The Appeal CommissionThe Workers Compensation Act of Manitoba

Preamble

An Appeal Panel hearing was held on March 3, 2004, at the claimant's request. The Panel discussed this appeal on the same day.

Issue

Whether or not the labour portion of the cost of renovating the claimant's residence should be paid by the WCB.

Decision

That the labour portion of the cost of renovating the claimant's residence should not be paid by the WCB.

Decision: Unanimous

Background

The claimant injured his left ring finger while working underground as a miner on April 23, 1999 which resulted in an amputation. The claim was accepted by the Workers Compensation Board (WCB) and various types of benefits were paid to the claimant.

In a letter dated June 3, 2003, the claimant advised that he and his wife had purchased a retirement home and because of the amputation to his left ring finger, he was unable to perform any of the home renovations that needed to be done. The claimant therefore asked the WCB to pay for the hiring of a carpenter to assist with the renovations.

On June 26, 2003, a WCB case manager advised the claimant that the WCB covered the cost of renovations necessary for improved access and mobility. The claimant, however, "did not meet the criteria by means of his disability or the nature of the repairs being requested." On June 30, 2003, the claimant disagreed with the decision and the case was forwarded to the Review Office.

In a decision dated September 26, 2003, Review Office confirmed that the labour portion of the cost of renovating the claimant's residence should not be paid by the WCB. Review Office referred to a previous decision by the Appeal Commission in which it was determined that lawn maintenance was a necessary activity of daily living and that home renovations did not meet that test. Review Office further noted that had it decided that the claimant's request met the test of being an activity of daily living, then it would have considered whether the fact he changed residences after his accident impacted on entitlement. As it decided otherwise, Review Office stated it would not comment on this point.

On December 10, 2003, a worker advisor appealed the above decision to the Appeal Commission. The worker advisor contended that the request for labour cost coverage for renovations on his new home met the requirements of policy 44.120.30 of the Act and that it should be accepted by the WCB. On March 3, 2004, an oral hearing took place to consider the claimant's appeal.

Reasons

As the background notes indicate, the claimant suffered a crush injury to the ring finger of his left hand, which eventually resulted in its amputation. The treating hand surgeon advised the WCB on April 28th, 2003, as follows: "He will not be able to do any form of lifting, gripping, pinching, pushing or pulling activities with the hand, which will also limit his functional capacity of the hand and require him to modify his activities significantly." It is for these reasons that the claimant requests that the WCB should pay for the labour portion of the costs of renovating his residence as he was incapable of doing the labour himself.

It is important to note that the renovations were not carried out for any purpose to accommodate the claimant's permanent disability. In addition, it was a personal decision on the part of the claimant to voluntarily retire from the workforce and relocate to another community. We find in this case that the expenses for which the claimant seeks reimbursement are not those either anticipated or contemplated by the Act and policy.

Accordingly, the labour portion of the cost of renovating the claimant's residence should not be paid by the WCB. The claimant's appeal is hereby dismissed.

Panel Members

R. W. MacNeil, Presiding Officer
A. Finkel, Commissioner
M. Day, Commissioner

Recording Secretary, B. Miller

R.W. MacNeil - Presiding Officer
(on behalf of the panel)

Signed at Winnipeg this 16th day of April, 2004