Worker didn’t initially report back injury and took time to heal, but pain didn’t improve and was linked to heavy lifting in job
An Ontario worker who wasn’t able to fully perform her physical job duties and required physiotherapy after the onset of back pain at work is entitled to benefits for disablement from a gradual onset back strain, the Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal has ruled.
The worker was employed at a plant where her work duties included picking up large, 60-pound rolls of paper from a cage, turning and attaching them to a machine, as well as occasionally lifting 30-pound rolls of plastic. In early January 2013, the worker had to take one week off work due to back pain and provided a note from her doctor diagnosing her with “severe right-sided sciatica.” When she returned to work, she continued to oversee the machine to which she was assigned and fill out the paperwork, but had others lift the paper rolls under her direction.
A few weeks later, the worker’s pain still hadn’t gone away, so she went to her doctor, who prescribed physiotherapy to help with the pain. However, she didn’t initially tell her employer it was related to her work duties and the week she took off was taken as vacation leave.
The worker underwent diagnostic imaging which found narrowed disc space in some of her vertebrae that was considered to be congenital, through there was no significant abnormality. The worker’s doctor filled out a form indicated picking up the 60-pound paper rolls and putting them in a machine was “an injuring mechanism” that contributed to her back pain and she had a back sprain and possible herniated disc from the repetitive activity. The doctor gave an onset date of Jan. 11 for the injury and stated the worker needed physiotherapy before returning to work as she wasn’t able to lift more than five to ten pounds.
Employer initially wasn’t aware of link to job duties
The employer thought the worker’s back pain was a personal issue and not work-related, but this was cleared up by the documentation from the worker’s doctor, and the employer reported the workplace accident to the Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) on Feb. 7. The worker returned to work again but didn’t have to lift the paper rolls.
The worker applied for workers’ compensation benefits for a low back injury caused by either “a chance event or on the basis of a gradual onset disability.” A WSIB eligibility adjudicator found the worker was unable to establish compatibility and continuity between the accident history, her ongoing symptoms, and the medical diagnosis and denied her claim. When the worked claimed entitlement based on an aggravation of a previous condition, she was denied again. An appeals resolution officer agreed with the decision, so the worker appealed to the tribunal, arguing that the back injury was an “unexpected result of her working duties which arose in and out of her employment.”
The tribunal referred to the WSIB policy documents identifying an accident as “an identifiable unintended event which causes an injury” and stating that disablement could emerge gradually over time or be an unexpected result of working duties.
The tribunal noted that an allowable claim must have five points: an employer, a worker, a personal work-related injury, proof of accident, and compatibility of diagnosis to accident history. The first two points were already in place, and the tribunal found the worker’s doctor early on made a link between the worker’s duties and her back pain, giving an onset date of the day the worker sought medical attention.
Though there was a slight delay in reporting the injury, the tribunal found this was “well within the time limits set out in (WSIB) policy” and reasonable considering the employer wasn’t initially aware the injury was tied to work and the worker initially thought it would resolve by taking a week’s vacation, before discovering it worsened when she returned to work, not to mention the time it took to for the worker to obtain a doctor’s appointment.
“The fact that the worker had not yet linked her increasing back pain to her duties does not disqualify her claim,” the tribunal said. “It does support the worker’s version of how her back pain arose, and how she came to be aware that it was a result of her workplace duties.”
The tribunal also found that the worker’s workplace duties appeared to be compatible with her injury. The physical tasks of lifting and bending with heavy weights are consistent with the type of lower back injury from which the worker suffered, and adding the doctor’s documentation of the link confirmed the causal relationship.
“Lifting 50-60 pound rolls several times a day from a cage which required (the worker) to bend, and then twist slightly to place said roll on machine, could reasonably be seen to lead to a low back issue,” the tribunal said.
The tribunal determined that the worker met the five-point checklist for her claim to be allowed. Her job was of a “heavy and repetitive nature,” she complained of increasing back pain at work followed by a week off, and she never returned to lifting the heavy rolls of paper. Prior to the onset of back pain, the worker was able to perform the heavy physical element of her job, but couldn’t afterwards. The worker also received physiotherapy after the onset of pain, which she had not had before. In addition, there was no delay in seeking medical attention, said the tribunal.
The tribunal found the worker had entitlement to benefits for a low back strain arising out of and in the course of her duties on a gradual onset basis and overturned the earlier denials of her claim. The WSIB was instructed to further adjudicate her claim to determine the amount of benefits.
For more information see:
