WCB Coverage

The Workers Compensation Board is going after the home inspection industry.
If you have an employee even part time they are requiring you to have your self and all employees covered with them.
They need money and you are going to have to pay…
Be prepared for them to contact you ,some already have been .
Looks like they think you are guilty and want you to start paying NOW !


[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]
*Court Bulletin *
**McKeown Contracting Fined $60,000 After Worker Loses Arm](http://news.ontario.ca/mol/en/2014/10/mckeown-contracting-fined-60000-after-worker-loses-arm.html?utm_source=ondemand&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=p) **

October 10, 2014
OTTAWA, ON - McKeown Contracting, a business that provides a variety of contracting services for residential and commercial customers, has pleaded guilty and has been fined $60,000 after a worker lost an arm in a conveyor.
On August 16, 2013, a worker was adjusting a feeder belt on a soil screening conveyor at the McKeown Contracting workplace at 2878 Stagecoach Road in Ottawa. The adjustment was being performed while the belt was running; the worker’s arm was pulled into the conveyor and severed.
A Ministry of Labour investigation found that a lock-out procedure was not in place at the time of the injury as required by law. A lock-out procedure ensures that workers do not have access to moving parts until all motion has stopped, and that any motion that can re-start and endanger a worker is disabled. As a matter of course the worker adjusted the belts while they were running.
McKeown Contracting, operating as 1092066 Ontario Inc., pleaded guilty to failing to ensure that the conveyor was cleaned, adjusted, repaired or had maintenance work performed on it only when motion that may endanger a worker had stopped. The company was fined $60,000 by Justice of the Peace Louisette Girault in Ottawa.
In addition to the fine, the court imposed a 25-per-cent victim fine surcharge as required by the Provincial Offences Act. The surcharge is credited to a special provincial government fund to assist victims of crime.
Court Information at a Glance
Ontario Court of Justice
100 Constellation Crescent
Courtroom #102
Ottawa, ON

Justice of the Peace Louisette Girault

Date of Sentencing:
October 9, 2014

McKeown Contracting operating as 1092066 Ontario Inc.
2878 Stagecoach Road
Ottawa, Ontario

Occupational health and safety

Occupational Health and Safety Act
Section 25(1)©
Regulation 851 (Industrial Establishments Regulation)
Section 75(a) and (b)

Crown Counsel:
Katherine Ballweg

[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]

Bruce Skeaff
Communications Branch
Ministry of Labour

As it should be!


With respect… what does this unfortunate story have to do with home inspectors?

Do you carry workers compensation .
Many are a one man company .
But if the wife answers the phone you could be in for a big surprise.
If you do not then you might want to know they want you too.
Many home Inspectors do not and they could be in for a big surprise when they have to pay for coverage for X number of years.
Only unfortunate if you do not carry workers compensation and get hurt . This is just a few things that could effect a home inspector.

Added … Roy

[FONT=Times New Roman]http://www.wsib.on.ca/WSIBPortal/faces/WSIBDetailPage?cGUID=WSIB013886&rDef=WSIB_RD_ARTICLE&_afrLoop=513629340668000&_afrWindowMode=0&_afrWindowId=null#%40%3FcGUID%3DWSIB013886%26_afrWindowId%3Dnull%26_afrLoop%3D513629340668000%26rDef%3DWSIB_RD_ARTICLE%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26_adf.ctrl-state%3D106vvno94c_4](http://www.wsib.on.ca/WSIBPortal/faces/WSIBDetailPage?cGUID=WSIB013886&rDef=WSIB_RD_ARTICLE&_afrLoop=513629340668000&_afrWindowMode=0&_afrWindowId=null#%40%3FcGUID%3DWSIB013886%26_afrWindowId%3Dnull%26_afrLoop%3D513629340668000%26rDef%3DWSIB_RD_ARTICLE%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26_adf.ctrl-state%3D106vvno94c_4)

[FONT=Times New Roman]Q19. What about home inspectors?[/FONT]

Currently, home inspectors are classified in our Employer Classification Manual under Rate Group 704-02 CU 4499-001: Testing, Inspection, and Related Services. To be exempt from coverage, the home inspector must exclusively do home inspections on an existing private residence where they are paid by, and work directly for, the occupant or potential occupant (or member of their family). However, home inspection work is not exempt when it is for potential purchasers or a member of their family, who do not intend to occupy the residence themselves.

My Alberta WCB coverage for myself is 200 bux a year, and it is voluntary, (owners are not required to have WCB) an excellent deal AFAIC.
If you have paid employees, you have responsibilities to them. You are required to obey all employment related statutes, of which there are many besides paying WCB. Provincial governments typically have pretty good web sites and local offices that can answer all questions. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Thanks Eric glad we are able to remind people and possibly save them a huge head ache .

That’s what I do so I’m exempt.


However, home inspection work is not exempt when it is for potential purchasers or a member of their family, who do not intend to occupy the residence themselves

Interesting I wonder how you can be sure your client is not going to rent the home out .

The home two doors up from me just sold and the seller did not know it was going to be a rental unit???

I don’t care what the house will be used for Roy. (Not my concern)

There is no requirement, that I know of, that says I have to ask what the client is going to do with the home.

None of my business


**You could be responsible for your employees **


[FONT=Calibri]Court Bulletin [/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]2006652 Ontario Limited/Innovative Industries Fined $80,000 After Worker Dies In Fall[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]October 20, 2014 4:00 P.M.[/FONT]
Ministry of Labour](http://news.ontario.ca/mol/en)
BRANTFORD, ON - 2006652 Ontario Limited, carrying on business as Innovative Industries, has pleaded guilty and has been fined $80,000 after a worker suffered a fatal fall through a skylight on an industrial building.
On November 15, 2012, workers were performing roof repairs and installing new roofing materials on a building at 148 Mohawk Street in Brantford. The surface of the roof contained numerous skylight units and the work undertaken that day required workers to walk throughout the roof surface.
A worker was sent to assemble materials and tools and was last seen walking across the roof to do so. A short time later another worker discovered the dome of one of the skylight units was broken and looked down to see the worker lying face down on the concrete floor below, a distance of about 23 feet. At the time of the incident there were no safety devices such as guardrails, barriers or protective covers in place around or over the skylight units while workers were performing roof repairs. The worker who died was not using any type of fall protection equipment or system. A Ministry of Labour investigation found that the company did not take reasonable precautions to protect the safety of the worker, as required by law.
Innovative Industries pleaded guilty to failing to take reasonable precautions such as installing temporary guardrails or barriers around a skylight or installing a temporary skylight screen, grate or cover of material capable of handling any load imposed by a worker, or ensuring that a worker working near a skylight used a travel restraint system or a fall restricting system.
The company was fined $80,000 by Justice of the Peace Marsha Farnand in Provincial Offences Court in Brantford. In addition to the fine, the court imposed a 25-per-cent victim fine surcharge as required by the Provincial Offences Act. The surcharge is credited to a special provincial government fund to assist victims of crime.
Court Information at a Glance
Provincial Offences Court
102 Wellington Square
Courtroom #1
Brantford, Ontario

Justice of the Peace Marsha Farnand

Date of Sentencing:
October 15, 2014

006652 Ontario Ltd. carrying on business as Innovative Industries
81 Elgin Street (registered address)
85 Morell Street (principal place of business)
Brantford, Ontario

If you do relocation inspections, you need WCB…

Exactly do one inspection and you are on the hook.

Good one thanks for reminder… Roy

Don’t forget that rules vary from Provence to Provence.


I am only talking about Ontario and it was Ontario rules I posted .
Now to avoid being trapped by the relocation Inspection where you are paid by Royal Lepage .
Get the Client to pay you and he can get his money from Royal Lepage .
That way you are now working for the purchaser.
This is how others are handling this .

WSIB is not our friend . They want all home inspectors to now pay them .


Older recipients face WSIB clawbacks equal to Old Age Security increases

**Antonio Mauro, 82, hasn’t received 10 years of OAS cost-of-living increases because workers’ comp claws them back. **

As Antonio Mauro’s Old Age Security is adjusted for inflation, his WSIB payments are clawed back, leaving him unable to adjust to higher living costs.
By: Patty Winsa News reporter, Published on Fri Oct 31 2014

In June this year, Toronto resident Antonio Mauro received $973.82 from the Workers Safety and Insurance Board, a little more than he made per month in the early ’70s, when he was injured.
In July, the 82-year-old Toronto resident was notified by the board that his payments were about to decrease.
Mauro is in an unusual category: an older worker who has lived long enough to be subject to a WSIB law that caps his benefits — including Old Age Security — at about 90 per cent of his 1970s salary.
The cap means that quarterly cost-of-living increases in OAS are clawed back from Mauro’s monthly WSIB cheques, even though OAS is a universal benefit that most seniors who earn less than $114,815 are entitled to.
“According to them, I can’t exceed the amount of money I made 43 years ago,” said Mauro, seated at the kitchen table of his immaculate East York bungalow. “Forty-three years ago, a loaf of bread was 15 cents, a gallon of gas was 35 cents,” he said. “Today a loaf of bread is $3 and a gallon of gas is almost $6.”
Advocates for injured workers say there is no reason to lump the universal benefit in with WSIB.
“It has nothing to do with the principles of proper workers’ compensation,” said Orlando Buonastella, a community legal worker with Injured Workers’ Consultants.
The provincial government says it was a decision “made 25 years ago by the government of the day.”
“Any guess on how that decision was arrived at would be pure speculation,” said Ministry of Labour spokesperson Bruce Skeaff.
Mauro came to Canada in 1956. He first injured his back in 1966 while working as a carpenter on a highrise construction site. Six years later, he slipped while moving a steel beam from a truck, which was slightly covered in snow, and broke his back completely — the severity of his injury having been aggravated by the first one.
Mauro was 38, but he never worked again. His wife went to work, “like a beast,” he says passionately, at two jobs to support their children, then 11 and 9.
The WSIB clawback is now about $160 a month.
And while OAS is adjusted quarterly for cost of living increases, WSIB benefits have been going up annually at a much lower rate — about 0.5 per cent a year.
“Every three months he gets a notice from the federal government that says ‘your OAS will go up,’” said Buonastella. “And he gets a similar notice from the board that says your OAS is going up, so your compensation will go down by the same amount.”
According to the Bank of Canada, a basket of goods that cost $100 10 years ago would cost just under $120 in 2014.
Legal advocates want the government to provide fully indexed pensions to all injured workers.
In 1990, the provincial government changed the law so that injured workers on full benefits who weren’t expected to work again would get a cost-of-living increase, but that only applies to about 1 per cent of cases, said Buonastella.
The law doesn’t apply to Mauro’s pre-1990 injury or the vast majority of WSIB claimants today who are receiving partial benefits.
“Most people aren’t getting full benefits, so they aren’t getting cost-of-living from the board,” said Buonastella, despite a report in 2012 commissioned by the Ministry of Labour that recommended the increase.
The study “recommended full cost-of-living adjustments to all workers, whether they were older or new,” said Buonastella. “And the government has not seen fit to act on that because they’re interested in resolving the financial issues of the board on the backs of injured workers.”
The WSIB’s insurance fund takes in less money than it needs to pay the benefits of injured workers, leaving it with billions of dollars in “unfunded liability.” The province passed legislation requiring the board to get rid of that liability by 2027.
Private member’s bills concerning indexing have been introduced at Queen’s Park, but none has passed.
In January, the government will once again review the annual increase, but a spokesperson with the Ministry of Labour says a decision on an indexation factor has not been made.
Today, an injured worker like Mauro wouldn’t receive life-long benefits.
Workers compensation is now cut off at age 65, the result of changes made in the 1990 law.
And that, too, has become an issue for advocates, who are seeing more claims after that age as people work longer. The maximum benefit the WSIB will provide to workers injured after age 63 is two years.
A lawsuit challenging the age limitation will go to divisional court in December.
“It is an issue of concern for workers because of the changing demographics,” said Maryth Yachnin, a lawyer with the IAVGO legal clinic. “Sometimes they have to work longer. They don’t have the normal retirement income, which forces more marginalized people to continue working.”
Older workers can only rely on Old Age Security if they’ve been in the country for 10 years or more. And for people like Mauro, injured at a young age, Canada Pension Plan payouts are low because he has missed years of contributions.
“They’re robbing me of my money,” said Mauro, who remembers the first clawback in 2005, when the WSIB reduced his benefits by 17 cents.
“After that, every single time the OAS went up, the compensation cuts me off the same amount of money,” he said. “Whatever the federal government gives to me, doesn’t come to me. It goes to them.”
If the province contemplates “any change to the existing formula, key considerations will be ensuring fairness for injured workers, together with the future financial sustainability of the province’s workers’ compensation system,” Skeaff said.
“Our goal is to ensure that Ontario has a viable and sustainable compensation system for future generations of workers and their families

This is Canada, where each province carries it’s own legislation! And to be eligible for Work (they now call it something to reflect men and women) Compensation, there are strict rules you must abide by! This is not automatic!

Bottom line: check your local legislation.