| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
disability pension |
|
|
Summary:
It consists of periodic payments made as compensation for a permanent injury (when retiring from the particular type of work in which one was engaged at the time of the injury). It may be partial, likely to last over a long period, may vary from time totime and may cease at 65.
The rationale behind excluding disability pensions is clear. The individual is working at a lesser capacity than would be the case if the disability had not occurred. The individual's total income consists of the disability pension (not insurable) and insurable income.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
wage-loss indemnity |
vs disability pension |
|
Summary:
Bus operator with the City of Winnipeg covered by something called an "Employee Benefits Program". The payments were made as compensation for a permanent disability. As such, the plan is properly characterized as a disability pension.
Wage loss payments are more likely to be short term and relate to temporary as well as to what may be or become a permanent disability. Benefits paid are likely directly related to one's full wages. Comparable to those paid under temporary partial WCB and sick leave plans.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
guidelines from the Commission |
|
Summary:
In a letter to the City of Winnipeg, the CEIC stated that from now on benefits under the plan would be considered wage loss instead of a disability pension and "prior cases" would not be reviewed. This led the Umpire to thoroughly examine the reasonableexpectation doctrine.
