Canadian Occupational Safety

12 Canadian Occupational Safety www.cos-mag.com John Sammut is the Manager of Strategic Programs for the Infrastructure Health & Safety Association (IHSA). He has been employed by the Safety Association since 1990. John is a Canadian Registered Safety Professional. His health and safety experience in construction began in 1984. He is a graduate from the Safety Engineering program at Humber College and has a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Industrial Relations. A CRSP since 1991, John's volunteer service has spanned a number of roles with the BCRSP since 2002. John has served on the Governing Board, was an integral member of the National Education Symposium (NES) Task Force and currently serves on the Quali cations Review Committee (QRC). John is a dedicated volunteer who is committed to supporting the CRSP certi cation process. The Board's Volunteer of the Year program was initiated in 2001 in conjunction with its 25th anniversary and the United Nation's "Year of the Volunteer". The Board of Canadian Registered Safety Professionals (BCRSP) is a public interest, ISO 17024 (Personnel Certi cation Body) and ISO 9001 (Quality Management System) accredited, self-regulating, self- governing organization established in 1976 under The Canada Corporations Act for the purpose of certifying Canadian Registered Safety Professionals (CRSP) ® /Professionnel en sécurité agréé du Canada (PSAC) ® . Board of Canadian Registered Safety Professionals Conseil canadien des professionnels en sécurité agréés 6700 Century Avenue, Suite 100, Mississauga, ON L5N 6A4 info@bcrsp.ca, www.bcrsp.ca Board of Canadian Registered Safety Professionals 2016 Volunteer of the Year Announcement John Sammut is the Manager of Strategic Programs for the Infrastructure Health & Safety Association (IHSA). He has been employed by the Safety Association since 1990. John is a Canadian Registered Safety Professional. His health and safety experience in construction began in 1984. He is a graduate from the Safety Engineering program at Humber College and has a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Industrial Relations. A CRSP since 1991, John's volunteer service has spanned a number of roles MAURICE DRANSFELD WORKERS' COMPENSATION Location most common workers' compensation query Incidents while travelling, on lunch breaks, in parking lots often questioned P erhaps the question I get asked the most when an employer is contacting me for advice on a workers' compensation board (WCB) claim is some version of "how is this even a claim?" There is usually some skepticism centered around the extent of the injury, the likelihood of injury or why an injury would be covered when clearly, the worker was not following safety procedures or was otherwise fooling around at work. This initial stage of workers' com- pensation denial usually moves through the well-known stages of grief and, in most cases, culminates in acceptance upon being reminded of the nature of the workers' compensa- tion system, namely that it is a system of no fault insurance that aims to provide coverage to workers who are injured while carrying out their work. At its core, workers' compensation is a remedial system, meaning that its fundamental objective is to provide coverage for injured workers. It does so by drawing a wide box around the types of things that will consti- tute compensable claims. The shared feature of all workers' compensation schemes across Canada is that coverage is extended to all injuries, regardless of fault, that are work related. The threshold question that work- ers' compensation boards ask in assessing whether a particular injury is "work related" is whether it "arose out of and occurred in the course of employment." Both conditions must be met in order for workers' com- pensation coverage to follow. The injury arises out of employment if it is the result of some sort of hazard of employment. It occurs in the course of employment where it occurs at a time and place consistent with the obliga- tions and expectations of the job. Ultimately, most workers' compen- sation cases are fairly straightforward. Most claims concern workers who are injured while they are carrying out their work at their employer's place of business. But there are claims that reside at the fringes of what it means for an injury to be "work related." These are claims for injuries that may occur outside of the employer's premises or claims that occur prior to work even starting, or perhaps during breaks. Injuries that occur during travel to and from the workplace are one such category of fringe claims that might force employers to take a close look at the applicable workers' compensation polic y to assess whether it will attract coverage. The general rule for travel to and from work is that it is not covered. However, as is the case with most rules, there are exceptions. Work-related travel can be considered as "occurring in the course of employment" in certain circumstances and this exception is generally based on how much direction or control the employer exercises over the travel. So, while the morning drive to the workplace is not covered, the drive to the airport at the direction of the employer might be. On the other hand, the personal detour to a nearby mall may not be. A WCB will look at various factors to determine whether the employer directs or controls the travel in some fashion. For example, travelling to work in employer-provided transportation, like a bus, would ordinarily be covered. Similarly, exceptional travel, such as errands for the employer, are covered. There are also cases where a worker travelling in his own vehicle is covered, such as while on a private road owned by the employer leading to the work site. If a worker's travel falls within one of the covered categories of work travel, injuries that occur during the ordinary side activities of travel, such as coffee breaks, lunches or rest stops, can also attract coverage. A recent case involved a worker who was found dead inside his vehicle parked off to the side of a highway. The cause of death was cardiac arrest and the employer correctly reported this injury to the WCB. The employer was understandably nervous about the extension of coverage for this unfor- tunate fatality. Under the applicable policy, coverage could extend if the worker died during a rest stop on the highway, if his travel was under the See Workers' on page 14 >>

• Cover