• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Beverley
    December 06, 2011 - 13:33

    Issues are the same across the country. We gave up the right to sue our employers in the early 1900's. The Meredith Principle - check it out and read about our historic tradeoff. Since the beginning of the 1990's compensation systems have been under attack in Canada. The push is to try and dummy our system down to the lowest common denominator - the U.S. Their system does not support injured workers as ours has, and we are in the proverbial "Race to the Bottom" as has been so eloquently described by those paying the most attention. What a disgusting circumstance. Workers built this country with the sweat of their brow and the brains to design. We must honour this history and tell our politicians and leaders alike, to bring the (WCBs) compensation systems of our country in line with the Meredith tradeoff.

  • Harlee
    December 06, 2011 - 12:21

    I am currently in this system and also have a horror story about WHSCC, however I will not get in to the fine details. I have a legitimate work place injury which has put me out of work indefinitely! These people tried to pass it off as an injury from childbirth. This is there mandate! Try and blame it on something or someone else. Any body who is intending to seek assistance of any kind from WHSCC better have the support of a psychologist or the Injured Workers Association because these people will bet you down so low you have nothing left! This is when the human minds snap!

  • John
    December 06, 2011 - 09:31

    Workers Comp should be forced to do assessments at any time there is a major differednce in rates that they have approved such as the massage therapy dispute. If the massage therapist is able to get 45.00 from the general public, why would they take somebody for 25.00. They ARE running a business. Because Workers Comp sends so many patients yearly, both sides should be able to come to a compromise or at least allow a patient to pay the difference. If they are willing to pay this, it should be looked at as being benefical to the patient.

  • tom
    December 05, 2011 - 23:40

    with Danny's cousin as CEO and another cousin as acting CEO, they are just keeping costs low at the expense of workers.

  • grant
    December 05, 2011 - 14:48

    I know a man who broke his leg at work, he crawled to his truck a end of shift and clamed he did it at home and filed a claim on his insurance, rather than go near WHSCC. No worker who is paying into WHSCC should have to do that. There should be an investigation into WHSCC to clean it up.

  • Joe
    December 05, 2011 - 10:51

    I work at WHSCC. I think this is just the Commission's way of saying we're not covering massage therapy without actually saying it.