The Appeal CommissionThe Workers Compensation Act of Manitoba

27(10) Medical aid furnished or provided under any of the preceding subsections of this section shall at all times be subject to the supervision and control of the board; and the board may contract with health care providers, hospitals or other health care facilities for any medical aid required, and agree on a scale of fees or remuneration for any such medical aid.

WCB Policy No. 44.120.10, Medical Aid ("the Policy"), addresses the subject of medical aid. In describing its purpose, the policy states:

The Medical Aid Policy presents a comprehensive and co-ordinated approach to delivery of medical-aid services to injured workers. The provision of medical aid attempts to minimize the impact of the worker’s injury and to enhance an injured worker’s recovery to the greatest extent possible.

Reimbursement of expenses to attend compensable medical treatment is addressed in section 3(a) of the policy. It provides, in part:

3. Expenses

a. Expenses Incurred to Attend Compensable Medical Treatment

i) The WCB will reimburse an injured worker’s actual reasonable expenses related to travelling to medical treatment (wage-loss, travel, accommodations, meals and reasonable telephone charges) which are in excess of costs normally incurred by the worker while travelling to and from work.

…

iii) All travel reimbursements should be based on the most cost-effective alternative and take account of the injured worker’s medical functioning level...

The Administrative Guidelines, set forth in section C of the policy, further address the basis on which travel expenses will be reimbursed:

iii) Transportation/Travel. Mileage will be reimbursed at the rate that a WCB employee would receive for travel within the province. The cost of necessary local transportation will be reimbursed but the WCB does not pay for the cost of personal trips (e.g., shopping, visiting, etc).

Worker's Position

In his appeal letter of June 20, 2015, the worker disagreed with the Review Office decision. In particular, the worker disagreed with Review Office's finding that there was a hearing centre in the community where the workplace was located. He said that he checked the phone book for the community where the workplace was and advised there was no listing for a hearing centre. He also called the senior's resource centre in the community and was told there is no hearing centre in the community. The worker noted that in the past, the WCB paid mileage to the Winnipeg hearing centre that he used for the replacement. He advised that the reason for the multiple trips was that the hearing aid was defective.

Analysis

The issue before the panel is whether the worker is entitled to reimbursement of mileage expenses. For the worker's appeal to be successful, the panel must find that the travel expenses satisfy the requirements of the Policy. The panel was able to make this finding. The panel finds that the worker is entitled to reimbursement of travel expenses for the 4 dates that he attended the hearing centre, specifically January 13, 2015, January 26, 2015, February 2, 2015 and March 17, 2015. The mileage to be paid is the difference between the mileage the worker had to drive from his home, at the time of the accident, to his place of employment, and the mileage from home, at the time of the accident, to the hearing centre where he received the services.

The panel accepts the information provided by the WCB that there is a hearing aid service available in the town where the worker worked. It notes that the service is provided on a limited basis, once per month on the last Friday of the month. Information was also provided about the services available at the next closest location. It is noted that these services are limited to every second Friday.

The panel finds that it was reasonable in the circumstances of this case for the worker to attend and receive services at a hearing centre which provided more regular service. The panel finds that the worker should be reimbursed the difference between the mileage the worker would drive to his former workplace and the mileage to the hearing centre that the worker dealt with. The panel accepts the WCB's calculations regarding distances and finds that the distance from his residence to his former workplace was 147.4 kilometers and the distance to the hearing centre was 165.8.

In addressing this appeal, the panel is bound by the Policy. Paragraph 3(a) i) of this policy deals with expenses incurred to attend medical appointments. It provides that:

i) The WCB will reimburse an injured worker's actual reasonable expenses related to travelling to medical treatment (wage-loss, travel, accommodations, meals and reasonable telephone charges) which are in excess of costs normally incurred by the worker while travelling to and from work.

It also provides that:

iii) All travel reimbursements should be based on the most cost-effective alternative and take account of the injured worker's medical functioning level.

As noted above, the panel finds that in the circumstances of this case and taking into consideration the injured worker's level of functioning, it was reasonable for the injured worker to attend at the Winnipeg based hearing centre.

The worker's appeal is approved.