The Appeal CommissionThe Workers Compensation Act of Manitoba

Preamble

The worker is appealing the decision made by the Workers Compensation Board ("WCB") that:

1. Their permanent restrictions are appropriate; 

2. The vocational rehabilitation plan for NOC 64409 – Other Customer and Information Services Representatives is appropriate; and 

3. A deemed earning capacity for NOC 64409 should be implemented effective September 22, 2023.

A videoconference hearing was held on April 9, 2026 to consider the worker's appeal.

Issue

1. Are the worker’s permanent restrictions appropriate? 

2. Is the vocational rehabilitation plan for NOC 64409 – Other Customer and Information Services Representatives appropriate? and 

3. Should a deemed earning capacity for NOC 64409 be implemented effective September 22, 2023?

Decision

1. The worker’s permanent restrictions are not appropriate; 

2. The vocational rehabilitation plan for NOC 64409 – Other Customer and Information Services Representatives is not appropriate; and 

3. A deemed earning capacity for NOC 64409 should not be implemented effective September 22, 2023.

Background

The worker has an accepted WCB claim, initially accepted as a lower back and left wrist strain, after an accident occurred at work on March 29, 2012. The worker received various benefits including wage loss and medical aid. Based on a functional capacity evaluation completed on July 3, 2013, permanent restrictions were recommended by the WCB on July 5, 2013 and the worker was referred for vocational rehabilitation services after the employer advised they could not accommodate the worker.

After consultation with the worker and the WCB's vocational rehabilitation specialist, a vocational rehabilitation plan under National Occupation Classification (NOC) 6651 - Security and Related Occupations was developed for the worker with a start date of January 6, 2014 and an end date of September 5, 2014. The worker was provided with job search assistance and was deemed capable of earning the minimum wage within NOC 6651 on September 6, 2014.

In a discussion with the WCB on January 16, 2017, the worker advised they had started working for a new employer in May 2015, had sustained a new WCB compensable injury in November 2016 and had been laid off from their employment. Medical information was obtained from the worker's new WCB claim and an opinion by a WCB medical advisor was placed to the worker's file on December 13, 2017. The advisor opined the discectomy surgery proposed by the worker's treating orthopedic surgeon was "…reasonably consistent with the mechanism of injury at work on 29-March-2012." The worker was placed back on full wage loss benefits as of November 25, 2017 and underwent the proposed surgery on March 13, 2018.

The worker began post-surgery physiotherapy but by August 2018, was experiencing ongoing difficulties and was referred for an MRI study. The MRI indicated a "…remnant disc protrusion at L4-L5 with disc material approaching the traversing L5 nerve roots bilaterally where there is mild spinal canal stenosis and bilateral lateral recess stenosis." The MRI was reviewed by the worker's treating orthopedic surgeon and on November 7, 2018, a revision procedure with instrumented fusion was recommended.

The worker continued with ongoing physiotherapy, with the treating physiotherapist requesting further treatment on July 24, 2019. On August 7, 2019, the WCB denied the extension request, with an August 6, 2019 note to the worker's file indicating the worker was likely at maximum medical improvement. Pursuant to a WCB medical advisor's opinion of November 7, 2019, it was requested the worker attended for a Functional Capacity Evaluation to determine the worker's permanent restrictions.

On November 21, 2019, the worker attended for a Functional Capacity Evaluation (“FCE”) and on December 5, 2019, new permanent restrictions were set for the worker. On April 23, 2020, an additional restriction was added to the permanent restrictions by the WCB. The worker's permanent restrictions were noted to be: no repetitive twisting and bending of the spine; no lifting and carrying more than 15 pounds; no prolonged seated postures more than 20 minutes, or standing more than 5 minutes; no pushing and pulling with force greater than 10 pounds; no repetitive stairs; no kneeling, squatting or crawling and ability to lie down for 30 minutes for pain control from time to time.

A revised vocational rehabilitation plan was developed by the WCB's vocational rehabilitation specialist based on the worker's new permanent restrictions. On August 4, 2020, a plan for the worker with an occupational goal of NOC 1526 - Transportation and Route Scheduler and a secondary goal of NOC 6552 - Other Customer Service Information was prepared. The start date was indicated to be August 17, 2020, with an end date of August 11, 2022, and included educational upgrading, technical courses and a job search assistance period.

In June 2022, the worker noted concerns with their ability to finish their course work due to health-related issues. After discussion with the worker and the educational institution, the WCB prepared an amendment to the worker's vocational rehabilitation plan to accommodate the worker's concerns. The plan amendment indicated the plan would now end on February 10, 2023. The educational institution advised on October 18, 2022, the worker had to complete a 160-hour practicum project in order to graduate from their program and as such, a new end date for the worker's education portion of the vocational rehabilitation plan was set to April 11, 2023.

The WCB spoke with the worker on December 1, 2022. The worker, joined by their spouse, expressed concern with participating in the practicum for their course. The worker noted concern with the amount of hours per week that would be required for them to participate in a practicum and noted they were not capable of working full-time hours. The worker also noted they were taking a new medication and they were experiencing side effects that were impacting their ability to participate in the practicum. On January 24, 2023, the WCB spoke with the worker again after discussions with the educational institution. The worker advised the WCB they could not work more than 2 hours per day with the WCB advising the worker that they would be expected to work a minimum of 3 hours per day. A further discussion with the worker and their spouse took place the following day on January 25, 2023, after the WCB spoke with the educational institution and confirmed the minimum hours would be 25 hours weekly or 5 hours per day, noting the worker's permanent restrictions did not include a time limit of hours they could work per day.

On March 30, 2023, the WCB wrote to the worker to advise an amended vocational rehabilitation plan would be developed for the secondary goal of NOC 6552 Other Customer and Information Service Representatives due to efforts to find the worker employment in suitable work from home positions. The WCB confirmed that work from home positions were consistent with job duties under NOC 6552 and as such, the worker's vocational rehabilitation plan would be amended. On April 13, 2023, an amended plan was provided to the worker with a start date of May 1, 2023, and an end date of September 22, 2023.

The worker’s treating physician requested the WCB arrange for another FCE for the worker and as the worker had questioned their permanent restrictions, in particular, the number of hours they could work each day, the worker’s file was reviewed by a WCB medical advisor on July 11, 2023 and a FCE was arranged for the worker. The worker attended for the evaluation on August 4, 2023, however, the physiotherapist conducting the evaluation noted while the evaluation was scheduled for most of the day, the worker left after approximately 3 hours due to reports of severe back pain. The physiotherapist did provide the worker demonstrated the capacity to function at a sedentary work level. It was noted a reconditioning program would likely not benefit the worker due to the length of time since their surgery and that it appeared the worker’s difficulty was more with tolerance, which would be helped by a gradual re-introduction to work. The worker’s file was also reviewed by a WCB physiatrist on September 13, 2023. After a thorough review of the worker’s file and the August 4, 2023 FCE, the physiatrist opined the worker’s restrictions could be updated to “No heavy lifting, restricting work duties to a sedentary level (DOT definition of sedentary level including lifting/carrying/pushing/pulling 7.5 – 10 pounds on an occasional basis).” With respect to the question of limiting hours per day of work, the physiatrist provided that the evidence on file did not support a need to limit the number of hours the worker could work each day however, it was noted that the worker would require a gradual reintroduction into the workforce.

On September 29, 2023, the WCB provided the worker with 2 decision letters. The first letter set out the worker’s new permanent restrictions as provided by the September 13, 2023 opinion of the WCB physiatrist. The second letter advised the worker they had been deemed capable of earning the minimum wage of NOC 64409, previously NOC 6552 – Other Customer and Information Services Representatives and as such, their wage loss benefits would be reduced effective September 22, 2023.

The worker requested reconsideration of the WCB’s decision to implement a deemed earning capacity for NOC 64409 as of September 22, 2023 to the Review Office on November 21, 2023. The worker noted they stopped the FCE due to pain and was unable to function for a week after the testing and requested a further evaluation. The worker further noted that a gradual return to work had been recommended but had not been offered to them to determine their capability to work full time hours. The worker disagreed with the determination they were capable of obtaining employment within the new NOC 64409 and requested that they be provided with further wage loss and medical aid to assist them. On February 12, 2024, the Review Office determined it was appropriate to implement a deemed earning capacity for NOC 64409 – Other Customer and Information Services Representatives effective September 22, 2023. The Review Office found the worker had been provided with educational upgrading, job preparation and job search services and given their updated permanent restrictions, it was appropriate to deem the worker capable of earning the minimum within that NOC effective September 22, 2023.

The worker’s representative requested the Review Office reconsider the appropriateness of the worker’s permanent restrictions on December 17, 2024. The representative noted the worker’s permanent restrictions post-surgery in 2020 were updated after a FCE in August 2023 to the current restrictions. The representative noted the evaluation was found to be valid, with the worker passing 3 of validity tests, however, the worker experienced severe pain in their back and down their legs following the testing along with a headache that was indicative of rising blood pressure. It was noted by the worker’s representative that the WCB medical advisor’s opinion of September 13, 2023 was prepared without the most current diagnostic imaging. The representative also submitted the worker continued to receive treatment for their back difficulties, including being seen at a pain clinic and their treating healthcare providers support the worker has experienced worsening symptoms and is unable to work modified duties of any kind. On January 6, 2025, the Review Office returned the worker’s file to the WCB’s Compensation Services for further investigation.

Additional medical information including updated MRI studies from October 3, 2023 and June 16, 2024, chart notes from the pain management clinic, a psychologist report and a status update from the worker on March 11, 2025 were placed to the worker’s file and reviewed by a WCB medical advisor on July 24, 2025. The advisor provided that at 13 years and 4 months since the March 19, 2012 workplace accident, additional workplace restrictions would not be required, and the worker’s current permanent restrictions remained appropriate. In addition, given the length of time and the amount of treatment the worker had already received, the WCB medical advisor provided the worker would not benefit from further physiotherapy or other treatment. On September 2, 2025, the WCB advised the worker their permanent restrictions remained appropriate.

The worker’s representative again requested reconsideration of the appropriateness of the worker’s permanent restrictions to the Review Office on September 9, 2025. The representative resubmitted their information from December 17, 2024, and noted the evidence supported the worker still required restrictions related to crawling, crouching, bending, kneeling, squatting, twisting, ability to change positions as needed, no prolonged sitting/standing, ability to lay down to control pain and repetitive stairs. On December 1, 2025, the Review Office determined the worker’s permanent restrictions were appropriate. The Review Office found the worker’s reporting of being unable to sit or stand for extended periods of time supports the worker’s ability to work in a sedentary position, which would allow them to adjust their position as needed. As such, the Review Office found the worker’s current permanent restrictions were appropriate.

The worker’s representative filed an appeal with the Appeal Commission on February 4, 2026 and a hearing was arranged.

Reasons

Applicable Legislation and Policy

The Appeal Commission and its panels are bound by the provisions of The Workers Compensation Act (the “Act”), regulations under the Act and the policies established by the WCB’s Board of Directors.

A worker is entitled to benefits under Section 4(1) of the Act where it is established that the worker was injured as a result of an accident at work. Under Section 37 of the Act, compensation is payable where the WCB determines that a worker has sustained a loss of earning capacity, an impairment, or requires medical aid as a result of an accident.

Section 27 of the Act sets out that the board may provide a worker with such medical aid as the board considers necessary to cure and provide relief from an injury resulting from an accident.

WCB Policy 43.00, Vocational Rehabilitation (the “VR Policy”), provides, in part:

Section I, Goals and Objectives:

1. The goal of vocational rehabilitation is to help the worker to achieve a return to sustainable employment in an occupation which reasonably takes into consideration the worker’s post-injury physical capacity, skills, aptitudes and, where possible, interests.

2. The WCB will help the worker as much as possible to be as employable as she or he was before the injury or illness. Once this is done and when necessary, the WCB will provide reasonable assistance to the worker so that she or he actually returns to work. However, services may not always continue until the worker actually returns to work.

…

Section V, Individualized Written Rehabilitation Plan (IWRP):

…

3. When developing the IWRP, the worker, the worker’s representative, advisor or union representative, the WCB and the employer (when involved) may pursue the established hierarchy of objectives. The WCB will document the outcome(s) of this joint process. Ideally, the worker’s healthcare practitioner will also be involved in this process. The IWRP will:

…

b) Describe the occupation or occupational group in which the worker can competitively pursue employment upon achievement of the vocational rehabilitation goal. This will be based on recognized methods of job classification. Where applicable, the description will include any community-specific features of the occupation as determined through job analysis.

…

4. The WCB will develop the plan after adequate assessment. This assessment is meant to identify the skills possessed by the worker and skills to be acquired by the worker. Further, the plan will establish the worker’s post-plan earning capacity through analysis of the worker’s skills in comparison to the labour market.

5. The WCB will reasonably ensure that the plan is based on a realistic goal. A realistic goal is one which is within the worker’s physical, intellectual, vocational, and emotional capacities. In helping a worker establish a goal, the WCB will apply knowledge of the worker’s vocational profile, medical aspects of the worker’s condition, the worker’s interaction with the environment and the effort and persistence the worker demonstrates in the face of obstacles.

In sum, the VR Policy sets out that the plan will be developed after adequate assessment of the worker’s skills and skill gaps and requires that the WCB reasonably ensure that the plan is based on a realistic goal, defined as a goal that is “…within the worker’s physical, intellectual, vocational, and emotional capacities” taking into account the worker’s vocational profile, medical aspects of their condition, the worker’s interaction with the environment and the effort and persistence the worker exhibits in the face of obstacles. Each plan must contain a financial implications report that indicates associated costs and that the plan is cost-effective as against no plan or other available options.

The WCB has also established Policy 44.80.30.20, Post-Accident Earnings - Deemed Earning Capacity (the “Deeming Policy”) which provides when a worker will be deemed capable of earning an amount that they are not actually earning and how the deemed earning capacity will be determined.

The Deeming Policy, provides, in part:

I. Vocational Rehabilitation:

…

4. Deemed Earning Capacity Following Completion of a Plan:

…

(f) Deemed earning capacity will be based on the established actual earnings for a given occupation. This amount will be presumed to be the minimum of the range for an occupation as established at the time of the Individualized Written Rehabilitation Plan and as confirmed after completion of the Plan.

The Deeming Policy provides that deemed earning capacity will be used in calculating a loss of earning capacity when a worker has participated in a VR plan and: 

i. The worker has completed the training part of the vocational rehabilitation plan designed to help the worker obtain new skills or improve current skills; 

ii. The worker has been given reasonable job search assistance (i.e., separate from the training part of the plan); and, 

iii. The information the plan was based on, including labour market analysis, has not substantially changed.

Worker’s Position

The worker was present at the hearing, represented by a worker advisor. Written submissions were provided in advance of the hearing, and an oral submission was made at the hearing. The worker provided testimony by way of responses to questions posed by their advisor and members of the panel.

The position of the worker is that the jobs available were initially within their abilities, however their permanent restrictions changed and the jobs within NOC 64409 were all warehouse jobs that required lifting and handling loads up to 5 kg, which the worker could not do. The worker states that the jobs available had physical requirements that the worker could not handle and were outside their permanent restrictions.

The position of the worker is that the vocational rehabilitation plan with NOC 64409 was inappropriate, and as a result, the implementation of a deemed earning capacity was also inappropriate.

The worker submits that they were competitively disadvantaged due to their lack of job experience, lack of ability and lack of assistance at home.

The worker’s evidence is that the WCB indicated the worker could look for employment where they could work from home, however the worker did not have an appropriate space to work from home, or a computer or internet connectivity. The worker argues that the WCB did not provide sufficient tools for the worker to obtain employment.

The worker relies on the opinion of their attending physician that they were not able to work as a result of their physical condition and “deteriorating mental health”. The worker was diagnosed with a mental health disorder which affected their ability to work.

The position of the worker is that they were totally disabled and unable to work.

The worker further states that it is fundamentally unfair for the WCB not to extend a worker’s job search period if their permanent restrictions changed during the job search period.

The worker is seeking that the decision of the Review Office be overturned.

Employer’s Position

The Employer did not participate in the appeal.

Analysis

Appropriateness of Permanent Restrictions

The panel is tasked with determining whether the worker’s permanent restrictions are appropriate.

For the worker's appeal on this issue to be successful, the panel must find that restrictions established by the WCB were not properly determined. The panel is able to make that finding, for the reasons that follow.

The evidence establishes that the worker sustained a significant compensable low back injury which ultimately required a discectomy in March 2018. Despite surgical intervention, the worker continued to experience ongoing symptoms, including persistent pain and functional limitations. The medical evidence further indicates that concerns regarding the worker’s condition continued after surgery, including MRI findings demonstrating residual pathology, ongoing treatment through a pain management clinic, and continued reporting of significant pain and reduced function.

The panel notes that the restrictions were established on December 5, 2019, and later revised on April 23, 2020, following the worker’s back surgery. The restrictions were revised again on September 13, 2023, based on the opinion of the WCB medical consultant following the worker’s Functional Capacity Evaluation (“FCE”). The restrictions were considered permanent.

The panel notes that prior to September 2023, the worker’s permanent restrictions were extensive and included restrictions relating to repetitive twisting and bending, lifting and carrying, prolonged sitting and standing, pushing and pulling, stairs, kneeling, squatting and crawling, together with the need to lie down periodically for pain control. These restrictions were established following a FCE in November 2019 and were considered necessary in light of the worker’s ongoing symptoms and functional presentation.

The panel notes that the new restrictions established on September 13, 2023 were not as detailed as those from April 23, 2020. The new restrictions were derived from the summary report of the FCE, however they lacked detail and did not set out the specific capacities of the worker established during the FCE. The panel notes, however, that the August 2023 FCE was not completed as planned. The worker was unable to participate for the full duration of the assessment and left after approximately three hours due to severe pain. While the evaluator concluded the worker demonstrated the capacity to function at a sedentary work level, the assessment also documented the worker’s limited tolerance and specifically identified gradual reintroduction to work as an important consideration.

There was no indication or explanation why the restrictions from 2020 were no longer listed as part of the worker’s restrictions in 2023, despite seeming to be appropriate based on the FCE findings. The WCB does not appear to have made inquiries with the physiotherapist that conducted the FCE as to the disappearance of the prior restrictions in light of the reduced specificity of the new restrictions.

The panel is not persuaded that the evidence supported the removal of numerous previously established restrictions. In particular, the panel finds there was insufficient evidence to conclude that restrictions relating to prolonged sitting and standing, repetitive bending and twisting, stair use, crouching, kneeling, squatting, crawling, positional changes, and the need to periodically manage symptoms through rest were no longer required.

The panel finds it significant that subsequent medical evidence, including updated MRI studies, pain clinic records, and reports from the worker’s treating healthcare providers, continued to document ongoing symptoms and functional limitations. The panel also places weight on the worker’s consistent reporting regarding their inability to tolerate prolonged activity and their significant increase in symptoms following physical exertion. The worker’s evidence in this regard was generally consistent with the medical evidence on file.

While the panel acknowledges the July 24, 2025 opinion of the WCB medical advisor that no additional restrictions were required, the panel is not satisfied that this opinion adequately addressed the worker’s demonstrated difficulties with activity tolerance or the broader medical evidence documenting continuing functional limitations. The panel finds that the worker continued to require restrictions beyond those established in September 2023.

The panel also acknowledges that the worker received a Permanent Partial Impairment (“PPI”) rating of 6.3% in 2013, which was later increased to 15% in 2020. The panel considers this a significant rating. The worker’s evidence is that they were totally disabled.

In order for the panel to determine that the restrictions were inappropriate, the panel would require some medical evidence or an opinion contrary to the evidence on the worker’s file to suggest that the restrictions were incorrectly assessed. In this regard the panel places significant weight on the opinion of the worker’s treating physician who stated that the worker was not fit for work and incapable of modified duties of any kind.

Additionally, the panel is of the view that the WCB has not considered the impact of the worker’s medications and mental health diagnosis. The panel acknowledges that no specific restrictions are in place regarding the worker’s mental health diagnosis, however the worker’s treating physician has indicated that the diagnosis affects the worker's ability to work and therefore this factor needs adequate consideration.

The panel therefore finds, on a balance of probabilities, that the worker’s permanent restrictions were not correctly established and are not appropriate. The worker’s appeal on this issue is granted.

Appropriateness of the Vocational Rehabilitation Plan (NOC 64409 – Other Customer and Information Services Representatives)

The panel is asked to determine whether or not the vocational rehabilitation plan under NOC 64409 - Other Customer and Information Services Representatives is appropriate.

For the worker's appeal on this issue to be successful, the panel must find that the VR Plan for NOC 64409 was not appropriate for the worker. The panel is able to make that finding, for the reasons that follow.

The VR Policy requires that a vocational rehabilitation plan be based on a realistic and sustainable employment goal that reasonably takes into account the worker’s post-injury physical capacity, skills, aptitudes and, where possible, interests. The plan must also be supported by adequate assessment of the worker’s transferable skills and the actual demands of the target occupation. The panel finds that these requirements were not met.

The evidence establishes that the amended VR plan for NOC 64409 was developed after the worker encountered significant difficulties completing the practicum component of the original VR plan. The worker consistently advised the WCB that they were unable to tolerate the hours required and experienced significant symptoms that limited their participation. Although the WCB noted that the worker’s restrictions did not contain specific hourly limitations, the evidence demonstrates that activity tolerance was a central issue affecting the worker’s employability.

The evidence before the panel is that the worker has permanent restrictions that significantly limit standing, prolonged sitting, heavy lifting, lifting, carrying, pushing, pulling, stair climbing, kneeling, squatting, and crawling. The worker also required the ability to lay down for 30 minutes for pain control from time to time. These restrictions materially limit the range of work the worker can safely and consistently perform.

The panel is not satisfied that the occupational goal selected by the WCB reasonably reflected the worker’s actual physical capacities at the time the plan was completed. The panel is of the view that the job opportunities were beyond the worker’s physical restrictions, with many requiring the ability to sit or stand for prolonged periods or lifting more than 7-10 lbs.

In addition, the panel finds that the WCB did not adequately consider the worker’s vocational profile beyond physical capacity. The evidence establishes that the worker has limited formal education, limited technological knowledge and no prior experience. The panel accepts that these factors materially affect the worker’s employability and competitiveness in the labour market.

The panel further notes that the amended plan was based upon an assumption that the worker could perform sedentary customer service positions, including work-from-home opportunities. However, the evidence before the panel demonstrates that the worker faced significant barriers to obtaining and maintaining such employment. These barriers included ongoing physical limitations, lack of recent work experience in the targeted occupation, limited practical experience arising from the incomplete practicum, and personal circumstances affecting the worker’s ability to perform work-from-home employment.

The panel also finds it significant that the August 2023 FCE and September 2023 medical consultant opinion both contemplated a gradual return to work. Despite this recommendation, the worker was not provided with a graduated work exposure or work-hardening process that would permit meaningful assessment of whether they could sustain the demands of the proposed occupation over time. Instead, the worker’s earning capacity was deemed at the conclusion of the job search period.

The panel is satisfied that the WCB did not reasonably account for the significant barriers the worker would face in attempting to obtain employment within NOC 64409 given their limited education, lack of relevant work experience and their mental health diagnosis. The panel finds that the WCB ought to have reviewed the VR plan when they were made aware of the worker’s mental health diagnosis.

The panel finds, on a balance of probabilities, that the vocational rehabilitation plan under NOC 64409 was not based on a realistic and sustainable employment goal that reasonably took into account the worker’s physical, intellectual, vocational, and personal circumstances. Accordingly, the panel concludes that the vocational rehabilitation plan under NOC 64409 was not appropriate.

The worker’s appeal on the second issue is granted.

Reduction of Wage Loss Benefits Based on Deemed Earning Capacity

The third question before the panel is whether a deemed earning capacity for NOC 64409 be implemented effective September 22, 2023.

For the worker's appeal to succeed, the panel must find that the WCB did not establish the worker is capable of working in NOC 64409 or that, on conclusion of the plan, the worker was not capable of earning the post-accident deemed earning capacity, or that the WCB did not correctly implement the deemed earning capacity upon conclusion of the plan. As outlined in the reasons that follow, the panel was able to make a finding that the VR plan was not appropriate and did not realistically position the worker to obtain employment, and therefore the worker’s appeal is granted.

As a result of the panel’s above finding that the vocational rehabilitation plan under NOC 64409 was not appropriate, it is determined that the deemed earning capacity should not have been implemented effective September 22, 2023. A deemed earning capacity presumes that the worker has been reasonably prepared and is capable of obtaining employment. This was not the case for this worker.

The panel is not satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that suitable employment consistent with the worker’s restrictions was realistically available, or that the worker had been provided with sufficient training and support to overcome the substantial barriers to employment they faced.

The panel therefore finds, on a balance of probabilities, that it was not appropriate to conclude the worker was capable of earning the minimum wage associated with NOC 64409 as of September 22, 2023.

The worker’s appeal on the third issue is granted.

Panel Members

R. Lemieux Howard, Presiding Officer
J. Peterson, Commissioner
M. Kernaghan, Commissioner

Recording Secretary, J. Lee

R. Lemieux Howard - Presiding Officer
(on behalf of the panel)

Signed at Winnipeg this 8th day of June, 2026