LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANI TOBA Monday, 21 July, 1986. Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY - ENVIRONMENT AND WORKPL ACE SAFETY AND HEALTH MR. CHAIRMAN, M. Dolin: Committee will come to order. We are on Page 69, Resolution 66, No. 5., Workplace and Worker Services - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. If there's going to be a motion for reduction in salary, it won't be the Minister's. lt will be the Chairman's salary that will be reduced. MR. CHAIRMAN: I'll let you go two minutes over. MR. A.

KOVNATS: I think that we've got a job to do and, with a little bit of cooperation, we can proceed with this. Maybe we can even finish this department this evening, even if we have to go a little bit longer than normal. Workplace Safety and Health is an important new function of the government. lt hasn't been in existence too long. We've always been concerned about the workplace and the safety in the work place. All we seem to have done in the past is compile statistics as to how many accidents and how many deaths and things of that nature.

I like the initiative of this department now in trying to reduce, in fact, eliminate. I don't think that you're going to be able to eliminate accidents and fatalities in the workplace, but it's a noble goal to try and reduce them to as little as possible and if, in effect, we can reduce the accidents to nothing, I think we'd all walk pretty tall. I think this department is concerned with the protecting of the health and safety of the workers in the workplace, and I know that it administers and enforces The Workplace Safety and Health Act.

I think what I would like to do at this point, rather than go into a long debate, I would like to ask the Minister how inspectors are chosen to look after The Workplace Safety and Health Act. What experience do they have? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. HON. G. LECUYER: Just for clarification, does the member refer to how they're hired? MR. A. KOVNATS: Yes. What is the criteria in hiring inspectors to govern The Work place Safety and Health Act? HON. G. LECUYER: Within th e Depart ment of Workplace Safety and Health, there are safety and health officers.

There are staff who are there as training and education officers; there are industrial hygienists; there are mines inspectors; of course, a great deal of supp ort staff. We've got staff in the area of agricultur e safety. Of course, we've got staff who are there to provide information and training to members of the Workpl ace Safety and Health committees. Therefore, there is a variety of expertise as well, I should have mentioned, in that administration. Quite a few of the members on staff have been for quite some time.

When there is a vacancy to be filled, it's filled by Civil Service bulletining of these positions in the newspapers, just as other civil servant jobs. They look for expertise or training in those areas where the individual will be required to work. You have to understand that this whole area of Workplace Safety and Health and the training that is required very often, especially if we're dealing with occupational medicine, is not an area- and I think the member was referring to that perhaps when he opened the question - where there has been a long-standing attention paid.

Very often, to find someone who can just fit in is difficult, and very often you have to find the best individual and provide him with this additional component of training on the job. MR. A. KOVNATS: I wasn't really trying to set up the Minister when I was talking originally. Then it started going through my miRd how the Estim ates went last year, and we were talking about the mines' safety and health inspections. There was an inspector hired, I guess it was, from Flin Flon, and this was just about a year ago.

The choice came from the union rather than from - I think it was somebody who had never ever been underground. I'm not against the union but I think that, if you've got a choice on whether you're going to hire a mines' inspector, you take somebody who has been a miner, who's got some experience in it, rather than a union representative. I think the Honourable Minister will remember, because it was brought up last year. Again, I wasn't trying to set him up. lt just came back to me when we started discussing it. Is this the criteria on how inspectors are hired?

Do they have to be a friend of the governing party, or do they have to be the most qualified? HON. G. LECUYER: Yes, I do remember the individual in qu estion, or this being raised last year. The individual indeed was hired. He was hired because, at that time, he had been for two years employed by the company in the area of safety and health inspections. He didn't have mining experience, I believe, underground, but he certai nly had experience in monitoring and inspections underground. I certainly had no

part in interviewing the individual. The individual was hired because he was thought to be the most suited. MR. A. KOVNATS: If you have a chance of picking somebody with some experience, I think this is the one that has to be chosen. Is that person who was chosen as a mines inspector still inspecting mines or has he moved back to representing the union? HON. G. LECUYER: He's still in the employ of the department and mines inspection for which he was 2006

Monday, 21 July, 1986 hired. As I say, he wasn't hired by the union , although he was an individual that was, I believe , a union rep at one time or befo re; but again I say to the member , at the time he was hired, he was under contract to the company for doing that very type of job, so I assume the company thought he was capable of doing that job as well. MR. A.

KOVNATS: If I could just refresh the Minister's memory, we had somebody who had many years of safety experience, mine experience, who had applied for that job and had been told that the job was his unti l the very last minute when the announcement was made that the job wasn't his. He thought enough about it to come down to my office and we spoke here in Winnipeg at his expense.

At that time he knew that he had been bypassed for it, but we were trying to establish that, in our opinio n, the best man was not hired for the job and there was a little bit of hanky-panky; hanky­ panky meaning preferential treatment in hiring somebod y who was not as qualified . I think we've established this and I would hope that the Minister would have more regard for the safety of miners so that if there is going to be more mines inspectors hired that the Minister take a perso nal loo k­ see to see that the most qualified person is hired.

I would hope that the Minister would some time in the future, if there's going to be any more mines inspectors hired and I'm sure that there will be, that he give it his personal attention or at leas t ask one of his staff to make sure that we're hiring the best person and it's not on a political basis. MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there a question there? MR. A. KOVNATS: Yes. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, I am sure that I gave remarks to the member in line with that last year; but again, as the member himself has said , this is an issue we dealt with last year.

I wish to remind the member that I don't get involved in the hiring of staff who are going to be doing mines inspection. I repeat, he was hired because it was felt - I admit that the other candidate the mem ber refers to was one of the three who were on the shor t list , who were considered , and was not hired. One of those interviewed felt that perhaps he should get the job . That was no confirmation that he got the job. The member should know that there are always two sides to a story, of course . I'm sure that the individual who discussed this with him perhaps did not give him all of the details.

The individual in question had been out of any type of mining operation for many years, I believe it was seven years, and prior to that, in fact , I don't think he had any actual mining experience . He had been doing some inspection, but some seven years before, during which time there was indeed a tremendous change in mining operations, in mining technology, which did not, certainly from the interviewer's standpoint , qualify him as being the most appropriate candidate. The member may wish to say that there's been political interference in the hiring process.

I wish to assure that member that that is not the case. MR. A. KOVNATS: I really wasn't trying to get down to that. I certainly feel that there w as political interference and from what I understand, the man was out of the mines business for a shor t time. It was nowhere near seven years. I was told, if I remember correctly, it was a couple of years. He had been in business in Flon Flon and he had still been there and associated with that area. I think he was running a taxi company, as a matter of fact. That's fair enough.

It was a difference of opinion here and I don't think a difference of opin ion constitutes a point of order. I don 't think anybody raised a point of order, did they? A MEMBER: Not yet. MR. CHAIRMAN: I would suggest to the member, though - I was not chair ing the committee last year, but if it did come up in last year's Estimates, perhaps it's in Hansard. People can review the arguments of last year. MR. A. KOVNATS: Mr. Chairman, when you find - (Interjection) - . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, 64(2) which is specifically relevant. This is 1986-87. MR. A.

KOVNATS: ... it's like a foo tball quarterback, when he finds a weakness, he keeps playing to that weakness. I'm quarterbacking th is team right now and I think that was a weakness in hiring a political person rather than the most qualified. If it came up last yea r and it came up again this year, I can almost assu re you that it will probably come up again next year, Mr. Ch airman. Mr. Chairman, we're talking about this committee , the Workplace Safety and Health coordinates health and safety training and education activities.

Education activities, are these regular meetings that we have , when we take people out of the workplace to these educa tional facilities, when we take people from Tho mpson , from Churchill, from Brandon, and from Winnipeg, to a central location where we give them specific safety training in the workplace? Do we break it down into different categories? Are there different categories that we break it down, so that we're not getting safety training, we'll say, for hospital personnel for people that work in mines? How is that coordinated, Mr. Chai rman? HON. G.

LECUYER: There are seminars that are given by members of the training and education in the Workplace Safety and Health Division on specific issues related to safety and health. As well, they provide some courses within the provision of the act which says that the members of the Workplace Safety and Health committees, or the representat ive s , or where committees are not mandatory , are qualified for two days of paid educat ional leave per year. So staff within that

section then have been providing that type of training. As well , they provide d sort of a course module for the first phase of training under The Workplace Safety and Health Act of preparing courses for more advanced training at this point in t ime, and I hope to have that 2007

Monday, 21 July, 1986 ready, I believe it's this fall. From there they will be preparing a third-level course for further advanced training into areas of workplace safety and health. As well, staff within that division also relates with the whole spectrum of the workplaces in Manitoba, including all of them. MR. A. KOVNATS: What I was really asking the Minister is do we train everybody for everything, or are they specializing? Do we train people working in the mines to be aware of health and safety problems, as I mentioned, in hospitals, in schools, in paint factories?

Do they go through the whole gambit or are we specializing? Because I think if we're going to train people for everything, then they know a little bit about everything and not enough about anything. What is our program in training these people is really what I'm asking. This time I'm really not trying to embarrass the Minister. I hope that he can suggest the proper way of doing it because if we set it up now in the proper way, when we change government in a short time then I don't have to make all those changes. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr.

Chairman, yes, indeed, and I said on specific issues and that's what I meant by areas of specific concern. For instance, the Safety and Health Committee Training Program is one of the areas. Under that, for instance, there were 12 4 sessions provided in 19 85 compared to '86 and'84, a total 992 hours spent in that area with 2,480 participants.

In the area of school safety and health training programs to develop awareness of basic understanding of safety and health hazards involved in schools, especially vocational courses and other workplaces, The Workplace Safety and Health Act regulations, for instance, school children enrolled in the vocational courses, especially industrial arts and in community training and educat ion programs, there were 37 sessions in there in 1985 with 1, 480 participants.

In the medical institutions' safety training programs, our target audience being workers, management and professional groups directly involved with medical institutions, there were four training sessions in there, a total of 30 hours with 48 participants. In the area of agriculture, again workers, management and farm families directly involved in primary agricultural work, there were 26 sessions with 64 hours and 834 participants.

In the area of special interest groups - and those are specific areas dealing with a specific regulation or safety and health involved with a special or a specific work process - there were 27 sessions in there, 216 hours and 62 1 participants. In the area of stress management - it's an awareness program - the target audience being workers, management, self-employed persons in all types of workpla ces in the province, there were two such sessions for a total of 18 hours and 90 participants.

In the specific topics of concerns of workplace safety and health, there were eight sessions for 7 4 hours and 122 participants. This will be, for instance, in such specific areas as logging or mill safety or ladder safety or lifting techniques, specific areas. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm just going to touch on this because it's Workers Compensation, but I just want to touch on it and then I'll go right back. You mentioned stress management. I had somebody who was under workers compensation who is no longer receiving workers compensation, who had been held up as a cashier in a grocery store.

Her nerves are so bad that she can't go back to work, and she's been cut off of workers compensation. So that's one thing I'll throw at you when we get to Workers Compensation, because you had mentioned about stress management. I don't want to jump all over the place. I just throw that at you right at this minute. You talk about this Workplace Safety and Health, the act is governed - and this is the act that orders limits and controls hazard in the workplace.

Now you also mentioned about, in 19 85, there were 10 formal charges laid under The Workplace Safety and Health Act for non-compliance with fines from $10 0 to $5,000.00. You're talking about 10 formal charges that were laid. I imagine some discretion was used, and there were warnings made rather than formal charges. I understand that. I think you've got to be tough but, you know, you've got to be somewhat understanding. I don't want you breaking the rules, but you can bend them a little bit. Wha t are the compan ies that came under this Workp lace Safety and Health Act that were fined for non-compliance?

There were only 10. I would imagine the Minister would have them pretty close at hand. If he wants to just give me what the big ones were, or maybe read them all off. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, the provisions for penalties are in the act but the actual penalties, when imposed, are imposed by the judge in court, not by the Min ister sitting in judgment. Therefore, these penalties are within the ranges that are provided in the act.

Ju st to gi ve you an example, in 19 85 Tundra Excavations, charges were laid in court and, on the final court date in August, 1985, there was a guilty plea and a fine of $500; City of Winnipeg Hydro proceedings were stayed; Atlas Utility Contractors, a guilty plea entered, $300; W.J. Emery Construction, a guilty plea entered, $300; Beaver Construc tion, a guilty plea entered, $500 - I don't know if the member wishes me to read them all here - Red River Construction, guilty plea entered, $400 ... MR. A. KOVNATS: What was the $5,000 one? HON. G. LECUYER: I haven't got to it yet; I don't know if it's in here.

Yes, just a moment, I'm getting to it. Dapien and Sons charges, a guilty plea, $500; Atkins Underground, it was struck off; Monarch Metal Co. Ltd., guilty plea, stayed one count, $5,000.00. MR. A. KOVNATS: Monarch Metal Products? HON. G. LECUYER: The member will remember the student that was killed at that pl ant. MR. A. KOVNATS: That was my next question. HON. G. LECUYER: The Crang's Autobody, Shilo, found guilt y, $800.00. I believe that covers the gamut where fines were imposed. In some cases, proceedings were stayed. 2008

Monday, 21 July, 1986 The member has to realize that the fines are as a result of appearances in court and , as unde r other legislation, the level of fines reflect the degree of severity of the non-compliance with the provisions of the act . MR. A. KOVNATS: Can the Honourable Minister advise whether charges were laid on these particul ar companies before or after an accident occurred? Were accidents what initiated somebody from Workplace Safety and Health to inspect these places? We're talking about Monarch Metal Products, where a death occurred after an explosion .

Do you have any there that were initia ted before an accident took place? HON. G. LECUYER: Nine out of ten were before an actual accident occurred. MR. A. KOVNATS: So then the only one that was after the accident was Monarch Metal Products. What initiated the Inspection Branch to go into these place s to inspect ? Was it just haphazard , or is it on a regular basis that they're inspec ted? HON. G. LECUYER: I'm sorry, there were eight out of ten . Two were after . MR. A. KOVNATS: What initiated the inspection? HON. G. LECUYER: The staff in the department carry out regula r inspect ions.

As well , they respond to complaints . Complaints can come from various sourc es. They can com e from members of these Workpl ace Safety and Health committees, for instance, who would seek maybe a redress of something they perceive d to be wrong and changes are not effe cted, in which case they would bring it to the attention of the division who would go and carry on an inspection. Then charges may occu r after an imp rovement order has been passed or imposed by the divisi on. Sometimes , it's even a stop order.

If chang es are not effected, of cours e, it become s a repeat ed refusal to comply with the Workplace Safety and Health inspections. MR. A. KOVNATS: Well, that's fine . What is happening then, from my understanding , is that these companies were give n warn ing and it's non-compl iance to the warning. Therefore, it' s after a second or third warning that they were fined and , no matter what you fine them, it doesn't seem enough money to be fining them . It's just like a tap on the wrist, particularly when they 've had warning.

I think what has happened - and the Honourable Minister can ' t just sit back and say, it's not my responsibility; it's his department. Sure it's the courts that are levelling the fines, but $400 for refusing to obey an order is a ridiculously light tap on the wrist. I think that the Honourable Minister should advise the courts that he's not about to accept any little taps on the wrist for non-compliance , particula rly after they've been given a warning . HON. G. LECUYER: In some cases there's no warning, Mr.

Chairman, because if there is imminent danger that is being caused, they know perfectly well the regulation . I'll give the member an example, for instance, showing for underground or excavations. Those would be imminent dangers where there could be an imm ediate charge imposed. There were, in the course of 1985, 81 stop work orders and 128 stop work warnings . Obviousl y, the action taken by staff in the depart ment who are trained in this area varies with the degr ee of danger that is posed .

If it's a minor situation , a work improv ement is all that is required and the empl oyer can effect the changes quickly . Generally , there is a deadline by which this work has to be complete d, and staff will go out and reinspect to determine whethe r the changes have occurred or not. If the change doesn't occur, they may decide to pass a stop work order, depending on the severity or the degree of danger that is being posed to the work ers immediately handling that piece of equipment, for instance . MR. A.

KOVNATS: I would think it would be a big job , probably too big at this point to ask the Minister to evalu ate whether the concentration of inspections that we have now , rather than from two, three or four years back , have eased and relieved the situation. Can the Honourable Minister , just off the top of his head without getting into too much detail, advise whe ther the workplace is safer today than it was even two or three years ago when we did start concentrating on workplace safety? Has it reduced the number of acc iden ts in the workplace? HON. G.

LECU YER: I can only speculate to a certain extent in this area . MR. A. KOVNATS: I understand , Mr. Chairman . HON. G. LECUYER: . . . but it will be some time where changes can be obvious in the workplace. We're talking about recent develo pments in the area of wor kp lace safety and health . We are continuing to put efforts in that area . It 's undeniable, by all accounts, in the area of workp lace safety and health that this will come about through a joint commitment from everyone in a particula r workplace, from the employer , the workers , their

part icipat ion in cooperatively achieving this goal, the kn owledge about those aspects of the workplace which compose a danger to their health. We are doing a number of things in that regard . The establishment of the committees was only one step; the education to the members of the committees is another; the right to refuse without discrimination to work in situations that pose dangers to their health and safety is another step.

We are now carrying on, as I have mentioned we would do when we were in last year 's Estima tes, an occupational health stud y which we hope to have completed soon, it's well under way, which is another step which will give us an indi cation of what measures we are to take to improve safety and health in the workplace. The number of committees continues to grow. We have some 925 committees.

Not only does tha t number grow , but they are getting to be bette r informed to be able to recognize those situation s or conditions that can pose danger s to their safety and health and, as they meet in committee , hopefully they will be insistent upon seeing these conditions changed and along the 2009

Monday, 21 July, 1986 way we'll see results, but results don't occur overnight in this areas. As I said, it will continue to require persistence and commitment before these changes, but I think there has been progr ess. I don't want to equate that knowledge with the number of accidents. The number of accidents is still rising and too high. it's partly, as well, because of the increased number of employed in workplaces.

I can give in terms of figures for the member, when we get in the Compensation after a while and he'll see that, perhaps, as also adding to the The more employees you have, the more you're going to find accidents; but hopefully the combination of these efforts, and added to that what will come in place with regulations under the handling and transportation of hazardous goods, will also add to the measures of safety in the workplace. So along the way we hope that these will show indeed effects toward a downward trend in the number of accidents. MR. A. KOVNATS: I hope so.

I had mentioned earlier to the Minister that I was tired of listening that we were studying the situation and monitoring the situation, but in some cases I've got to accept it because you have to keep studying a particular situation and you have to keep monitoring different situations. I don't want to allow the Minister to use it as an overall excuse and I don't think the Minister has used it as an overall excuse. I understand and I appreciate that.

We were talking earlier about - and we're still on Workplace Safety and Health - when we were talking about hiring northern Natives for the Limestone project, and I had suggested at that time that they were taking people out of protected reserves where they weren't aware of high technology equipment. I was prepared to support the training of these people with high technology equipment so that they could work at the Limestone project and other places around.

Can the Honourable Minister advise whether the training of these Natives not only in the highly technological type of work that they've entered into, but have they been trained in the workplace safety and health aspect so that there isn't an inordinate amount of accidents happening in the workplace, particularly with native Northerners? HON. G.

LECUYER: At the very early stage in the training of northern workers, I sent a letter to my counterpart, the Minister responsible for Energy and Mines, drawing that to his attention because we had an experience - I personally wasn't here at the time - but our past experience in such large scale projects, especially in constructions of that type, wasn't so good because there is indeed a high degree of risk involved. In order to try and improve the picture, I asked that there be, as part of that training, specific components dealing with workplace safety and health.

I'm assured that these are being provided to all workers who are being trained to work in the Limestone project, not only those who will work with highly technical equipment. There are many precautions that one can take, even as a general labourer, especially working in conditions where you have fast flowing currents, rocks and falling objects, so everybody needs to know what are measures to take to protect his own safety and health. Therefore, they all require that kind of training. MR. A.

KOVNATS: We were talking about the transportation of hazardous goods about how the drivers have to fill out forms when they're delivering these hazardous good by transport or by truck. Are special courses given to the Natives on the workplace safety and health in Northern Manitoba in the language of their choice rather than in English or French, because I think if anybody has been on any of the reserves, there's quite an amount of numbers there that don't speak French or English. Is special language training given to these people in their own language? HON. G. LECUYER: I can't answer that, Mr. Chairman.

I don't know if any training is provided in the Native language and I don't know that it is required. lt might make it easier. We'll find out if there is any. We're not overall responsible for the training courses that are being provided and I can't say whether there's any training in their native language or not. MR. A. KOVNATS: When we talk about Work place and Worker Services, which is that Clause 5, does that include workplace safety and health in a private home?

Let me go on a little bit further because I just happ ened to hear on the radio, I guess it was this morning, as I was coming to the Legislature. lt was a beautiful day and I had my windows open; I didn't have to turn on the air conditioning. lt was just a beautiful day and I was listening and somebody on CBC Radio was telling me over the radio that one-third of all fire alarm detection equipment in the homes is inoperable or not of standard procedure. Two-thirds of it still was good but one-third was not good.

We're talking about workplace safety, and if people have offices and they use their homes as their workp lace, what insp ect ion do we have of their workplace when its their homes? HON. G. LECUYER: Obvious ly, anyone that is in the home full time and is a worker in that home, he's in a workplace, so I can't disagree from that standpoint. it's certainly not possible for the department to provide inspections of every home in the Province of Manitoba. You can imagine the resources that would be required for that.

I do understand - I don't know if that is throughout the province or just in the major cities and towns - that the fire department carries on at least annual inspections and these things are looked at during these inspections. We, in the Work place Safety and Health, do not carry on inspections in private homes. MR. A. KOVNATS: Now that we're talking about firemen carrying on these inspections, what special advice do we give firemen when they're going in to fight fires?

I happened to attend the funeral of a very good friend of mine who was a fireman, and I was led to believe, and it was under discussion that he had died of cancer and that possibly the cancer was caused with him fighting fires in a particular location. I think it's exposure to carcinogens - is that the correct terminology? 2010

Monday, 21 July, 1986 What protection do we give these firemen? It's their job to go into these locations and put out fires. I know that they don't have to work in a workplace if it's not safe, but they 're hired to go into an unsafe location . What do we do to compensate the widows for those people that die from exposure to some of thes e things that cause cancer and how do we determine whether, in fact, that's the cause of their death? HON. G. LECUYER: The latter part of the quest ion is indeed a compensation question .

We can answer it anyways in terms of it is a compensatory injury and that is determined under the adjudication of the board through the medical specialities that are there. As far as the first part of that question whi ch deals with how they train, they're trained as part of their firefighters' training . Last year, in fact in January of 1985, we passed a code of pra ctice for protective clo thing for fire figh ters . They have three years to fully implement this code of practice in the firefighting department. This deals with their own boots and clothing, etc., which we want to be up to cod e.

If they deal with a fire where there's burning hazardous substances, that is partly the reason why we put on this training prograt under the transportation and handling of dangerous goods at the fire-training college in Portage so that they can recognize the substances they have to deal with and so that they can take the proper precautions to protect their own health and wear the proper equipment if it's called for. As well, staff generally are called through ou r emergenc y response 24-hour service.

We are advised immediately when this takes place so that staff can also come to the scene of the accident and provide advice to the firemen if that is required . MR. A. KOVNATS: With exposure to carcinogens, remember reading somewhere that there were 100 deaths that were attributed to cancer last year. Am I correct in my figure? HON. G. LECUYER: Yes, I think you are. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm not sure, but are all of these deaths compensated under some form through Workers Compensation? HON. G. LECUYER: No. MR. A. KOVNATS: Even though we know that they were caused through the workplace, a danger in the workplace? HON.

G. LECUYER: These are estimated figures . The direct link is not absolutely or scientifically established. I can say to the member for sure that these are not all compensated; probably only a minor number of these are . If the accident occurs and it's directly related to the workplace, then it would be, but that has to be established . There are far more deaths associated with diseases in the workplace which, at this point in time, it hasn 't been possible to adjudicate with any degree of certainty. MR. A.

KOVNATS : I will turn to - and I think we discussed this on Thursday somewhat - when it comes to asbestos in the workplace , do we have any locatio ns in Winnipeg that have been warned concern ing the asbestos content in their product, a warning to rep lace it, that the warning has not been complied with at this point ? I would think it's the asbestos. Do we have a danger in the drinking water? There was a dang er. Has it been corrected? Is there a danger of asbestos wrapping around pipes that could cause cancer? I'm not trying to scare people , but these are things that I've been made aware of.

And have we corrected those types of situations? If I might just add, I remember an interview with the people in Quebec where I guess the asbestos is mined and it comes out . I'll repeat how these people in there are prepared to take chances with asbestos rather than lose job s in the ir industry . They came right out and said it. It's like the acid rain affecting Canad ian trees . The Americans don 't care about the acid rain because it's Canadian affecting trees . All they 're worri ed about is affecting American jobs. It is the same situation taking place in Quebec at this point.

And how does it affect us in Manitoba with the use of asbestos? HON. G. LECUYER : The asbestos control is assessed on a case-by-case basis . We are looking at adopting a code of practice , one that has been in the making for a substantial amount of time . I expect we will adopt this code in t he nea r fu ture, one that has been dependent upon discussions and going on also elsewhere . The member is right in saying he hears a lot about this recently; in fact, it has been in the news a lot especially in relation to the sewage pipes or water pipes used in the Cit y of Winnipeg.

Except ions to this case­ by-case approach have to do with schools or government-owned buildings where the Department of Education and Government Services are also involved in the program. It operates in fou r different phases which consist of identification , and that includes respond ing to concerns or complaints from both management and workers of possible presence of asbestos insulation. In actual laboratory analysis , we have a staff person, an industrial hygienist, who monitors and responds to complaints raised in this particular regard.

Then there is evaluation , as part of the identification , we assess to confirm the presence of asbesto s and the evalua tion assessment of the problem is done within the branch . If we establish, for instance, that there are loose fibres, they could present dangers; that might indicate there is urgency to remove these asbestos insulation or fibres in a proper way as quickly as possible . If they are not exposed or behind other building materials and are not disturbed, perhap s to remove them would create more of a problem than to leave them where they are.

So depending upon the individual cases , I said we will identify, evaluate and consult and then proceed to control the problem if it needs to be removed. MR. A. KOVNATS: I had mentioned a year ago I guess, the last time we were in Estimates - it doesn 't seem that long ago but I guess it is a year or maybe even longer - when I had suggested that special code painting 2011

Monday, 21 July, 1986 take place inside factories to identify danger zones and to identify the different types of liquids that were flowing through pipes in case there was a break in the pipe during a fire or at any time during the working day. If there was a danger of an elevator, it was red-coded or black-coded and if there was a drop in the floor, there was another code. Actually I saw one over at a paint factory.

They get their product at a reasonable price and they're able to provide their own product for their own buildings, and I'll tell you it really did spruce up the place. it's kind of enjoyable working in a nice bright place. When it serves another purpose of providing warning to people in case there's any danger, and we're talking work place safety and health, and the Honourable Minister at that time didn't consider that it was an important aspect that I had brought forward, and again I bring it forward. We're still working towards the same goal and that goal is to provide warnings and safety in the workplace.

Will the Honourable Minister after a year of thinking about it - and I wouldn't want him to move too quickly on it - but after a year, would the Honourable Minister reconsider the proposal that was made? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, I bet if the Member for Niakwa were to look back at last year's comments - and I do very distinctly remember him raising that - and contrary to his remembrance of what I had said at that time, I said I thought that was a good idea.

I've seen some places like that myself especially, as the member has, in paint factories where it's easy to carry out because they have the product right there on the spot to do the job. They're more likely to do it very qu ickly. There are Canadian standards involving the colour code for these substances. We certainly encourage, especially in those plants where they handle chemicals or other hazardous substances, especially if there's a variety of substances in the workplace using piping system, I certainly would encourage them to adopt this measure that the member talks about.

I have no problem agreeing with that app roach. On the other hand, the workplaces that use piping systems to carry hazardous substances are rather few and far between. MR. A. KOVNATS: I was just about to let my associate from Portage la Prairie carry on, but just to finish off on the colour code in the factories, it's not just in the pipes that carry the hazardous materials. lt's a step down that I guess could be almost every bit as dangerous if you're driving a front-end loader and you don't see that there's a step down and all of a sudden you end up a few floors below with a front-end loader on top of you.

I think if it's colour-coded, you know that there's a drop in the floor or there's a low ceiling or things of that nature. I would hope that the Honourable Minister would not just agree with me, but would do something to get it off the ground. I think one of the paint companies has even suggested that they would be happy to encourage it, not just for the profit in the selling of the paint, because I really don't think there's that much paint involved. You're not going to be painting a whole skyscraper different colours because it is only a small area that is required.

I think this is something that could be initiated and I think the Honourable Minister can accept whatever credit it is in providing safety into the work place. HON. G. LECUYER: I am told that there is under the Fire Commissioner's Office and The Gas Act, there are colour coding of pipes that come under that act which I wasn't aware of. But as well, anytime that we come upon an area or an issue that we feel presents a degree of danger to safety or to health, we use this approach here to communi cate to some 20,000, 22,0 00 workplaces in Manitoba. - (Interjection)- MR. A.

KOVNATS: I have the same one and I read it religiously. HON. G. LECUYER: So do I and, I t'link as well, if there are specific issues; as an exampl3, the split rim, for instance, which has caused . . . fatalities, we make a special bulletin involving that specific issue, or if we are made aware that a type of equipment for instance could pose certain dangers, we would then proceed to have labels made for that type of equipment so that all workplaces could use it directly on the equipment, so that it would be visible to the operator at the machines.

So certainly in every way, shape or form that we can help to reduce situations that present risks, we are cert ainly all in favour of providing that type of information, either through the training that is provided in the branch through this review or special bulletins, or to the labelling - and the member has to remember under the dangerous goods handling and transportation - I always mislabel the name of the act. There will also be labelling requirements for various products or containers under that act. So there will be additional requirements to come in place. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage. MR. E.

CONNERY: You don't have the'84-85 annual report. In the area of the actual money expended, do you have those figures? HON. G. LECUYER: Yes. MR. E. CONNER Y: I'd like you to give them to us at a speed that I can write them down. HON. G. LECUYER: I believe they'r e in the sup plementary figures that I gave. All for'84-85? MR. E. CONNE RY: Yes. HON. G. LECUYER: Total budgetary figures for the department - if the member will just give me a minute or two, we'll have that information. MR. E. CONNERY: Appendix B, in the'83-84 one, that's where the 4 mill ion showed up for the Workers Compensation.

We don't know if there are any surprises or things in there this year. lt makes it very difficult to do a proper estimates when you don't have the annual report. 2012

Monday, 21 July, 1986 HON. G. LECUYER: We'll have that information in a moment's time. MR. CHAIRMAN: If you'd like to carry on with another question while he's getting you that information. Anybody else? The Member for Ste . Rose . MR. G. CUMMINGS: Mr. Chairman, my questions are related to Workplace Health and Safety regulations in the public schools . The last couple of years - three years ago, I guess - was when the schools were asked to comply with Workplace Health and Safety regulations and set up committees within the schools, the same as in industrial workplace situations.

I would ask the Minister if he can give me a rationale as to why that was extended to that degree into an area that's already heavily regu lated? What rationale was there for the involvement of getting right down into the classroom situation for Workplace Health and Safety? HON. G. LECUYER: The requirements under The Workplace Safety and Health Act for the committees and the Workplace Safety and Health Committees in the education system is one that has always been part of the act for that matter. There was no additional requirement.

The additional requirement applied to all workplaces, and because the school system is a workplace, they applied to the school system. Now , under those provisions, the school districts and school divisions were required to implement just like other workplaces, Workplace Safety and Health Committees . The purpose is twofold, basically , to reduce accidents or risks to health and, as well, to educate our young people to the proper workplace practices that might affect their health down the road.

Out of the 48 school divisions and 10 school districts in the province, all have implemented at this point in time their Workplace Safety and Health Committees . I can understand that it poses a degree of complexity because those workplaces are not single unit workplaces. Very often where you have from the school divisions and districts that vary from five schools to some that have 84 schools. In Phase One, we are talking about the establishment of these committees. Then, having established these committees, to proceed to develop a policy procedural manual as terms of reference for the committee members.

As Phase Three, it is hoped that eventually there will be some education and training of school representatives where subcommittee members regarding their responsibilities and activities as outlined in The Workplace Safety and Health Act and the regulati on thereunder. We hope that these will be carried out in the school divisions . We are not saying that all have to operate on the same model. We have offered a variety of models. Some school divisions proceeded more quickly and developed successful models.

We provided some of these examples to other school divisions who found difficulty in implementing these, and we have a staff person in the Workplace Safety and Health Division whose job it is to assist the school system in doing just that. I have sent to all school divis ions, secretary-treasurers of school divi sions and the Teachers Society, the Trustees Association, the chairpersons and the co­ chairmans of the Safety and Health Committees in the workplace a letter with some guidelines which went out in September of 1985. As I said before, all have implemented thes e committees at this point in time.

Some are obviously functioning better than others. The school system is an ideal place and we would be remiss as a society if we did not do something to prepare the future workers of tomorrow to educate them in the proper safety and health measures to take to protect themselv es. I have here a bulletin which comes from the Ham ilton Board of Education .

It's called, "Safety in the Workplace Gets a Start in the Schools ." It states that in 1981, for example, in the 15-24 year-old category, they accounted for 30 percent of Workers Compensation Board claims in Ontario while making up only 19.4 percent of the province 's workforce in the manufacturing sector; there are also teachers; the re are also bus drivers; there are also maintenance people; there are also custodian staff. You know, all of these people may not be, and students may not be, salaried employees; they are not employees, but they are workers in that workplace.

So their health is just as important as that of anybody else. Our life there is just as important as a life somewhere else. Maybe the member would be surprised how many accidents do occur in the school system. Generally, you know , we say it is a rather safe place because they are under the guidance and protection of a teacher . The teacher is there basically to make sure they are not exposed to hazards. The teachers eliminate the hazards , if you wan t to put it that way, but what is needed is more than that.

They have to be trained how to recognize situations that might pose a threat to their health and how to handle such situations properly. There is an education tha t has to be provided and we hope that what we're dealing with now is a first step that has to go much furthe r than that. This

article ended with this message and it says, " The message is clear. Good safety practices learned in the school can be translated into the workplace where individuals will be better equipped to handle potentially dangerous situations to the health and safety of themselves and those around the m." That's part of the responsibility I think we have in providing a well-rounded education to our young people to help them to work as productive individuals in society without becoming a burden to the system because they didn't know how to cope with dangerous situations . MR. G. CUMMINGS: Mr.

Chairman, I think if I'd have gotten the short answer , this might have been a sho rt question. When we star t talking about this is the way that we're going to teach the workers of the future the ir safety consciousness, then it should be part of the curriculum surely. The school divisions are controlled und er almost every other department of the government that has anything to do with public health and safety, and to imp ly that this is being put in there to imp rove instruction to the childr en I think borders on ludi crous.

Your bus garage is con tro lled under the Depar tment of Highways , Motor Vehicle Safety . Your Industrial Art s area is controlle d already unde r Workplace Safety and Health, as I conc ur, and I agree that it should be. I guess what bothered me, when I was on the receiving end , you say that all the school divisions have now 2013

Monday, 21 July, 1986 concurred. That's because they were told to, or they'd be faced with non-compliance. Quite simply, I think a lot of the school divisions concurred because they were gi ven no choice. I think, if you check the records, you'll find there were a significant number of them who didn't comply until the very last moment.

I find that the committees that have to be set up, and you alluded to this - you obviously recognized it as a difficulty - where you have schools that are spread around a school division and you have representatives from each school and you have a legislated number of meetings that should be held with representatives from each area. Then flowing from those committee meetings, if there's a problem, a committee shall be set up to go and view the problem. You're talking thousands of dollars cost in a school division to run these committees.

I can give you examples of costs of $1 0,000 to $1 5,000 in a school division to handle a Wo rkp lace Safety and Health Program that was implemented in the school division. I would wonder if the Minister would consider the fact that there is a difference between this type of a workplace and, for example, an area that would be much more dangerous to work in, and you can choose any example you wish. But is there any thought that perhaps this area, if we must maintain a presence there, could be handled in a less compl icated way, let me say? HON. G.

LECUYEA: I certainly agree with the member that there are different types of workplaces and this is a more complex type of workplace. They do come under various legislation depending, as the member has referred to, whether it applies to the bus garage or whatnot, but that's true of other workplaces as well. The requirement is that there be - and I have to say this before I begin. The requirement under the proposed regulation, which is not finalized at this point in time - I've met with representatives of the various school divisions, I think it was approximately a month ago.

Following that, I've also met with representatives of the Teachers Association. Maybe they don't exactly agree on how to go about it, these representatives of the schools. They were secretary-treasurers and trustees who I met. Not one of them disagreed that this doesn't have to be done in the school system, not one. They may disagree about how to go about it. The requirement that is being considered is that they have four meetings a year. The costs that this represents for an average school division will be probably less than $5,000 a year.

This is no great cost when you measure it against the number of accidents that may occur or the lives that may be lost. 1t depends on what value you place on these happenings. The memb er has to remem ber that, in the construction industry, they have to provide 15 minutes every week of training on the job. We're not imposing that type of requirement. Other workplaces where the risks are higher will have to meet more frequently than four times a year. So we've taken that into consideration.

All I have to say to the member is that there is a need for it. lt is a recognized need for it, and I haven't met anybody who disagrees with that yet. MA. G. CUMMINGS: Well, I would chal lenge the Minister on the question of whether or not there are people out there who have had some serious misgivings about the imp lementation of th ese additional regu lations. After the fact, of cou rse, now that everybody has got committees in place, the question is not nearly as close to the top of the agenda about whether or not it would be thrown out. Then the question becomes, how can it be modified so that it is workable.

I guess, I would take that approach also.

When you're talki ng about pull- out situations where you have professional people who are taken out of the classrooms for meetings, you have travel time, you have replacement time, there can be the easy way and there can be the hard way. it opens itself up to a situation where it also very much can become embroiled in negotiations which it shouldn't but, if staff and school board relations are not that good, I think the Minister would understand that this is another lever where, if all of the regulations are in place, they can be worked to the point where it becomes a very costly operation for the school division.

I can giv e you examples. I don't need to get into it here. I guess I was only trying to encourage the Minister to look at a way of implementing it in this particular workplace so that it would be a little more suitable. Don't forget that we're dealing here with school divisions where, at the professional level, the average salary is probably in excess of $35,000.00. Every time you have a pull-out program, that's a pretty costly state of affairs, particularly when that pull-out also imp lies that you have to put a replacement in there for the classroom to function at the same time. HON. G.

LECUYEA: As I said before, we haven't finalized that regulation, and we certainly will be looking at the comments that will be forthcoming from the staff from the various school divisions. I've told them that before. I think that the problems or the comple xity of establishing such a system and the cost that was perceived to be associated with it, to a large extent, has been dissipated because, when we're talking about the central committee for a school division, it's not as if you're going to have a whole lot of teachers on this. lt may be that you'll have in some cases only one of them.

So it's more of a perception than an actual case, because there will be management representatives on this central com mit tee; there will be worker representatives on this committee. Some of these worker representatives could be - there's no reason why there cannot be, for instance, a volunteer parent from the Parents' and Teachers' Association who would be on that committee. In the community college or high school level, there could be a student on that committee as well. So there could be a bus driver; there could be a custodian. We're not talking only about teachers being on that committee.

These meetings are not going to - that will be a difficulty to iron out yet, when these meetings will take place. As I said before, we're talking about a frequency of four times a year. We've gone through a cost scenario of how much this would cost to a school division, and we arrive at the figure that would be around $5,000 and no more. MA. G. CUMMINGS: Mr. Chairman, this gets stranger and stranger. There may, no doubt, have been some 2014

Monday, 21 July, 1986 changes since I was, two years ago, involved in being part of a school division, but if we're now talking about parental involvement, student involvement and, very specifically, I believe I just heard the Minister imply a couple of minutes ago that in fact the students in this case are considered the same as if they were workers in Workplace Safety, is that correct, or a workplace situation? HON. G. LECUYER: They are not employees but they're workers in that system, so they're a part of that work place.

The scenario that I'm talking about, I'm not saying they'd have to have a student; we're not saying they'd have to have a parent. We've built the scenario, for instance, under a system whereby the accounting that I have here is based on having two trustees; two school division management people, whether superintendent, secretary-treasurer; two teachers; one custodian; one transportation maintenance person; one clerical person; and one student. That would make for a committee of 10 individuals. That scenario that I referred to is based on these type of individuals.

They don't have to have a student on that committee. They don't have to have a parent, but this is the kind of flexibility that is built into this regulation. MR. G. CUMMINGS: That same flexibility, I think also, can make the system very nearly unworkable. I would give you, as an example, frivolous situations that can be brought forward. The committee must then strike a subcommittee or the whole committee must go to view situations in the other schools within the division.

Then you're looking at a day or two or three or four during the course of the year when this committee that you just spoke of will be on the road. I find that very hard to justify, realizing at the same time that there is no expense, in many ways, that cannot be justified in the name of safety. I would ask the Minister to look fairly carefully at this because there's problems out there that may not be coming to the surface. There's certainly an awful lot of discontent on the part of the trustees that I've talked to.

When you have things like the buses idling in the loading zone being considered a hazard when, in fact, if the buses don't idle to keep them warm the windows fog up, and you waste committee time hour upon hour just whether or not this is a C02 problem in the area. You can see where this gets all tied up in negotiation problems. I would suggest, also, that when you look at all the areas that govern the schools, that this is probably an overlay that is there more for the pu rposes of the professional staff than the other staff because they are covered under other regulatory areas to give them protection.

I would also ask you to giv e some serious consideration to the idea that if this is to be put in place as an educational tool, then let's do it the right way as we would implement any other program into the schools. You're talking, I understand, where it would be an educational tool by example, but we can also provide some pretty ridiculous examples for our students. I suggest that workplace safety is an important vehicle. To wander for one minute, Mr.

Minister, the school bus safety that the divisions comply with, the motor vehicle safety regulations and the safety certificate that goes with trucks that are the main frames that these school buses are put on, provide for a certain amount of wear on brake drums. In the educational system, that amount of wear is not accepted to the point where we have drums being taken off of school buses, thrown in the scrap heap, picked up and put on heavy trucks and used again for another 40,000, 50,000 to 80,000 miles. Yet we in the school division go to the extent that we provide that extra leverage of safety.

You can justify almost anything in the name of safety but let's use reason, and this is what I want to appeal to the department in this area, also, that you may be getting into an area of overkill. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, I've said before that we will cert ainly look very carefully at the recommendations coming forth in preparing the final draft of that regulation. As I said before, we're not at that stage yet where the mandatory committees are there. Now, the regulation governing that process is not yet in place, or hasn't been finally revised yet. We are out there with that regulation for consultation.

They were told they have until September 15 to respond to it. So, therefore, I haven't finished receiving their comments at this point in time, but I did meet with them to listen and hear about their concerns. We will look, certainly, at making it as reasonable as possible. Having said that, I say it does apply to them. There will be committees in the school system; whether there has to be a central committee that goes to each school, I don't think that that is mandatory. There are other methods that can be employed to do that.

Maybe a subcommittee could be struck at the school level and then nobody has to travel from one school to the other to do these things. So, sure, we'll look at it very carefully. MR. G. CUMMINGS: I appreciate that. MR. A. KOVNATS: Does the Honourable Minister have the figures that we requested? HON. G. LECUVER: The actual expended for 19 84- 85 in Workplace Safety and Health is $2,886, 10 0.00. I can giv e you the number for 19 83-84 if you wish as well. That was $2,858,200.00. MR. A. KOVNATS: That's not the figure that's here, Mr. Minister. HON. G.

LECUVER: Is the member referring to the special payment to the board of $4 million in that year, the one-time payment? MR. A. KOVNATS: No, I'm talking about- it's Appendix B on Page 60 of the Department of Environment and Workplace Safety and Health, Fiscal Year 19 82-83 versus Fiscal Year 19 83-84, Actual Exp enditur e Comparison. Could the Minister confirm that the 19 83-84 actual expenditure was $2,340,300.00? HON. G. LECUVER: Can the member refer to the page number again? 2015

Monday, 21 July, 1986 MR. A. KOVNATS: Page 60. That's in the Annual Report. We don't have this year's .. . HON. G. LECUYER: I'm told that's because that figure did not include the transfer of the Mines Inspection Branch which was transferred as of April 1, 19 84. MR. A. KOVNATS: That's fine. MR. CHAIRMAN: 5.(a)(1) - the Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Just one brief question to the Minister again, Mr. Chairman, in the area of small businesses.

I'm thinking specifically of small garages where the number of employees are large enough however to require committees to function in the manner that we were talking about a minute ago. I would appeal to the department to consider the idea that some areas are a great deal more hazardous than others. In talking to some of my constituents who are involved in auto garages, for example, they feel that they are being governed at the same level as if they were running a much more hazardous or much more dangerous work place.

In fact, they have reached the point where their regular meetings become a situation where they'd have to generate something to prove that they had a meeting. Is there any possibility that they might be given some consideration in this area? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, these meetings can be fairly expeditious if the whole operation is running well, it's a well-looked after operation and these meetings are not time-consuming. I have to remind the member that he might be surprised how many accidents occur in garages - four fatal accidents in this last year.

So it is a workplace which presents quite a variety of hazards; from that standpoint, perhaps much more than many, many other workplaces with that number of workers. So it is a place that can be considered a place of fairly high risk. lt is only proper that they should sit down and look at what are these factors that cause these accidents; what are the factors that can pose threats to their health, and redress these measures. Once these have been done, they're not going to be consuming great amounts of time dealing with issues that pose problems, because they'll have addressed them.

There's no requirement that they spend a specific amount of time resolving issues that are not there. it's a joint approach to try and solve the problems, so that all those involved will participate in reducing the risks to their health.

We've got a situation now where it's tremendously costly to industry in a variety of ways; it's tremendously costly to the whole economy, the situation which presently exis ts, not only here in Manitoba but everywhere else in Canada, and large operations have been able to change their operations so significantly to break down levels of time loss by 50, 75 and 80 percent. lt can be done and the benefits are there for everyone around. For everybody involved, there's a benefit to gain in this process.

So it's not a question of just looking at the time aspect that it takes, but let's look also at the benefits for everybody involved. MR. CHAIRMAN: 5.(a)(1)-pass; 5.(a)(2)- pass. We now go to S.(

b) Worker Advisor Office - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Mr. Chairman, this seems to be the "court of last resorts," where it provides assistance to workers whose claims have been rejected by the Workers Compensation Board. I think by that time, you're kind of whistling into the wind. There's another expression "into the wind," - it's not whistling - but you get the same results and it blows back at you. Once the Workers Compensation Board have rejected a claim, I would imagine there's not too much that can be done because the Honourable Minister can't get involved with it.

The critic for the Opposition has tried in the past and these are the rules that are in effect and we have so many people that are going unsatisfied because the Workers Compensation Board, in their own wisdom and with the facts and figures that are presented in front of them, have rejected workers compensation claims. Now, these worker advisors are br-:>ught in, after everybody says no, and given the resporsibility of trying to get these people who have been rejected onto workers compensation or try to look after them to some degree. 1t says here that they have closed 2,478 claim and files.

How many of those claims and files have been successful, or do they just take them and close them and put them away and go through the motions? HON. G. LECUYER: First of all, let me say, Mr. Chairman, that this is not a group that necessarily deals with after everybody else has said no. it's there primarily to assist injured workers to take their cases to these levels, whether it's to the review committee or to the appeals level. So it's to assist with the presentation of their case at these various levels, not after they've said no, but before.

If a claim has gone through adjudication and has been rejected, then the next step is for that claim to go to the review committee and the claimant may require some assistance in preparing his case to present it to the review committee; or if it has been rejected at the review committee level, may require assistance to take it to the appeal level and that's where the worker advisor comes in. As far as the specifics of that question, I can't say to the member how many of these claims have been successful. I don't have any figures in that regard.

The member has figures in terms of the number of files they handle in the course of the year, but I don't have figur es in terms of how many were successful and to what degree they were successful. In some cases they get a partial claim recognized, but maybe not the total claim, so there are certainly some cases where they're not successful at all and some cases they are partially successful; perhaps in certain cases totally successful, but I don't have figur es for that. MR. A.

KOVNATS: I would have hop ed that th e Honourable Mi nister wou ld have figur es on this particular aspect of it, inasmuch as if there's been no successes, then I would say eliminate the worker advisors, that is sugges ted they're not doing the job. I've got to correct the Minister, inasmuch as when I 2016

Monday, 21 July, 1986 read it, it was from a release from the Minister's Office, where it says, "P rovides assistance to workers whose claims have been rejected by the Workers Compensation Board." it's straightforward. it's exactly what I just read from the Minister's Office. Previous to that, there's something else that says where they're involved in other things but I wasn't making up when I say this is a "court of last resort," where the Workers Com pensation have obviously rejected just what I read.

Earl ier, as a matter of fact, it's the same statement on both ends of the paper and on Page 43 of that supple mental, it starts off the same way. lt says, "P rovide assistance to any claimant whose claim has been rejected by the Workers Compensation Board or who may have difficulty establishing a claim." That's the original. If you look at the bottom par t where it says, "O perations," it says, "P rovides assistance to workers claim who has been rejected by th e Workers Compensation Board" - straightforward.

A claim has been rejected by the Workers Compensation Board, unless there's a typographical error, which I know the Honour able First Mini ster us es as an excuse on occasions, but I don't think this is a typographical error. lt think it's intended to say that this is a "court of last resort." Can the Honourable Minister not agree? HON. G. LECUYER: See, that's the wording I tried to correct, the "court of last resort," because they're not the court at all. They don't make any of the adjudication. They are there as a facilitator; they are an advocate of the claimant in a sense.

They will assist and prepare, assist the advisor in presenting his case, not in that it's the last resort, and that's why I explained that there are various levels where they may be called upon to assist not only after the case has been done at the appeals level. If the worker has had his last resort, then they really can't intervene unless they are asking for a review of that appeal process with new medical evidence that they may have. Once the claimant has been dealt with at the appeals level, that ends it. I mean that's the court of last resort.

The commissioners of the board that look at the case after initial adjudication, after the committee review, and at that committee review the worker advisor may assist the worker, the claimant, in presenting his case. Again, if it's rejected there and it goes or he requests an appeal, then he may seek the assistance of the worker advisor to present his case at the appeal level. So it's not after the process; it's to prepare for to present it at that process. MR. A.

KOVNATS: I knew the answer except when I read it here, and any lay person reading it would not be able to understand it as well as I; at least I wouldn't think so. But from what I see here, I'm just trying to follow where it says "provides assistance to workers whose claims have been rejected by the Workers Compensation Board." I know that there are other kinds of appeals, and maybe I shouldn't have used the ·. . . HON. G. LECUYER: Maybe that's not good wording. MR. A. KOVNATS: Yes, maybe my wording wasn't correct, but I don't want to get into any great hassle on that.

Worker advisor office was established in 1982 as the Minister had originally suggested, and I believe that his figure is correct. I think he had mentioned that it was in 1986, which couldn't be September '86, because it hasn't come about yet. And it says: ". . . continues to provide much needed assistance to claimants having difficulty in resolving their claims with the Workers Compensation Board." In a lot of cases, there are some difficulties and it's a needed position. I'm not saying that the position isn't needed because it is needed.

But the Minister has suggested that there were four positions - let me just find it here. Under this program, four advisor trainees are undergoing extensive training and application of Workers Compensation Board and worker advisor procedures. There are four trainees. Was this the original amount of trainees, or are these four to replace any trainees that are no longer working as worker advisors? HON. G. LECUYER: There were seven originally in the first phase of that program and there are now only four. MR. A. KOVNATS: There are only four now from an original seven, so we . . . HON. G.

LECUYER: No, that's a different group. The first four underwent this training for a year and that training program is comp leted. This group of four that I'm talking about is a new group of trainees. MR. A. KOVNATS: How many worker advisors, starting today, from before are now working as worker advisors? HON. G. LECUYER: After completing, I gather the appropriate . . . MR. A. KOVNATS: How many worker advisors are there right today? HON. G. LECUYER: There are six worker advisors, and of those I believe - at least one that I'm aware of, perhaps more - two - are people who were hired as worker advisors.

As the member can well understand, over a period of time, it is a stressful job and, as any other job, people can look elsewhere to seek employment. Some have left in the worker advisors' office and have had to be replaced and we were able to hire two of those who had undergone the training. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm a little confused. it seems to me that these worker advisors were unio n representatives who were on loan from the union to Workers Com pensation Board for a period of approximately one year, if I remember correctly, and were to be returned to their union after their terms were finished.

Now it seems that we're taking them from the union as worker advisors and we're looking at steady positions. I don't think that was the original idea with these worker advisors. Am I incorrect in my thinking? HON. G. LECUYER: Let me just correct one of the - I think maybe the member made a slip when he said 2017

Monday, 21 July, 1986 that. They weren't hired by the Compensation Board because this is a program that doesn't come under the Compensation Board . MR. A. KOVNATS: It comes under the Manitoba Jobs Fund , I'm sorry, but . .. HON. G. LECUYER: It's an integral part of the department. The training program was financed through the Jobs Fund . But , yes, indeed, the intent was to have these trainees go back to the workplace and provide assistance , especially in these larger workp laces , to the workers and thos e workplaces.

But when we seek to fill in a vacancy that has occurred, and we advertise through the Civil Service for filling a vacancy on the Worker Advi sors' Bureau , then you will find that some of those who applied might be among the trainees . Because they already had one year of training , they are in a position where they are suited to fill a posit ion and can become useful empl oyees much sooner than if we were to take someone who had never had any experience in that area and had to train him from zero.

So having had one year's training , if they were successful candidates to fill a position, as was the case in two instances, they become useful employees very quickly because of the training they had previously . But that was not the intent in providing the program . The member is correct in saying that. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm disturbed again because now that we're hiring these people in some cases on a permanent basis, they are given preferential hiring treatment because of their experience which they got becau se they were union representatives in the first place.

Theref ore, it is preferential treatment in hiring union representatives to do this type of job . Are these jobs , when they come open as worker advisors to work for the Workers Compensation, do they come under . . . HON . G. LECUYER: Not for the Workers Compensation . MR. A. KOVNATS: Well, as worker advisors . But when these jobs come open, are they advertised as open jobs ? Is special consideration given to these union rep resentatives because of their experience which they got because they were union represenatives? HON. G. LECUYER: It has nothing to do because they were union representatives.

It simply has to do and , in some cases, I don't know that they were union representatives per se. They were chosen by their various unions to be on this training prog ram , not necessarily because they were union reps, but it's like any other job, Mr. Chairman. Yes, indeed, it is advertised, but when you try to fill a vacancy , you try to fill it with the individual you think is most suited to the job and if he has qualifications that another individual doesn't have, yes , it might serve that individual in good stead . MR. A.

KOVNATS: Let's get back to when you choose a person to do a job because they're the most qualified - or you think they 're the most qu alif ied - let's get back to the mines inspector before where you don 't choose the most qualified , you choose a union representative . MR. CHAIRMAN : There 's a dispute on facts here. Perhaps you maybe will agree to disag ree on that. MR. A. KOVNATS: Yes, we agree to disagree . I'm disturbed also that the Minister can't give me any kind of results on when these peopl e are rep resented by the worker advisor to give them some assistance. We should have some results of their work.

I don 't know where you would get it, but I thin k if I was the Minister I would have those types of figures to relate if anybody asked me, because it's his department and I think these figures should be at his fingertips . HON. G. LECUYER: The purpose of the advisor, of course , is to assist the claimant in making his case and having a voice and having the most effective voice possible to be able to present his case in the most efficient manner possible .

But , having said that, I think I will say to the Member for Niakwa I'll take his advice as a good suggestion and see if we can have that type of statistics for next year. MR. A. KOVNATS: That's fair enough. I don 't want to leave on the record that I'm unhappy to the point of getting rid of the worker advisors because I've had some contact with them and I found them to be most cooperative and , in most cases, well qualified . I'm not speaking of that. I just don't like them being given preferential treatment in being hired and that's the only disturbing point.

Again , I do support the program and I would hope that there would be a little bit more openness somewhere in the future in seeing that these people are hired because they 've got a very, very importan t job, inasmuch as they do help prepare submissions for the review committee, the medical review panels and the board of commissioners . They do assist in that regard, but for the amount of cases that they have to be involved with , Mr. Chairman , I just don't see how that few a number could possibly do the job in a proficient manner .

I'm not saying, hire helter-sk elter, beca use all you 're going to be doing at this point is hiri ng more union representatives and, again , I think this is very unfair. I think that there should be more consideration given so that the people who are applying to the Workers Compensation have every opportuni ty of presenting themselves in the most proficien t manner for themselves, because a lot of them, some of them don't know how to answer boa rds, how to appear in front of panels and these worker advisors can be of tremendous help to them .

I wouldn't want to see one person making a claim be rejected of a claim because they didn't have the proper manner in presenting their cla ims. I would think that's probably somewhat the case, alth ough I do know of some people who have been rej ected, who in my opinion should have been given a little bit more consideration, possibly because of language barrier. I've been told that there's no language barrier , that they can be supplied with people who can speak their 2018

Monday, 21 July, 1986 language and giv e them advice, but it's an awful thing when you have to rely on somebody else to express the way you feel and to have questions come back and translated for you. There's something that's lost in the translation. I think it's a hackneyed phrase, but there's something lost in the translation, and some of these people are at a disadvantage.

I know that the Mi nister and this department provides translation services, but there's got to be some better way of helping these people, particularly when they're coming off of a traumatic experience where they've been injured in the workplace and they're looking for assistance. I think that's there's got to be some dealings from the heart, rather than straight black and white figur es. I was reading where the MFL has made recommendations that workers be given absolute benefit of any doubt.

Well, I don't think that's the case and I don't agree that much with the Mani toba Federation of Labour but, in this case, I think they're dealing from the heart. it's not just on a political basis. I think that we all must deal from the heart a little bit more than what we have been and some of the claims that have been rejected should be reviewed and some of these people just need the consideration that they deserve. We had one fellow up at Flin Flon and every year we'd come up with the same ones. I've got the names and I giv e them to the Minister and our hands are tied.

There's got to be some way of helping these people. I would hope that this review committee that the Minister has working right now is going to come up with some idea where these people who have been rejected get some consideration. We have people who are 64 years of age, 65 years of age. We have people who have spent time in hospital and things of that nature. I think we should get back to this worker advisors; there's a place for the work advisor and again I suggest that the worker advisors are an acceptable group, but I think we have to have another look at how they're chosen. HON. G.

LECUYER: Just very briefly, I appreciate the fact that the member sup ports the work that is done through the Worker Advisors Office. Certainly it is my concern as well that every worker who is injured at least get the fair and equitable treatment that his case deserves and we, through the Worker Advisors Office, do everything we can to assist every worker or every claimant who needs assistance, whatever language that may be. it's not possible, of course, to have advisors to speak every language that could potentially be required, so we do the best we can in that regard. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 5.(b)(1)-pass; 5.(b)(2)- pass. Resolution No. 66: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,44 3,10 0 for Environment and Workplace Safety and Health, Workplace and Worker Services, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1987- pass. We'll deal with Workers Compensation Board now, before we get into the Minister's Salary. The Minister wishes to make an introductory remark. HON. G. LECUYER: I had prepared some remarks.

I'm going to try to perhaps shorten these as I present them, but I do want to put a few remarks on the record. 2019 The compensation system, through legislation, is intended to provide financial benefits and services to workers who are injured in one way or another at work, and at the same time giv es protection to the employer from civil action. This is important because it's an historic trade-off which occurred several decades ago and is still the underlying theme of Workers Compensation legislation.

In essence, it is a no-fault insurance scheme and, therefore, by its very nature, one that will always be at the centre of two divergent viewpoints. lt is recognized that the ongoing review of the Manitoba compensation system was relatively neglected until the very late Seventies. Various reports to the government, which include the Lampe, Cooper, Cereco, and the

Section 100 Rehabilitation Advisory Committee Reports, provided strong indications of the areas wherein the Manitoba compensation was deficient. Our government acknowledged these deficiencies and has mandated the Workers Compensation Board to implement most of the recommendations contained in these reports.

Some of the recommendations requiring a change in legislation have been put on hold pending the report of the External Legislative Review Committee whose work is currently under way. lt should be noted that The Workers' Compensation Act has not been reviewed since 1957 and for decades has been revised through legislation admendments on a piecemeal basis. Mr. Chairman, I would like to go back for a moment to the effect and costs associated with th e recommendations that the board was mandated to implement.

I'm sure my colleagues appreciate and accept the fact that improvements to any system cannot occur without directly proportionate costs. Although it would probably be desirable to ph ase in improvements to the system, this was not possible due to the lengthy neglect that had occurred. In late 19 82, it was abundantly obvious that the major improvements had to occur, at the very least, within a three-to-four year period.

The major improvements are in the area of increased communications and accessibility to both the workers and employers, provision of rehabilitation benefits and services, impr ovements to the medical review panel system, improved medical monitoring of the care that injur ed workers receive, improved computer and financial services, proportionate increased staffing, among many others. The cost of these improvements are reflected in the rise of the administrative costs over the last four years.

This is not to say that the system is currently functioning perfectly. lt is acknowledged that once changes to the system are implemented, an ongoing evaluation and review of the system should occur to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of the system. I'm pleased to note that concurrent with the external review process of the Legislative Review Committee, the board is conducting, on a continuing basis, its own internal review of its policies and procedures. There has been a lot of criticism levied at the government and at the board for increases in administrative costs.

We ackno wledge th at adminis trative costs have increased; however, the bottom line, Mr. Chairman, is that we cannot create something out of nothing, and that impr ovements have a price tag.

Monday, 21 July, 1986 The government and the board have also been severely criticized for non-compliance with

Section 66(1) of The Workers' Compensation Act, a

section which stipulates that the accident fund must be maintained in a fully funded position. lt should be obvious that we are very much concerned about this matter and have endeavoured to find a reasonable way to deal with this difficult problem. We believe that ideally the compensation system should be fully funded at all times as required by the act. However, through our consultation process, we have heard from industry and business sectors that they would prefer gradual increases over the next few years to that of one sudden increase in rates.

Government had to make the difficult decision to allow a temporary aberration of unfunded liability only because of our concerns and sensitivity for the financial prospects of our industrial and business communities and the negative effect that a large increase could have on job creation. As we said last year, we believe that the continuation of reasonable, yet responsible, assessment rate increases will gradually allow the board to achieve a fully funded position. Mr.

Chairman, the government considers that the 20 percent average increase in the 1986 assessment rates strikes a reasonable balance between over-burdening employers and letting the deficit grow too large. The approach taken by government in this matter appears to be one among a number of factors which has helped the economic recovery taking place in our province. In fact, Mr. Chairman, there were 19,531 employers registered for workers compensation in 19 85, the hig hest number ever recorded. This represents an increase of 434 employers compared to 19 84.

Manitoba's business rate formation rate of 36. 1 per 1, 000 businesses compared to the national average of 30. 7; business bankru ptcies are at 8.0 per 1, 000 compared to the Canadian average of 8.4 per 1,0 00, accord ing to the information from the Federal Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, the Manitoba Bureau of Statistics and Statistics

Canada Business Register. The costs of insur ance, Mr. Chairman, have dramatically increased throughout North America. The Association of Workers Comp ensation Boards of Canada late last year received information from the U.S. Emplo yment Standards Administration which details incredible increases in workers compensation insurance rates in the Southern United States. I could cite examples such as in Louisiana where it went up 40 percent where the actual recommendation by the council actually indicated a need for a 95. 1 percent increase.

In Oklahoma, it went up 41. 9 percent; in Texas, it went up 48.7 percent, etc. In Canada, Mr. Chairman, many insurance companies now are unwilling to underwrite private liability coverage as the most recent court awards in many cases amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars. For instance, the city of Toronto was reported to have difficulty finding an insurance company to underwrite their coverage. In fact, some companies have received annual insurance increases exceeding 12 00 percent.

The president of the Manitoba Truckers' Association late last year indicated that insurance premiums for trucking firms rose by 100 percent to 300 percent, 2020 quoting directly from the newspaper

article in which Mr. Painchaud, the president, stated the same thing is happening right across Canada and North America. "it's a serious blow to the industry. To make matters worse," Mr. Painchaud said, "certain types of coverage are becoming more difficult to acquire because some insurance companies are pulling out." The private insurance crisis is the result of many factors, quite a few of which are common to the workers compensation system as well. lt is noteworthy, however, to consider com ments by leaders of the pr ivate insu rance industry.

Borden Voigt, (phon etic) the chairman of the Liability Committee of the Insurance Bureau of Canada, said on liabi lity coverage for pollu tion, "the possi bility exists that sudden and accidental coverage will be difficult to purchase in the future." I could cite other examples that I will skip over to save time. When we consider that approximately 71 percent of workers in Manitoba are covered by the Workers Compensation Board, and that 19,531 employers are also provided with protection by the system at the same time, an average assessmsent rate of $1. 36 per $10 0 of payroll is certainly a modest premium.

We must also remember that the compensation system is a non-profit system designed solely to service its kind, workers and emp loyers alike. In the compensation system, the benefits and services are provided at a fairly consistent level compared to court awards which could drastically vary from one award to the next. One only needs to look at the recent reported court awards to appreciate this difference. Mr. Chairman, there has also been much criticism about the rate increases usually only focusing on the percentage increase and not on the actual dollar figures.

When we look at the average rate for 1976 and see that the average rate then was $1. 10, and the average rate for 1986 is $1 .36, that seems amply reasonable. Mr. Chairman, I know all of us share a deep concern that the business and industry sectors in our province maintain whatever competitive edge is possible over busi ness and industry sectors in other provinces. Assessment rates could be an important factor in this regard.

Therefore, it is in all of our best interests, the govern ment, the board, industry, labour, and the community as a whole, to try and keep assessment rates as low as can reasonably be expected while providing fair and equitable treatment to injured workers and employers. Notwithstanding that, the compensation system is by far the the best vehicle for the provision of this service. Our government recognizes the necessity of a complete review of The Workers' Compensation Act and board policies and practices in this regard.

This is to ensure a sound check and balanc e on the system and appropriate revision of legislation to bring the Manitoba workers compensation system to today's standards. Having said these few words, Mr. Chairman, rather briefly, and having shortened my remarks, I am open for questions from the members. MR. CHAIRMAN: The time being 10:05 p.m., I assume you wish to continue until we complete this. Is that correct? MR. A. KOVNATS: Well, if we didn't stop at ten o'clock, Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that we carry on.

Monday, 21 July, 1986 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, agreed. The Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you. The Honourable Minister was very kind when we started on Thursday and, in his remarks, he thanked everybody except some of the working staff in the building here who weren't directly involved with him . But I would think that with the chairman of the Workers Compensation Board and one of the commissioners here, it would be incumbent on us to pay some special remarks . I would allow the Minister, if he wants to make any additional remarks, to carry on. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr.

Chairman, normally the staff is not present when I make opening remarks . I didn't say anything and you didn't say anyth ing, so staff came up to the front . It's only at this point in time that I would normally intervene and do wish indeed to express my thanks for the work that is being done by staff of the Workers Compensation Board and, at the sam e time, introduce staff who are present here at the table . I have Sonny Arrojado, who is chairperson of the board ; John Wiebe, who is the director of finance ; Carla Moore, who is a research analyst; and Ken Carrolls , liaison officer . MR. A. KOVNATS: Mr.

Chairman, are there any other members here, any other commissioners of the board? HON. G. LECUYER: The two othe r commiss ioners of the board are sitting in the audience, and I would ask perhaps that they stand up: Don Bullitt,? commissione r; Al Fleury, also a commissioner . MR. A. KOVNATS: Is the heavy one in the front . HON. G. LECUYER: They both looked at one anothe r. MR. A. KOVNATS: Now that all the nice things are finished, let's get down to it. A year ago, and the Minister made some mention of it, we were talking about the Class Fund .

The Provincial Auditor states in his report : "As indicated in our last year's report , this deficit financing is not in compliance with

Section 66(1) of The Workers ' Compensation Act which states that the board shall every year assess a levy upon and collect from the employers in each class ... sufficient funds .. . (

a) to meet all amounts payable from the accident fund under this Part during the year including administration costs ... (

c) to provide in each year capitalized reserves suff icient to meet the periodical payments of compensation accruing in future years in respect of all accidents that occur during the year ... '". The Workers Compensation Board, the Class Fund has deteriorated to the point that it' s causing some great concern

whereas the Minister is operating under an illegal operation. I know that he's trying to correct the operation - but lo and behold! - I told the Min ister that I didn't want to hear any more of we 're monitoring ; we're reviewing; we're evaluating; when we're talking about The Workers ' Compensation Act, I've got a new term : "It's on hold." 2021 I don 't think that we can be on hold . We can't keep reviewing. I know that there is a review committee , and I would hope that they would be giving a report pretty soon so that we can take action. It's been a couple of years now that we've been sitting on it.

That require s some action . When will the review commission on The Work ers' Compensation Act be making a repo rt so that we can keep the Minister out of jail from this illegal act? HON. G.

LECUYER: Although the Compensation Board is in an unfunded liability situation which doesn 't please me any more than it pleases the other member but, as I indicated, the premium rates charged for a number of years and the implementation of the recommendations of four different reports , which I think I outlined last year, and I can again this year indicate what has been implemented and the costs associated with the implementation of these changes in the operation, have necessitated addition al staff . We have put in the on-line computer system in the board . All these have a price tag associated with them.

Having said that , the member will notice that the rate of growth of the unfunded liability has been arrested and has been reduced this year as compared to last year.

So, if I judge by that, we're going in the right direction in that we said that by increasing the rates at a reasonable level, because that was in the interests and the route that was favoured by all in spite of the fact that the provision of the act stated that the board was to assess rate increas es at the level which was projected to pay for all costs of the operation in one year, which wou ld have necessitated rate increases higher than what we imposed; in other words , there was government interve ntion to prevent the rates from going up at that level beca use various business sectors were in agreement with that proposal as well .

We hope that with ongo ing reasonable rate increases, and as a review in process - we got legal opi nions in that regard - and because there is a measure now being undertaken to revise legislation , that was sufficient as a clear step. Although the Auditor does comment to the fact that we haven 't rais ed the rates to erase the deficit, at least he notes the fact that measure has been undertaken . MR. A. KOVNATS: How can the Minister make such a statement, that a measure to revise the legislation has been unde rtaken?

There's a review committee , but we don 't have any idea as to what the recommendations of that review committee are going to be. How can he, in all honesty and sincerity , say that there's a measur e to revise legislation? Was that the inten t when this review committee was brought into being , that they were told to revise legislation, or were they just told to bring in recommendations that they thought were appropriate? I would hope that they weren't given any specific instructions from the Minister when he appointed them to do their job . HON. G.

LECUYER : The committee 's mandate was to indeed review the entire legislat ion, the proc edures and the policies of the board , and make recommendations which are intended to be considered for a review of the legislation, exactly that.

Monday, 21 July, 1986 While I remember - I did not answer that part of the question the member asked a moment ago - the mandate of the committee is an 18-month mandate, which means that towards the end of this calendar year we should be having a report from the Legislative Review Committee. it's a lengthy and arduous process, and I remind the member that the mandate of the commission that reviewed the legislation in Ontario was one of three years. We've given the review committee 18 months to perform their task. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm not going to fight the Minister on that, the amount of time.

I think that we were late in getting started. There were the indications that the Class Fund was going to be in a deficit position going back a few years now. The Minister can't use that as an excuse that Ontario was three years and ours is only a year-and-a-half. But the Honourable Minister had made a remark about how the courts decided that they weren't going to proceed with any action because there was a committee revising the legislation. At least, that's what I wrote. The Mi nister changed his word now to "reviewing" the legislation.

Is it reviewing or revising the legislation that the committee was given instructions to do? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, a review leads to revision, and the government is the only one in power to do the actual revision, but these are made on the basis of recommendations of the committee that makes the review. So there is no misuse of words there, the words are the correct ones, and they were not used accidentally. I did not refer to Ontario as taking three years as an excuse, Mr. Chairman, just as an indication that this is indeed a difficult task, and that's the context in which I gave that explanation. MR.

A. KOVNATS: We're not going to get into any arguments at this point - we've been very, very friendly up until now- but review certainly doesn't mean revise. Review means to have a look at it over again; revise means to change it. Let's not get down to the semantics of these words. it's not worth it at this point. I can't accept what the Minister has said.

"We are conc erned that the failu re to charge adequate assessment rates will result in an unfair burden being placed on future employers." Now, " ... an unfair burden on future employers," has the Minister consider ed special allowances to the workers compensation, other than coming from the workplace, to bring the Class Fund up to par? HON. G. LECUYER: We did at one time, as the member knows, make a contribution to the compensation system of $4 million out of general review. We stated that was a one-time only. We are not currently considering making any contribution towards the system.

We stated that with the improving economy, the growth in the number of employers and the workers, the additional revenue that that brings in, we will be able to keep the rate increases at a reasonable level and get back to a fully funded system. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm sure that the Minister's staff at the Workers Compensation is trustworthy. I believe that; I truly do. But we did have some problems in another Crown corporati on, in Mani toba Public Insu rance Corpo ration where there were some problems, and the chairman was replaced because of some practices that were not accepted by auditors or by law.

Some of the privileges that go with being a member of the Workers Compensation Board or staff, has the Minister had any reason to believe that there are some problems at the Workers Compensation Board similar to what might have been at the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation? HON. G. LECUYER: In an operation like the workers compensation system, there is no way that one can say there are no problems. There are always improvements to be brought to the system, and I cannot deny that is an ongoing process that we have to be on the lookout for. Hopefully, we can overcome the problems as they occur.

I'm not aware of problems such as the member is referring to. MR. A. KOVNATS: Has the Minister initiated any investigation through the workers compensation to see that these peop le, in fact , would prove to be trustworthy? Wouldn't that be wonderful, to be able to go to your staff and say thank you very much for doing the job that you were hired to do? I would hope that would be the result. Has the Minister initiated any investigation into the actual working similar to what happened at MPIC? HON. G. LECUYER: I am told, Mr.

Chairman, that there are currently conflic t-of-interest guidelines within the board and at the staff level. The board has requested an internal investigation involving one particular case. They've requested that from the Provincial Auditor. MR. A. KOVNATS: I don't need any names at this time, Mr. Chairman. I'm just looking to see that they're doing the job that they're capable of doing. Obvious ly, if there is some investigation going on at this time - I would hope that there wouldn't be - but if there is, that's all to the board's credit, so enough said at this point.

We've got some problems with some of the claimants who have been rejected. Some of them have been over years, many, many years. I've got one, and I can't mention names. lt seems to me that we agreed not to mention names at one time, and I'm not going to. But the Minister is most cooperative. He said that if I got any particular persons who require some help, please let him know and giv e him all the details, and he would be happy to look into the matter. Then I get from the Minister that I am limited in what I can do. I am the Minister in charge of Workers Compensation, but I can't put my nose in.

You know, we've sat there and we've discussed particular cases, but he can't do anything to help them. I was wondering whether the Minister could change it so that there could be some way that we in government, we as elected representatives, could be of some assistance to these people who have no other recourse, who have been 2022

Monday, 21 July, 1986 completely rejected now, and maybe rightly so. But there's got to be some way - and I wouldn't want it to go through the . . . HON. G. LECUYER: Don't mention any names. MR. A. KOVNATS: Oka y, maybe I won't. There's got to be some way we, as political persons, can get somewhat involved and have some influence, I say, because I think that as political people, we've got to have that right. When I say some influence, I'm not saying that you direct the Workers Compensation to follow your ruling. What I'm saying is that you can put pressure on them to at least review maybe once more.

You might come up with the same answer, but there's got to be some way that we as the political animals are able to get them to maybe give us one more kick at the cat. I think that - (Interjection) - Well, we're talking about kick at the cat. We're talking about people who just can't understand why they can't receive compensation after they've been injured in the workplace, and these are the people that we've got to giv e some special feeling for and some special arrangements; they just don't understand and it's causing them great concern.

I guess I'm a very compassionate person and sometimes I would see that they would get workers compensation even if they didn't quite deserve it in the manner in which they think they did. I'm compassionate enough that I would think they requir e some special con siderati on. Would the Honourable Minister give them the consideration that I think they deserve. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr.

Chairman, I as the Minister would like to make sure that every injured worker gets a fair and equitable treatment and that the provisions of the legislation are applied and interpreted as intended to ins ure th at each memb er that qual ifies for compensation gets it. But, having said that, the member would be the first one, I think, to agree that to have a system which is open to the whims and fancies of all sorts of political interventions would not make for consistent and fair and equitable treatment.

Therefore, the legislation has been set up in that way that the board - there is a process which has been refined since 19 82 whereby in 19 83, I believe, the three levels of adjudication - the claimants officers and the senior claims officers, the review committee, and, if necessary, a medical panel, and to the final level, which is at the appeal level, are to deal with each one of these cases and adjudicate them with their experience using the legislation as their guide, implementing policies which will help to make for a greater degree of consistency of application and guidelines to achieve that same end.

The board has been doing that in recent years and a number of policies have been implemented to assist in that process and to insure that there is a consistency of adjudication, rather than to go piecemeal and be subj ected to the whims or fancies of each one presenting his case in whatever light or with whatever pressure they can garner. As far as assistance, I've mentioned before, there are worker advisors to assist in facilitating that process, but I think that the member would not want the system to be subjected to the pressures of whatever individual intervenes on behalf of a claimant.

I think that would not make for a just system, it would not make for equitable or consistency of application of the legislation. Having said that, when one asks me what I can do, I indicate what the restrictions under law are and apply to me, and I can get a status of the actual file and, should I be informed that the board has contravened or not implemented the legislation properly, or if they have put in place procedures, then sure I would certainly see it as my responsibility to point that out that there's an inconsistency or that is not in keeping with the legislation.

Having said that, I don't think the member would in my position intervene to try and see that any specific or favourable treatment be given to one individual versus another. I know that's not what he would do. MR. A. KOVNATS: As the critic of Environment, Workplace Safety and Health which takes in the place, the Workers Compensation Board. I'm just trying to think of my position, I get dozens and dozens of requests. I get the signed forms so that I can get the medical review and all of that, but there's got to be some better way of giving these people that last chance at being accepted by Workers Compensation.

I think the Honourable Minister would be reminded of a particular case that we sat in his office and discussed, because when I've got a problem I go to the Minister and he has been cooperative to the point where we have been able to sit in his office and discuss it. We agreed that this man was deserving. In fact, there were things that didn't come out into the open that we were aware of that would have almost ensured that this man be given some special consideration, and there just was no way that we could get him back into that special consideration.

I don't have the right to phone the chairman of the Workers Compensation and say, would you have another look at it. That's not the terms of the chairperson's contract. There's just got to be some better way of helping these people, and I'm at a loss trying to think of which it would be without putting myself in a position of trying to put additional pressure on the people on the board because I don't have that right. The Minister goes through the same thing. We go through anguish. Why isn't there something we can do on a political basis to help these people?

We are elected on a political basis, why can't we use that elected position that we were elected to to be of some assistance? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, I really can't provide much additional to what I said awhile ago. I know what the member is saying is that when a claimant comes or addresses his concerns or complaints or describes his case to him, or to myself, or to other members of the Legislature, we sympathize with his situation; we'd like to see it corrected. On the other hand, we're not the adjudicators and we haven't got the information of the full file.

What the member should know is the percentage of rejection of claims is very low and generally I would hope, and always I would hope. I know that human beings are the adjudicators and there is quite an involved process. As I say, it can go through 2023

Monday, 21 July, 1986 a variety of levels before it gets there. They seek medical opinions, the board has medical specialists. There's the Occupational Health Centre that also can examine patients or claimants and make its recommendation. I would hope that, knowing that we can be always wrong when we're talking about human beings adjudicating and making decisions involving another individual's concern and trying to assess the validity of his claim, but hopefully we're almost always right.

Now having said that, the member knows as well as I do that if you are the claimant and you consider your situation to be such that it is worthy of recognition or of compensation, of course, you would like to see your case being recognized and compensated, independently of the fact that you're not perhaps the best to make an objective decision when it involv es your own situation.

I certainly expect that there are instances where people perhaps have not had their claim as fully recognized, in certain cases, or have had it recognized perhaps a little bit too generously in other cases, but I think with the expertise there, and the staff involvement on these claims that, as I said before, by far an overwhelmingly high percentage of cases - and I would hope that it's in the 99 percent-plus - where the claimants are treated as they deserve to be treated. And I suspect that to be the case. MR. A.

KOVNATS: I was just reading in the paper the other day concerning a chiropractor - I guess it was the President of the Chiropractic Association - making statements about how they weren't considered in the same light as medical doctors. I wonder, can the Minister advise why chiropractors are not regularly included on medical review panels. Is it because their opinions - I said regularly now - are not considered on the same par as medical doctors? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, the Compensation Board of Manitoba does provide for chir opractic treatment under

Section 24(19) of the act. Some other compensation boards do not. The Compensation Board of Manitoba recognizes chiropractic treatment, and also has two chir opractic consulta nts on staff for consultation in matters involving chiropractic treatment. So chiropractic opinion is taken into account when evaluating a claim. Chiropractors are also invited, I believe, in certain cases to present their views to the Medical Review Panel as well. So they are perhaps not recognized to the extent that they would like.

The only thing I can say in that regard is there is a review going on, and they will make their case there, as other members of interested parties in Manitoba. Those will be considered by the review committee, I'm sure, and recommendations will be made in that regard. MR. A. KOVNATS: Dr. Gil Bohemier, I remember the name well. Why was Dr. Gill Bohemier complaining? Is he crying wolf in anticipation that his request will be denied, or is he not treated on the same par as a medical doctor? That was the question. Is he not treated on the same par as a medical doctor? HON. G. LECUYER: That is correct.

They're not treated in the same respect as a medical specialist, by legislation. 2024 MR. A. KOVNATS: By legislation. Is the Honourable Minister thinking of changing that legislation? HON. G. LECUYER: The legislation, Mr. Chairman, is as I said under review by the committee. We will, when the report comes to us, consider making many revisions to the act, and we'll look at that at that time. MR. E. CONNERY: I'm quite concerned. I think the government knows that this is paid for by the employers so, no matter what you do, the employers are going to have to pay for it.

I'm concerned at this lack of concern over costs. I think, if we went through some of the financial costs, Administration going up 12 .4 percent. I find that this is just a totally irresponsible amount of money to be going up in Administration. How does the Minister justify 12 .4 percent increase in Administration? HON. G. LECUYER: As I said, Mr. Chairman, a while ago, to implement those recommendations, to bring the system up to par to the services provided by other compensation boards in Canada, we had to provide those services in Manitoba.

You know, until 19 83, there was practically no rehabilitation provided in Manitoba. In fact, I have figu res on that, and can giv e you an indication, for instance, of the staff who have been brought on to add the medical expertise, for instance, the medical coordination and medical monitoring to provide the rehabilitation that wasn't there before; to put in place the job-finding club and the re-employment officers. These cannot be implemented without additional costs. So these are additional costs to improve the system, to get the treatment to the injured worker, to get him back in a job as quickly as possible.

But in order to do that, you have to provide the services. Those represent additional costs. I fail to see how you can improve the system without having the costs associated with it. There is no getting around that. But inasmuch as we are successful in doing that, we'll also, in the end, hopefully have a better system and have reduced other costs. I want to also draw to the attention of the member that you can't compare this to anything else. You've got to compare with what's happening elsewhere. Manitoba just cannot lag behind and say, well we'll just disregard the services that are being provided elsewhere.

The average assessment rates, I mentioned awhile ago, have not in dollar amounts increased substantially. Very few things have increased so little as the compensation rates. Talk about any consumer goods or services, and just the inflation rate is way beyond the increase in assessment rates in Manitoba. When you look at what it was at in 1976 and you compare it to 10 years later and you go from $1.10 to $1. 36 per $10 0 of payroll, as average assessment rates, you know, that's not much of an increase. But having said that, we don't want to be completely out of line either, as I mentioned.

Nova Scotia's got the lowest rates. We've got Sask atchewan with an average assessment rate 1 cent per hundred less than Manitoba. So we're in third place, almost equal with Saskatchewan at a second-place level. MR. E. CONNERY: Is that what it is? Well, of course, to say that the rates haven't got up when you're operating ...

Monday, 21 July, 1986 HON. G. LECUYER: They've gone up, but not . . . MR. E. CONNERY: Well, not up, you know, to say there's such a very low increase, of course, is when you're operating illegally and not putting the increases according to the costs that you've incurred. Have you talked at all with the business people? They gave you a presentation, I do believe, the Manitoba Emp loyers Task Force. I'm sure they must have gi ven you that presentation where they are very concerned, and I'm sure in other provinces the employers are equally concerned. How much is workers compensation becoming a social benefit also?

How many people are now getting benefits for injuries that were not related to the job that were already in place before the person was employed and then is now working on compensation; back injuries, lung conditions, all these sorts of things, that now they're getting full compensation and it's being charged to the employers where maybe it's a social problem rather than a workers compensation problem. HON. G. LECUYER: By the same token, the other question that can be asked: How many claimants are the social systems carrying that should be carried by the compensation system? Where do you draw the line?

That's the difficult question because it can also be the other way around. Perhaps when the rates were too low, the rejection level rate was much higher and many of the claims that should have been paid through the compensation system were paid through the other social systems, welfare or Medicare, etc. Mr. Chairman, I don't take any pride in the fact that the assessment rates are among the lowest in the country at all. What I'm saying is that the compensation rates should be at the level to provide that the services which are intended for under the act and should be fair and just to the injured worker.

That's the way the system was introduced; that was the trade-off. The employer is freed from any liability suits being taken against him and I indicated what's been happening in that sphere of insurance across the country and across the continent, so th e member knows where the employers would be if that were the case. The system provides, through the col lective responsibility system, many benefits to employers and they know that; and these benefits - yes, they do pay for it, but they are also benefits that are deductible from the cost of operation.

There are also benefits that are generally charged back to the consumers. Who pays for those benefits very often and to what extent, I don't know, but the average consumer of Manitoba, generally speaking, pays for those benefits because they're charged back on these goods that are sold to the public of Manitoba and elsewhere; they're charged back. Some of the claimants themselves pay for a certain amount of these costs through their pur chase of goods and services that are produced through the employers. A MEMBER: Except on agriculture. HON. G. LECUYER: That may be a good example.

I have to say, on the other hand, the member states, except on agricultur e; Except agricultur e is one of the sectors that there are very few people who carry compensation because it's one of those sectors where compensation is available on a voluntary basis and therefore there's not too many people who pay assessment rates for compensation in the agricultural sector. We have said that the rates, obviously, to provide the services that should be provided should be more than they are now. But I've met, as the member has said, with the employer gro