload or worlcload problem, so I would be interested in pursuing with you if in fact WCB case managers are overloaded and if that is the sole reason, or if it is in fact that they have not the skills to manage the cases. •

(1310) Mr. Wilde: In term; of caseloads, you may recall the slides I put up, where we were talking about the average worlcload to our overall staff. You can, in a rough way, equate that productivity back to the actual adjudicative staff, and we carry one of the higher caseloads of the compensation boards across the country. It is at the point where, when tbere is an increase in the workload, it can cause us

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 79 problems, or when we have periods of time where we get an imbalance between available staff, whether it is heavy vacation period and high claims frequency, we do have some problems, and we look at coottacting some of the work. We look at temporary staff. We are looking right now at our staff levels very closely because we are concerned that with our existing staff levels and with the claims numbers that I referred to earlier having gone back up in 1994, our present staff levels are at the margin in terms of being able to effectively manage it. Ms.

McCormick: Can you give me an indication then as to how many extemally contracted case managers you would be using at any given time? Mr. Rogers: We use for the most part three different suppliers of that. We use Manning and Associates, and the Society for Manitobans with Disabilities. They are actually our two biggest. The actual number of people who are doing it varies because sometimes they might ooly have one or two cases, sometimes they might have three or four, so the actual mnnber of providers out there in terms of workers, many of them who do some work for us are only doing a small portion.

They are not doing a full caseload or are we providing them with the equivalent of a full-time job so the number does vary. Ms. McCormick: Can you give me an estimate of the annual cost for these extemally contracted people? Mr. Rogers: I am sorry, I do not have that right now. Ms. McCormick: We have received some concerns that employers have no right of refusal for extemal contractors and that they are expecting the intervention to be short time when they agree to it, but in fact there may be an extension beyond what is considered to be short time to long term because of an absence of a realistic plan.

What kind of controls are in place given that this is a direct charge back to employers and that the decision to contract externally appears to be with the board and allows for no mechanism for input by the employer? (Mr. Jack Reimer, Acting Chairperson in the Chair) Mr. Wilde: I think it is important to recognize that it is the proper role of the board to manage the process ofharxDing that claim.

While some of the employers pethaps do not agree with the approach we take, whether it is the rehabilitation process or their opinion on, for example, a graduated retum to work program may be different than ours, we are looking at it based on obviously our own experience but also the medical advice we get. Quite frankly, in some cases, the interests of the emplO}el'S are diflercnt than are the interests of the WCB in terms of properly managing that return to work situation. Ms.

McCormick: What I am getting to hear is that there are employers who have in fact got resources within their own organizations to expedite return to work. The situation appears as it has been presented to me that the external contractor needs to go on a learning curve in a sense to know, for example, what resources are available, what job alternatives are available in a workplace and there have been situations where there have been resources within the employing organization.

So I am a little concerned that we say that the interests of the employer and the WCB are at odds because obviously it is the employer who is going to be paying for the plan whether it is internal or external. I would be interested in knowing what kind of safeguards are in place to prevent what appears to be an attempt to get a short-term situation resolved quickly to keep that situation from resolving into a long-term claim, again with the employer obligated to pay for the external contractor but not having any input as to whether or not it is working in the best interest of the employee or the employer. Mr.

Wilde: I will make a brief comment and then pethaps ask you to refer it to Mr. Rogers for more

80 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 detailed comment When I referred to the difference of interest, the employer's interest is predominantly on managing the cost of his claims experience. There clearly is a separate element and that is the managing of the proper physical rehabilitation of that wotker, and in the kind of programs we are talking about here, generally we are talking about graduated return to wor.k program. We do have to be guided by some objective, usually medical opinions as to the process of doing that.

The resources that are employed by the employer, or whether they are their own staff, in a couple of cases where they were large employers or, in a lot of cases, independent consultants working for the employer. There, frankly, are simply differences of opinion about how quickly some people can return to the workplace and the kind of accommodations that are appropriate for them This is where I will sort of defer the balance of the response to the expert. Mr. Rogers: Yes, just a couple of points. In terms of the employer's resources, I could not agree more.

When that exists and when the employer has an interest in bel ping that along, it is an enormous assistance to the process, and we basically tiy to plug into it whenever we can. 1bere are times when there are disagreements and the voc rehab people, in a sense, become somewhat arbiters, and it is still our responsibility to ensure that the plan is reasonable and appropriate, so we have to do that. Getting back to another point, in terms of the learning curve in terms of the external providers, that is nmch less of a problem now than it was during the long-term claims project.

Of course, we had huge numbers going out all at once. We had people out there getting into the business and us trying to get them and to get them to do the work, and the learning curve was considerable. Because we are doing less of it now, and those resources are still there, we are really picking and choosing, and we are picking people who have already gone through that learning anve, people who have done WOik for us for some time now. That problem may have been very real. I think it is nmch less of a problem now. Ms.

McCormick: What I expect, though, is that in the difference between the long-term claims management process and the short term is, when you are dealing with a short-term situation, by and large, that employee is returning to the workplace in which the employee was injured-right?

whereas, with long-term claims, often there has been a disconnectioo between the employer and the employ=, and the return to work is not necessarily to the worlq>lace in which the accident was caused. So what I need to understand then is, how does the board guard against a pmposeful protracting? I mean, I do not mean to be nasty here, but when you are spending something that is going to be charged directly back to the employer, because it is pass-through. how do you safeguard the possibility of a person saying, boy, I got this claim, maybe somebody thinks we can get him back to work in six weeks, but I get more money if I keep him out for three months? *

(1320) Mr. Rogers: Yes, the concern is a valid and a real one, and we are very careful about it. The earlyretum-to-works now are being all monitored by ooe individual in voc rehab who supervises the case esseotially and supervises the people who are providing that, would always be matching what her expectatioos of what should be happening here and what they see and what is being reported, and they would intervene to the extent of making sure they have :llX)re reports, actually asking the person, why is this taking longer than we thought it would. very carefully.

As well, in terms oflong-term providers, we are now in the middle or, hopefully, coming to the end of an audit where we have gone back and we are looking. We are going to be using that as a learning experience for both ourselves and the providers, where we are going back to them and saying, we have looked at a bunch of your files, we have found this, we like this, we do not like this, we expect some changes, and we will be monitoring to make sure that that happens.

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 81 Mr. Reid: Mr. Acting Chairperson, this issue has been around for a while since the board started to contract out for the services in an advisOIY capacity on the long-term claims files. I am not sure if I have asked this question before, and just in case I have not, I will ask it now. There was some concem that I had beani amJDgst claimants, long-term claimants, that their claims files were being put out for review by the Mercer or the Manning and Associates, and there is some question here about the legality of that process.

The information that is contained-for the board, I believe they have a certain set of guidelines that they have to follow, and there may be some confidentiality portions to the act to protect the claimants' file information. What legal opinion does the Compensation Board have to show that the board is acting propedy by contracting for the outside-of-board services for review of these long-term claim files or other files that may be out? Mr. Praznik: Before a response comes from the board, I would just like to comment or clarify to the member for Transcona.

He mentioned two private firms, but I would assume he would also want the sa~re confidentiality to apply to any other outside group, including the Society for Manitobans with Disabilities. I just wanted to clarify that. Mr. Fox-Decent: Ms. Karn Sandy, the corporate secretary of the board, will respond on this issue. Ms. Karn Sandy (Executive Director, Corporate Services and Research, Workers Compensation Board): This issue was looked at, and we reviewed it very thoroughly in consultation with legal counsel.

It was found to be a valid use of the board's authority to enter into relationships as an agent of the Workers Compensation Boanl. But it was looked into, and the results were reported back through the board. Mr. Reid: So it was internal legal counsel to the board that rendered that opinion or that information to the board itself. There were no outside services that were given. Is it possible for us to see it or obtain a copy of the legal opinion that you have on that matter? Mr. Fox-Decent: We will certainly provide a copy, Mr. Reid.

Kam may know whether it was Gordon McKinnon outside that gave the opinion or whether it was Alan Scramstad inside, or someone else for that matter. Do you- Ms. Sandy: Just off the top of my head, I do not recall wbidl counsel did provide the opinion at the time. There may very well have been consultation externally as well. But we will look into it and give you the basis upon which we believe that it is a fair practice. Mr. Reid: Can you tell me, has any claimant ever challenged this?

I mean, I have received some personal comments brought to my attention, but I want to know, has any claimant or any organization challenged the legality of this? Ms. Sandy: To my knowledge, we have received complaints from time to time, but no formal challenge. Mr. Reid: Okay, I look forward to receiving a copy of that and reviewing that matter. I would like to switch to another issue that has been a long-standing concern of the board, and I am referring specifically to the unfunded liability.

The minister, when he brought in his legislation back in 1991, indicated that the unfunded liability was a significant problem, in fact, maybe the major problem of the board's operations to return it into a position where they could protect the interests of claimants and employers in the event of some event happening that would ensure there were sufficient funds there to cover. I look at the d~nt that was put out, the 1993 annual report, that makes reference to that.

It also makes reference to the fact that the board is looking at significantly reducing, in fact, of totally eliminating the unfunded liability portion earlier than the year 2000 as had been originally intended. In fact, the boanl has gone so far in their reports to publish the fact that they intend to reduce it early in 1997.

82 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 Maybe I should ask the question first here considering that the board had seen some significant smpluses in their ftmds available at the end of the year to allow them to further reduce the unfunded liability, what has been the experience for 1994 wlr.n we compare that to 1993's surplus? Mr. Fox-Decent: Mr. Reid, the figures are not complete for 1994, but I can tell you that we expect a surplus in the $6-million to $9-million range which is down from a double-digit surplus whidl was going to be in the low 20s.

We indeed expect to see this year's operations yield a surplus of as much as $9 million, as little as $6 million, which of course would be applied again to the reduction of the unfunded liability. Mr. Reid: Considering that the surplus from '93 was-- I believe it is in the range of $22 million and now we leam that the actual for '94 is some $6 million to $9 million. I suppose we will see the final figures oo that wlr.n the report comes out and maybe the chairperson of the board can indicate when we might expect the report.

I am also concerned that since we have already published in our documents that we are going to move towards the more rapid elimination of the unfunded liability, and we have published that information in the documents, if we do not have the necessary returns, the surplus in the operating funds in the year to allow us to further decrease that unfunded liability to stay in line or in keeping with the published information. how is it that we are going to arrive at the elimination of the unfunded liability by mid-1997 if we have seen such a drastic drop in the funding surpluses? Mr. Pramik.: Mr.

Chair, certainly the chair of the boanl will have s~ COIIJilleDts. I certainly do not want to take away from that, but I wanted to say very clearly on behalf of the government to Mr. Reid that when we introduced legislative changes both to reform the government structure, ny predecessor Mr.

Connery was the minister responsible at the time, and the legislation that I took through the House to reform our benefit package, to update our benefit package, and the work that has gone oo in service delivery all towards the goal of eliminating the tmf'wded liability and improving the operation of the facility, we recognized that if we did not come to grips with the unfunded liability which was $235 million approximately, if memory serves me correctly, and if it continued to grow-and I would remind him that when my party came into office in 1988, the expectation was that it would continue to grow, and the discussion at the time was expectations of rate increases in the area of 20 percent a year on an ongoing basis for several years to either stabilize or deal with that issue, whidl was totally unacceptable to the people of Manitoba.

So we recognize that if we did not come to grips with it, the board would continue to dig itself into a difficult situation that would be much harder to get out ot: and if it was left on that course, at some point in time, would not be financially sound and put at risk the futures of all of those claimants who are dependent upon the board for their income.

We should teJD:mber that the unfunded liability is based oo dollars that should be put away in any given year to deal with the total long-term cost of a claimant who is injured in this particular year, so that those costs are not a burden on future emplO}elS, but the employers of the year in which an individual is injured are the ones who are paying for the complete cost on an actuarial basis of the requirements for that claimant.

The Province of Ontario, going back through a number of administrations, was in a very similar situation as we faced in '88 and did not come to grips with that problem, and they are now looking today at a debt in excess of $11 billion. Just by a quick comparisoo of population-they are about 10 percent larger than us-their deficit should have been in the $2-billion to $3-billion range when ours was at $235 million. lbey are now at the $11-billioo range, and it is going to strangle them Their average rate is well above ours. The Rae government is attempting to deal with the matter, and they are in a mess. •

(1330) So from our government's perspective, coming

January 12, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 83 to grips with the unfunded liability was important. The

titre frame in which it is dealt with, whether it be 1997, '98, '99 or the year 2000, is not as important, quite frankly, as the fact that it is being dealt with and we whittle away at it bit by bit each year. Our expectatioo was the year 2000. That we had SOlllC extrit surpluses, I think more than it was anticipated or I was advised would be available, so we were able to whittle away at it at a faster rate with the $21-million or $22-million surplus of 1993. The surplus for 1994 is not expected to be the sarre, but there still will be a surplus. It will bring that down.

So from our perspective, as the government, we are on steady progress to eliminating that unfunded liability. If it does not occur in 1999 but occurs in the year 2000, that is fine. We have dealt with the process. We have dealt with the problem, and our board will be, quite frankly, one of the most financially sound in North America as we enter the next century.

If it could take place next year, we would be even more pleased, but it is not om intention as a government to force that to happen in 1997 by reducing benefits, for example, by bringing in legislative amendments to reduce om benefit package to provide the additional revenue. I would also hope that the board does not view it as a goal that has to be achieved by bringing in excessive rate increases, or rate increases to deal with it on deadline of 1997.

The maintenance of current rates which are providing us with the dollars we need on an annual basis to operate to the boaid and providing for surpluses to deal with the unfunded liability have worked well for the Manitoba economy. 1hey have actually become a competitive factor. The average rate in Ontario for WCB premiums is about $3.25-plus per hundred of payroll, a full dollar-plus more than Manitobans. So a well-run WCB system fmancially is a competitive advantage in the Manitoba economy. So we are on track.

I know the suggestion has been made by some in the labour commmity that to achieve the 1997 elimination of the unftmded liability, a government may consider bringing in legislation to further reduce payouts, or reduce payouts in certain areas, or to make changes that would result in more cash being available. I can tell the member, that is not the intention of this government. Things are on track where we want them to be. Some have also suggested that perhaps rates should be increased dramatically to eliminate the unfunded. liability by 1997.

If that is a suggestion, that is not one that this government would want to see happen. Quite frankly, we are on the road to where we want to be. 1he unfunded liability is being reduced bit by bit each year.

Our board is going to be, by the beginning of the century, as I said, out of this unfunded liability and one of the most financially sound in North America and, in doing so, maintaining good rate levels, fair rate levels and still providing what is becoming, since we brought in the legislative changes in 1991, one of the more generous benefit packages in Canada, since many provinces have reduced benefits to areas below what Manitoba offers. (Mr.

Chairperson in the Chair) So I hope that gives the member some sense of the political agenda that a government sets for its boatd or for its operation and allays any fears that might be out there in either employer or employee community. Mr. Reid: I notice the minister made several omissioos in his colDliblts. He did not comment ! will quote from his own 1993 annual report: The liability for short-term disability was significantly reduced in '92 as a result of changing from a payment system of 75 percent of gross to 90 pen:mt of after-tax income for claims incurred and subsequent to December 31, '91.

In other words, it is a result of legislation that the costs have gone down, and it is obvious that the bottom line has improved on the backs of the workers. 1be minister also said that this is not ilqK>rtant to reduce the unftmded liability. When changes were coming about in Bill 59, the minister said that it was essential that we move in that

84 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA January 12, 1995 direction to remove the unfunded liability portion. Now he is saying it is not important. The minister talks about Ontario. Why does he not talk about Saskatchewan? They do not have an unfunded liability in that province. He talks about program services cuts. Why does he not talk about altering the rates? Why did we not talk about that as well? I mean, there are provisions here that we can look at both sides of that equation.

I want to ask the minister or the members of the board: How many employers in this province saw decreases through the merit surcharge program in this province? Which percentage of the employers saw decreases in their rates for this year? Mr. Praznik: Mr. Olair, I have sat in this committee many years and listened to the members of the New Democratic Party defend the old systemofWorlrers Compensation in this province that was based on a gross of the payment of wage loss benefits on gross salary, where we had individuals who were being paid more than their take-home pay to be on compensation.

When the members of the New Demx::ratic Party say that the financial problems of the WCB have been dealt with on the backs of the worlcers, they are absolutely wrong. I cannot understand how anyone can com:: to this table and defend a system that paid many applicants more money on wage loss to be home on compensation than when they were working. That to tre is just unbelievable that Mr. Reid, the member for Transcona, would continue to defend that type of position, because it is that kind of position that got the Workers Compensation Board into trouble.

On the other hand, because of that payment structure, we had many of our poorest recipients, people who were not in the 25 percent tax bracket, who received substantially less than when they were on compensation and wage loss. Yet the members of the New Democratic Party continue to defend that system that hurt the poorest workers and benefitted the wealthiest I cannot understand that, quite frankly. Now I have to also make a comment, Mr.

Chair, when this government took office in 1988 and we brought about changes in the structure of the WCB, I remember talking to people who were involved at the board I am told that there were some 200 boxes of active files in the basement of that building. Let us remember what was going on prior to 1988: One of the No. 1 issues in the province of Manitoba, put the finances aside, just talk about service delivery to injured worlcers. One of the No.1 issues was Worlcers Compensation because the service was absolutely disgusting to injured workers. The

titre to first payout, the periods of adjudication, the way matters were dealt with at the boaid, the way people were treated at the board was awful. Who was in govemment?-the so called worlcers' party was in government. They should hide their heads in shame. Yes, we may disagree from

titre to

titre about whether we should pay 90 percent of net or 100 percent of net, and in the labour movement, we have had that discussion. That is a legitimate debate. Many other provinces have moved to 80 percent of net or less.

We can have those discussions, but I will tell you, this board today, because of the work that has gone on by this government, by the representatives of employers and employees who have worked through the board of directors, by many of the stakeholders' groups, to put this board on strong financial footing by improving our service delivery and by ensuring that our rate system is competitive and that employers are getting value for money, which treans their worlcers, when they are injured, are getting service.

We have made huge progress in all of these areas, and we had to clean up a mess that was left by the NDP in this province. So I find it absolutely interesting, to say the least, to see that the member for Transcona would come here and make accusations that we have fixed this board on the backs of working people. The member should talk to the hundreds of claimants who have been through my office. Not all of them have ended up satisfactorily,

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-6-pu2
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 6th hansardpdf pu2.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	235652533ad78bc566184b50dcad86d60cdab96f

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).