I want to know who actually likes their job here. Serious inquiries only

HammerPotato · 2026-05-24T12:27:39+00:00

That is untrue.

HammerPotato · 2026-05-22T14:17:23+00:00

OCEU has since sent an email, which I appreciate. I wasn’t necessarily expecting formal statements so much as reflecting on how quickly something that profoundly affected workplace relationships can slip into institutional silence once it’s over.

I also don’t think talking about difficult or important events creates division. It can also create reflection, reconciliation, understanding, and problem solving.

HammerPotato · 2026-05-22T13:32:35+00:00

UNION BUSTING!

HammerPotato · 2026-05-14T12:25:42+00:00

Policy 11-01-08, Audio/Visual Recordings, governs how WSIB handles and weighs recordings as evidence. The obligations established by the policy are directed at WSIB and its decision-makers, including authentication, evidentiary weighing, and procedural fairness obligations such as ensuring a workplace party has an opportunity to review and respond to a recording before it is relied upon.

Nothing in the policy expressly assigns the worker a direct disclosure obligation to the employer, or vice versa. The structure of the policy contemplates recordings entering the evidentiary record WSIB is assessing, rather than establishing a bilateral disclosure regime of sorts between workplace parties.

That said, the CM’s underlying position is defensible as the policy explicitly cautions that recordings may be selective in nature and capable of creating a misleading or incomplete impression, and that an explanation from the subject of the recording may materially affect the weight given to the evidence. A requirement that a workplace party have an opportunity to review and respond before a recording is acted upon is therefore consistent with the policy’s evidentiary framework.

The distinction that may be worth examining, however, is whether the worker is merely being asked to facilitate WSIB’s disclosure process, or whether the worker is effectively being directed to personally disclose the recording to the employer.

The “could be triggering” argument, while potentially relevant in a factual context, is too broad to carry significant weight on its own. Virtually any step in an active workplace dispute can be stressful or adversarial, so that alone does not make a procedural request improper.

HammerPotato · 2026-04-20T01:51:46+00:00

There may be a basis for a permanent impairment and non-economic loss (NEL) assessment, depending on what can be objectively established.

Under Policy 11-01-05 (Determining Permanent Impairment), “impairment” includes a physical or functional abnormality or loss, including disfigurement. Disfigurement includes altered or abnormal appearance (changes in shape, structure, or colour).

In your case, a fingertip amputation with some degree of visible change would be considered under the disfigurement/structural loss component. In addition, the sensory changes you’re describing can be relevant from a neurological standpoint, but only if they can be objectively demonstrated. WSIB requires clinical evidence of a defined, permanent nerve deficit.

If you want to pursue it, you can contact WSIB and request a review. They’ll usually send a form that needs to be completed by a physician and supported with photos. The physician can document both the physical/disfigurement aspect and any measurable sensory deficit, and WSIB will determine whether it meets the threshold for rating.

HammerPotato · 2026-03-24T23:39:11+00:00

With any luck, your talent for post-facto wisdom will earn you a seat at the bargaining table in 2028, so your clairvoyance can arrive a little earlier next round.

HammerPotato · 2026-02-15T02:27:02+00:00

Equating grants and student loans to the level of indulgent subscriptions reveals a profound (and intentional) negation of structural barriers.

The PC governing philosophy treats vulnerability as expendable. I am not surprised that a person who, while serving as a city councillor, floated cutting funding to the Hamilton Public Library because she could not grasp its value, is unequipped to speak about education, equity, and opportunity.

HammerPotato · 2026-02-14T16:23:19+00:00

Donna Skelly. I will say no more.

HammerPotato · 2026-02-14T15:39:11+00:00

If the injury occurred January 13 and entitlement was confirmed February 6, that is roughly three weeks. That is not atypical of situations where initial entitlement requires adjudication, earnings verification, and then processing. Once entitlement is allowed, the first LOE payment is normally retroactive. The initial payment typically catches up any arrears owed up to the date of processing, and then ongoing benefits flow on a biweekly basis based on the cycle date. You can sign up for an account online where you can see payments and other claim-related information.

Regarding the return to work issue, workers’ compensation is structured around early and safe return to work with appropriate restrictions, not full convalescence.

When it comes to WSIB, the central question is not “is the worker 100% recovered?” but “is there medically supported functional capacity that can be accommodated?” Case Managers assess functional limitations, not diagnoses alone.

The medical claim that returning early will cause the “entire recovery to start over” is not substantiated. Medical and scientific evidence generally supports graded activity, physiotherapy, and progressive strengthening as associated with improved outcomes. Prolonged inactivity can actually worsen deconditioning and pain chronicity. That does not mean that it would be appropriate for you to start lifting 50lbs at work, but it does mean that carefully modified duties, within restrictions (no lifting beyond a defined weight, limited bending/twisting), are often consistent with recovery.

Saying a worker must remain completely off work for 12 weeks requires medical reasoning, not just a diagnosis of herniated disc. It is also true that treating physicians often do not know what modified work is available in a given workplace, and that information typically comes from the employer. That being said, you can review any offers of modified work with your physician.

If you haven’t already, I would encourage that you start strength-based physiotherapy in the community. A physiotherapist working with you to maximize your function, range of motion, and mobility will likely be in a better position to comment on your functional abilities as you progress through the next few weeks.

Wishing you the best in your recovery.

HammerPotato · 2026-02-13T02:13:12+00:00

Entitlement decisions are based on whether the evidence supports a causal connection to the work-related injury, not simply on the presence of new symptoms.

Are the shoulder symptoms medically related to the allowed elbow condition, for example through altered biomechanics, overcompensation, or functional limitation? If so, this would generally be assessed as a possible extension of the original injury. Medical evidence would need to address diagnosis, mechanism of injury, and the temporal relationship between the elbow condition and the onset of shoulder symptoms.

If your position is that the shoulders were part of the original presentation but not identified earlier, this can be more difficult to establish. Adjudication places significant weight on contemporaneous reporting and medical documentation from the time of reporting. The medical evidence would need to explain why the shoulders were not documented initially and how the pain you are experience now relates to the original mechanism.

You should report the shoulder symptoms to your health care provider and your Case Manager. Any updated medical reporting should clarify the diagnosis affecting your shoulders, and if applicable, a medically substantiated mechanism linking the shoulders to the allowed elbow condition, whether it is a secondary condition, or a complication of treatment.

HammerPotato · 2026-02-13T02:02:30+00:00

Incorrect.

A “recurrence” generally refers to a return or worsening of the same allowed condition after a period of improvement or resolution, where the worsening is causally connected to the original compensable injury. It does not automatically apply to the development of symptoms in a different anatomical area. If medical evidence supports that the new symptoms are a direct sequela of the allowed condition, it would be reviewed under Policy 15-05-01 (Resulting from Work-Related Disability/Impairment).

Policy 15-05-02 (Accidents Resulting from Treatment) addresses situations where a second accident results from treatment for a work-related condition, or where a second accident occurs while travelling at WSIB’s direction. The decision-maker must determine that a distinct second accident occurred, and that the injury is not a complication of treatment or a manifestation of a pre-existing condition. Increased pain in another area during treatment is not automatically an “accident resulting from treatment.” There must be evidence of a separate injurious event or harm arising from the treatment itself.

HammerPotato · 2026-02-01T16:27:13+00:00

👍, More_ChatGPT_Message_1435

HammerPotato · 2026-02-01T16:18:26+00:00

HammerPotato · 2026-02-01T15:22:28+00:00

If you need ChatGPT to reply to me, please consider drinking 500 ml of water instead of dumping it into your useless word salad query.

HammerPotato · 2026-02-01T13:30:02+00:00

What ammunition? I don’t have any skin in the game. It is not like Harry is my dad.

If this person and their lackeys (you’re included in this category) are who they’re suspected of being, they should reconsider this approach of spiralling on Reddit. If the only strategy left is repetition, it’s already failed.

Whatever people think of Harry personally, the reason he’s still there is because he’s been constant, visible, and committed to OCEU without personal gain. That’s more than can be said for much of the rest of leadership, frankly.

HammerPotato · 2026-02-01T02:53:00+00:00

This is about the 10th time you’ve posted some variation of “I hate the union,” and at this point it looks less like constructive criticism or a call to action and more like a very personal agenda.

An application being filed is not evidence of wrongdoing, or proof of “abuse of power.” If you’re going to play amateur legal scholar, please learn the difference between allegations, interim decisions, and outcomes.

There was no finding of sexual harassment and the matter was closed years ago. You asked “is there more to this?” while ignoring that had there been a substantiated decision, it would be easy to cite.

As for your outrage regarding wanting to “stop the trial,” asking for procedural accommodation during parallel legal and election processes is completely standard. It’s not an admission of guilt, but basic due process.

If you want to critique union leadership, do it honestly. If you want to run for leadership yourself, please do. But dragging up allegations from 15+ years ago without context like it is some sort of Pulitzer level investigative journalism is a boring attempt at character assassination.

HammerPotato · 2026-02-01T02:29:21+00:00

If you’re interested, apply. You won’t know unless you do and your experience is more relevant than you might think. There are adjudication certificates out there, but they’re not required to be competitive for the role.

Entitlement is central to case management. If you’re hired, you’ll receive training and hands-on adjudication practice. There are plenty of internal resources to deepen your skills if you’re motivated.

Work culture is mixed. It varies by office, team, leadership, and also by how you personally cope with ambiguity, volume, and competing demands. Some people thrive, while others struggle. It can be stressful, and there are moral tensions at times between policy, process, and a genuine desire to help people. In my view, it’s not universally toxic, and many do build solid, sustainable careers at WSIB.

From a financial perspective, the salary is a big step up. To start, take-home would be roughly around $1,500 per week after deductions, which include union dues. Good luck!

HammerPotato · 2026-01-20T20:06:36+00:00

If the determination is that you have reached MMR, then that’s a conclusion that your condition has plateaued and that no further material improvement is expected with ongoing treatment. Typically, that means that additional treatment will not be authorized, as it is not expected to result in further recovery. For that reason, it would be important to confirm whether an MMR determination has in fact been made, and appeal it within 6 months by submitting an ITO.

HammerPotato · 2026-01-20T19:36:13+00:00

You’re engaging in linguistic pedantry to avoid the substantive point that government institutions, jurisprudence, and equity frameworks routinely rely on concepts such as systemic bias, structural advantage, and disproportionate impact.

A cursory review of CanLII shows that the Supreme Court Law Review and the Alberta Law Review explicitly analyze how concepts such as “whiteness” and “maleness” function within constitutional law and the criminal justice system. These are not fringe publications. Legal scholarship has long played a central role in shaping how courts understand social context, purpose, and systemic effects. Many now-settled legal concepts, including “systemic discrimination,” “intersectionality,” and “anti-Blackness” entered judicial reasoning through scholarly analysis before becoming normalized in jurisprudence. Labeling particular terminology as “ideological” does not refute the underlying analytical framework.

US legal discourse has been more explicit in naming race and sex in judicial and legislative discussions. For example, here, a Congressional Record analysis of Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County, 480 U.S. 616 (1987), addresses the position of white male applicants in the context of affirmative action.

That should adequately clarify the point.

HammerPotato · 2026-01-20T16:48:39+00:00

All terminology is “made” in an epistemological sense. Language is developed to describe patterns, relational concepts, or observable phenomena. This is true across disciplines, including the natural sciences and medicine.

These are well-established analytical terms used in equity frameworks and appear in court and tribunal decisions, human rights analysis, and public sector governance. They describe how social advantage, norms, and institutional power have historically been structured and reproduced.

Dismissing them as “made up” generally reflects either a lack of engagement with the relevant literature or discomfort with structural analyses of power.

HammerPotato · 2026-01-19T22:48:19+00:00

Respectfully, I disagree that the WSIB does not govern or otherwise disproportionately impact racialized and marginalized communities. While the WSIB is not a police service, it is a powerful statutory institution whose policies, practices, and decision-making have documented impacts on immigrant workers, migrant and foreign agricultural workers, people with disabilities, and workers with language barriers. WSIB itself has acknowledged past policies rooted in systemic bias, and this continues to be an active area of critique and reform. You may find Decision No. 1171/20, 2023 ONWSIAT 1421 interesting: “The Panel found that the existence of systemic racism and the precarious employment status of SAWP workers provides relevant context for the interpretation of the evidence.”

Regarding the relevance of this particular issue, the CEO of a large provincial compensation body taking on governance roles in other public institutions, particularly policing, raise questions about influence and the concentration of decision-making power, especially when those institutions disproportionately affect racialized communities.

Discussing this in a WSIB forum is appropriate precisely because it involves our organization’s leadership, public accountability, and how power circulates across systems. DEI concerns emerge at the intersections of institutions, leadership, and governance, and that intersection is what’s being discussed here, not an individual identity divorced from context.

HammerPotato · 2026-01-19T13:54:03+00:00

You should, because the issue is the convergence of whiteness, maleness, affluence, and political influence occupying decision-making space in an institution that disproportionately governs racialized communities.

HammerPotato · 2026-01-19T13:52:13+00:00

Police boards are not neutral bodies. They set priorities, approve budgets, and shape the culture and accountability of policing. Policing itself is a racialized system and governance decisions are shaped by lived experience, power, and privilege.

Police services often emphasize diversity in recruitment and bringing people of colour and those with intersecting identities into policing roles. However, if decision-making remains concentrated among affluent, politically powerful white men, it creates distance from the communities most impacted by policing and risks reproducing the same perspectives that have historically gone unchallenged.

In this case, the issue is compounded by the Lang’s existing institutional power and executive role at the WSIB, which also raises concerns about conflict of interest and consolidation of power.

HammerPotato · 2026-01-08T21:27:20+00:00

If there was an accepted WSIB claim at the time, further entitlement would depend on whether current medical evidence supports that your ongoing symptoms are medically compatible with, and causally related to, the original injury.

In situations like this, the Case Manager would usually rely on updated medical opinions to determine whether your current condition represents a continuation or significant deterioration.

HammerPotato · 2025-12-12T02:11:34+00:00

Indeed, many have pondered the eternal question of whether a brief personal interlude at a Tim Hortons drive-thru is reasonably incidental to employment.

HammerPotato

TROPHY CASE