Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Workers' Advocacy

One of the intended advantages of the workers' compensation system was to create a non-adversarial alternative to the courts that would be provide a less complicated and faster process for resolving claims. Unfortunately, many claims have nonetheless ended up before the courts. The WCB is well equipped to litigate these cases with staff lawyers and lawyers on retainer.

Claimants, however, are at a considerable disadvantage to the WCB. Injured and often without income, they must often rely on legal aid, which will not necessarily pay for counsel with expertise specific to workers' compensation issues. Claimants may also have difficulty accessing independent medical advice. This means that when the system does become adversarial, there is a tremendous imbalance of power and resources.

The committee heard suggestions that one way to correct this imbalance would be to set up a legal fund for injured workers or to expand the mandate of the workers' advisor to allow claimants to obtain legal representation and medical advice through that office.

Other witnesses spoke against this approach, which they are concerned could push more cases into the justice system, and instead favoured making the workers' compensation system work in the non-adversarial way originally intended. Among this group was Governance Council member Steve Peterson, who told us, "litigation is not what compensation systems is about. ...It is supposed to be worker reps and employer reps sitting down compassionately overviewing the file. ...I think that if we were able to go and be much more diligent in our principles and make sure the presumption favours the worker and those issues are addressed with that sort of focus, we would avoid a lot of this litigation. ... I think that it's something we can resolve in-house if we were more diligent in enforcing that presumption for the worker."

The committee cannot support such an idealistic approach. While sound policy applied by well-trained staff using best practices should resolve most cases, it must be accepted that mistakes, errors and challenges will occur. It must also be accepted that the average worker will need legal or other professional help to get answers. The recent Valic (NWT Supreme Court) and Rennie (Nunavut Court of Justice) cases are illustrative of the delays and procedural hurdles injured workers can encounter in trying to have their claims resolved.

Recommendation

The standing committee recommends the Minister direct the worker's advisor to draw up a proposal to provide for assistance to workers who need expert medical evidence, and/or legal assistance with judicial reviews, to move their case forward.

Now I will ask Mrs. Groenewegen to continue on with the report.