Hello to everyone in the Canadian Darkroom Disease Community.
As a longtime advocate and more recently licensed paralegal, I primarily represent injured workers in Ontario.
Because a number of my clients have DD, I have become very familiar with this condition and the horrendous discrimination to which such individuals are subjected.
It is extremely important to understand that all legislation in Canada, whether federal or provincial is framed within the human rights laws. In other words, unless so specified in a particular law that it is exempt, human rights legislation has primacy over that statute. Of course this is conveniently ignored or obscured by workers' compensation boards.
Nevertheless, the human rights "tool" is one which has not been used nearly enough. As injured workers, those with DD (which, but the way is one of many conditions that fall under the umbrella of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - MCS) are treated very differently than injured workers with evident disabilities.
In Ontario a new regulation under the Accessibiltiy for Ontarians with Disabiities Act (AODA-2005) was enacted on January 1, 2008. It is entitled "Accessibility Standards for Customer Service, Ontario Regulation 429/07. It was made mandatory for numerous agencies on January 1, 2010. This regulation does not simply refer only to physical barriers. The principle of equal opportunity means having the same chance, options, benefits and results as others, In the case of services it means that people with disabilities have the same opportunity to benefit from the way goods and services are provided as others. They should also not have to accept lesser quality or more inconvenience.
It should be noted that the AODA grew out of the Human Rights Code of Ontario and can and should be used along with the Code.
For wcb's to deny benefits to injured workers with DD when those with other more "evident" or "visible" injuries is to treat the DD workers very differently and thus they have been subjected to serious discimination.
I do hope that many more advocates and lawyers will seriously consider using the applicable human rights legislation in conjunction with the workers' compensation legislation.
Although provincial wcb tribunals have the power and authority of "discretion", this power and authority does not give these bodies the rights to subject injured workers to violations of their human rights.
I look forward to receiving your feedback.
Cheers from Ontario
Hilary
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hilary, Thank you for your thoughtful post. There are many technologists across Canada who have exhausted all WCB avenues. Without advocates like you and without the efforts of those with the fortitude to persist with their claims in the face of overwhelming opposition, this issue would be quietly swept aside by employers, the film processing industry, and WCB.
ReplyDeleteIt is easy to feel downtrodden, when your own professional association, the CAMRT (Canadian Association of Medical Radiation Technologists) has yet to take a position, never mind taking action. The numerous peer-reviewed publications on topic, didn't stop past president, Richard Lauzon from stating in an editorial that there is not enough proof. As if that were not enough, having a life-changing condition such as MCS (Multiple Chemical Sensitivity)–a multi-symptom condition for which there is no widely accepted test, and no treatment–also means having to be advocates in the medical community and our own social spheres.
In 2007 a report to the Canadian Human Rights Commission strongly supports the legitimacy of MCS, measures to prevent MCS, and accommodation for sufferers. As you suggest this may very well be the means by which we gain recognition.