Good Morning Mr. Chair,
CEP Local 848 in Corunna represents about 200 members
employed in oil refining, oil movements (tank farm), specialized and general
maintenance, provision of steam and other plant utilities and laboratory
testing services. Occupational disease
is of great concern to our local, and we thank you for the opportunity to
comment on the Draft Report of the Chair of the Occupational Disease Advisory
Panel.
It is clear that the WSIB is failing to recognize some
Occupational Disease. CEP was of the
view that the ODAP process initiated by the Board could make some substantial
changes for the unacknowledged victims of occupational disease.
As recently as this weekend a 30 year worker at my
work site has called to let me know that his Repetitive Strain Injury claim,
previously accepted by the board, has now been denied. The worker has cancelled scheduled
surgery that may have relieved his
pain. He feels without the protection
of the board his job may be in jeopardy as his surgeon has insisted that he not
return to the same work he has today Sometimes workers are hurt and in
pain. They feel powerless in the face
of unintelligible decisions made about them.
The appeal process can be long and difficult and all the while the
worker and their family and the employer continue to suffer.
As a complex oil refinery our worksite is influenced
by many factors. Hydrocarbons,
chemicals and combinations of each, under heat and pressure, creating a
cocktail of unknown results, are commonplace in our worksite.
Petroleum Products
Treatment Chemicals
Radioactivity
Solvents and soaps used in equipment maintenance
Metals, including vanadium and other heavy metals
Temperature
Silica and Asbestos
Noise and Vibration
Mercaptans
Carbon monoxyde Carbon Dioxyde Sulfure Dioxyde
Hydrogène Sulfide
Ammonia
Pyrophorics
Smoke
Dust
Repetitive Strain Injury
Organic Land Farming
These are but a few of the hazards that we as workers
are subject to in our workplace.
At our worksite I feel that sometimes CEP Local 848 has
been virtually alone in trying to inform workers of their rights and
obligations under the Act. Often we
have had to encourage workers to report an injury to the health centre and then
we send them back to insist that the employer complete a form 7 for the
board. I know that these are basic
expectations under the act but it still happens where opinions differ or a
short explanation form the company nurse conveys to the worker that a formal
report just isn't necessary. When events are handled properly by the worker and
the health centre in our workplace, other hurdles often occur. For instance,
when medical evidence is required and a worker asks for a copy of their medical
file, from our health centre, that file is first sent to the head office in
Alberta for a review and only then is it given to the worker. This causes questions and distrust between
the health centre nurse and the worker.
Also when doctors and specialists reports are part of a medical file
they cannot, under the rules of our employer be given to the worker without
first securing individual permission of the physicians involved. This can make the gathering of medical
evidence a cumbersome and time consuming exercise.
When the worker has to deal with the board it seems
that any problem at all no matter how minor is enough to deny benefits. It has been my experience that a worker can
have many individual pieces of medical evidence to support their claim, as well
as peer testimony and yet the board with a simple doctors review that focuses
on one conflicting medical or non-medical opinion may deny benefits. I believe that sometimes the board hopes the
worker will just go away if they the board, put up enough resistance.
Any insights that you gather from these hearings that
can be used to bring back a degree of fairness and justice to injured workers
will be a step in the right direction.
To do otherwise will leave some workers on a path towards disease,
depression and bankruptcy. Thank you for listening to me.
Dan Hennaert
CEP Local 848