The Appeal CommissionThe Workers Compensation Act of Manitoba

Preamble

This case deals with whether the Workers Compensation Board (WCB) should be responsible for the worker’s relocation and travel expenses.

The worker moved from Winnipeg to a community in northern Ontario in August 2005. The worker sought reimbursement for relocation expenses and for travel expenses for trips to Winnipeg to see his physician. The WCB denied responsibility for these expenses as the relocation was considered to be voluntary. The WCB Review Office upheld this decision. The worker appealed to the Appeal Commission.

A review was held on December 11, 2006, at the worker’s request.

Issue

Whether or not the worker is entitled to reimbursement for relocation and travel expenses.

Decision

That the worker is not entitled to reimbursement for relocation and travel expenses.

Decision: Unanimous

Background

On July 25, 2003, the worker was involved in a work related accident and injured his neck, back and shoulder. He submitted a claim to the WCB which was accepted and various types of benefits and services were awarded to the worker.

At a meeting with his WCB case manager on June 29, 2005, the worker was advised that his benefits would end after July 22, 2005 when the work hardening program he was enrolled in was scheduled to conclude. The worker was subsequently advised by telephone on July 20, 2005 that his benefits will continue beyond July 22, 2005 until a review of his file is completed.

On August 11, 2005, the worker told his WCB case manager that he had moved from Winnipeg to Ontario. The case manager informed the worker that the WCB could only pay Manitoba healthcare rates and that the WCB was unable to pay mileage for any future medical appointments.

In a letter to the WCB dated October 31, 2005, the worker stated, “…WCB should cover my expenses to my doctor and my moving expenses as my case worker told me I should go to my family for assistance and they reside in [name of town], Ontario. I had no where to go and this was my only alternative.”

In a decision dated November 1, 2005, a WCB manager advised the worker that there was nothing in The Workers Compensation Act (the Act) or WCB policies to allow him to pay for the worker’s relocation expenses. He also determined that the worker was not entitled to expenses to attend medical appointments in Winnipeg as the worker had resided in Winnipeg when he was injured and because his move to Ontario was voluntary. On June 9, 2006, the worker appealed the decision to Review Office.

On August 16, 2006, Review Office confirmed that the worker was not entitled to relocation or traveling expenses. Review Office made reference to the WCB’s relocation policy and noted that the policy was not intended to cover the expenses of a worker who moved or relocated while in receipt of wage loss benefits. The policy’s intent was to assist workers in their vocational rehabilitation plan when there were limited opportunities for suitable re-employment in the community in which the worker lived. The worker’s move was initiated on his own accord and therefore precluded WCB assistance. Review Office was of the opinion that as the worker’s relocation to Ontario was not approved by the WCB, there was no entitlement to subsequent additional expenses that resulted from the relocation such as costs to attend medical appointments. On September 11, 2006, the worker appealed Review Office’s decision and a file review was arranged.

Reasons

Worker’s Position

In his notice of appeal, the worker indicated that he was forced by the WCB to relocate. He advised in a letter to the Appeal Commission dated September 12, 2006 that he was told that his WCB benefits were being terminated. He also advised that his WCB case manager told him to go live with his family. He stated that he could not get a lease without income so was forced to move to the Ontario community where his sister lived. He states that he had no choice but to move.

The worker is seeking reimbursement for relocation expenses and for expenses he incurs in traveling to medical appointments in Winnipeg.

Analysis

The issue before the panel is whether the worker is entitled to reimbursement for relocation and travel expenses. The panel finds that the worker is not entitled to reimbursement of expenses.

The WCB has a policy dealing with relocation. This policy is intended to apply to cases where the worker’s relocation is considered for purposes of vocational rehabilitation. To the extent that the policy is applicable, Paragraph 1(e) provides:

1. e. Relocation will not normally be approved where:

i. The worker has, independent of the WCB, moved out of the community in which he/she was living at the time of the injury;

The worker indicates that he had no choice but to move as he was advised that his benefits were being terminated and he had no place to reside other than with a relative in the Ontario community.

From a review of the file, it is clear that the worker’s decision to relocate to the Ontario community was a personal decision made on his own accord. The WCB did not require, approve or authorize the relocation. The relocation is unrelated to the worker’s injury. The panel finds that the worker, independently of the WCB, made the decision to relocate.

The panel finds that the relocation was not approved by the WCB and that the WCB is therefore not responsible for the worker’s relocation expenses or travel expenses for medical matters which arise from the relocation.

While these facts do not affect the panel’s decision, the panel notes that the worker had given notice to leave his apartment before he was advised that his benefits would be terminated. It also notes that the WCB did not terminate the worker’s benefits, although at one point the WCB had advised that the benefits would be terminated.

The appeal is declined.

Panel Members

A. Scramstad, Presiding Officer
A. Finkel, Commissioner
M. Day, Commissioner

Recording Secretary, B. Kosc

A. Scramstad - Presiding Officer

Signed at Winnipeg this 6th day of February, 2007