Mandatory WSIB in Ontario: MPP Garfield Dunlop wants to clean up the mess (VIDEO)
Robert Koci
Videos Canadian ContractorGarfield Dunlop, Ontario's representative for the people of Simcoe North, is not "just" a politican, he's a licensed plumber
Last week, Canadian Contractor publisher Rob Koci chatted with Garfield Dunlop, Ontario MPP for Simcoe North, and the PC party’s “Skilled Trades and Apprenticeships Critic,” about how the PCs would abolish or dramatically reform the newly-founded, controversial Ontario College of Trades.
This week, Rob interviews Garfield Dunlop about Ontario Bill 119, in effect since the beginning of this year, that expands the reach of the WSIB bureaucrats into the pockets of whole new classes of renovation contractors, including independent operators.
As we pointed out last week, Mr. Dunlop is not “just” a politician. In his “real” life, he’s a plumber.
Print this page
It’s nice to hear an elected official say that he wants to repeal Bill 119. I was one of the few companies that met the requirements for the exemption. That was negated when I took a small commercial job. Now, I have to pay WSIB premiums for a minimum of 3 months. This means that any work that was quoted under my exemption is now 9.1% less profitable. This seems punitive and makes no financial sense.
I think that the entire WSIB should take a 9.1% paycut to pay for their own underfunded liabilities and see how they like it.
Very bitter.
Paul: I think you hit the nail on the head when you suggest that WSIB employees take the hit,not the contractors who are paying higher premiums. It makes perfect sense for them to do so. After all, it was the WSIB that could not get their house in order. They are the ones that should pay. You do when you mess up, right?
My accident coverage protects me 24/7 were as WSIB coverage is only for on the job injuries. Little use to anyone who injures themselves after hours and can’t work anyway.
WSIB is another Hydro style train wreck of financial mismanagement.
You got to be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Having to pay full rates for office staff and others who don’t work on sites is unfair and counterproductive and needs to be changed.
Remember WSIB was originally conceived and promoted by contractors to protect themselves from ruinous lawsuits against them for injuries and death on the job. Overall this is still the best way, but it doesn’t prevent improvements.
The cry of unfunded liability is a red herring. Just as in the CPP you don’t need to fully fund the insurance because there is no end date, there are always new people to pay as others stop paying. In fact it would be ludicrous to set it up as fully funded because every worker is not going to be injured at the same time and there would be no more workers to pay premiums.
This legislation will do nothing to combat the underground economy. and I feel it will only become worse. Of course the big firms most likely like this legislation as it will no doubt cut back on competition. within their sector.. i have been in business for 40 years and always paid into WSIB for any employee I had during this time. During this period I have seen the underground business expand rapidly with the advent of GST and HST. Also during this period I also had private coverage for myself and family which was much better coverage than WSIB. Meaning there could be an opt out clause for small operators which are a different breed than employees. What makes me laugh (even though it really isn’t a laughing matter) the WSIB became totally disorganized under Elizabeth Witmer when she was labour minister and now the “funny” part …….she was appointed director by the McGuinty Liberals to run it. Government works in mysterious stupid ways sometimes. Now someone explain to me how this legislation will lesson the underground economy? The only way I see anything to impact is to allow a homeowner to deduct a certain percentage of work done on their homes and then they would care about getting receipts for services rendered.
Actually whether this comes to a surprise to everyone or not Bill 119 has not changed the WSI act 97. The inclination was to reign in the self employed construction workers in the Province. The wording of the legislation and the process for determining who is and who is not considered self employed in fact has not changed. The only thing that this legislation has changed is one simple fact. In the past a self employed individual had an option to opt out of coverage that option has now been removed. The determination of self employed is still completely in tact.
But here in lies the issue. Prior to the implementation of bill 119 WSIB audit regime wrongfully declared a companies independent operators workers for the purposes of the WSI act and their interpretation. An interpretation proven over and over again by WSIAT as the incorrect determination. Bill 119 ultimately has proven by the exemplification of how to determine the difference between worker and self employed individual in their OPM manual was identical in every way to the determination contained with tin the former legislation. There are two points here that should be made clear.
1.) Audit Fraud perpetrated through the Audit process. If the declaration of self employed has not changed from the previous legislation. The new legislation proves all along that the actions of the Audit department in cases dealing with independent operator`s was wrong backed up by their own interpretation in the new legislation. And as I have been saying all along enforced by WSIAT to continually reverse the audit decisions.
2.) What you must look at with in the WSI act now is the ability not to change the determination of who is or who is not self employed, it is who pays. The Audit department now has the power simply put to charge up the ladder. If you are confused as to who pays, it is clear. If you hire a person in the construction industry and specifically one who has not registered with the WSIB, and you do not have a clearance certificate for that individual. `YOU`will be held responsible to pay.
Now just to make it clear to the unions who have told their members that the onus is on the companies they work for I have contacted the Ministry of labor for that determination. There are no such exemptions for members of a union who declare themselves self employed. They are required to pay premiums to the WSIB on their own behalf.
@Sean Keane?? Not sure what your bottom line point is? I have always paid into WSIB for any employee and had 24 hour private coverage for myself. It is a no brainer that all should have either one but no one should pay for two coverages when one is suffice. Quite simple as it appears to be a cash grab.
Where’s the video?
It’s there. I just checked. Tell us what you are seeing?