- Out of province (substantial connection)
- Schedule 1 employer
- Out of province (accident out of Ontario)
This decision concerned an appeal by a worker who was denied insurance coverage under the WSIA for an accident that occurred outside Ontario. The decision addressed whether the appellant had valid workers' compensation coverage for an injury sustained while working in Florida, USA.
The appellant was injured on January 14, 2024, after falling from a horse he was training in Florida. Although the employer is based in Ontario, the WSIB denied the claim on the basis that the appellant was not covered under the WSIA at the time of the accident. The denial was due to the appellant having worked outside Ontario for more than six months without the employer requesting extended coverage, as required by WSIB Policy Document No. 14-02-08. The Panel denied the appeal.The Panel reviewed sections 18 and 19 of the WSIA, which outline the conditions under which a worker employed outside Ontario may be entitled to benefits. Coverage generally requires that the worker either: i) resides and is usually employed in Ontario, or ii) has a usual place of employment in Ontario and is working outside Ontario temporarily for employment purposes. The law specifies that if a worker is employed outside Ontario for less than six months, coverage applies; beyond that, the employer must apply for extended coverage.The appellant had been living and working in Florida for 7 to 8 years prior to the accident and was not temporarily outside Ontario but permanently residing abroad. The appellant was compensated based on the horses trained and also worked for other owners, raising but not resolving questions about worker status versus independent operator status. The Panel did not decide this issue but focused solely on coverage under the WSIA if the appellant was a worker.The Panel concluded that the appellant did not meet the residency or temporary employment requirements for WSIA coverage. The employer was not obliged to pay assessments for work performed in Florida, and the WSIB policies cited confirm the lack of coverage in such circumstances. The appellant had no substantial employment connection with Ontario at the time of the accident.The appellant's representative argued that the appellant was unaware of the loss of coverage due to lack of employer notification. However, the Panel found no evidence that the appellant genuinely believed coverage existed at the time of the accident. Even if there was a mistaken belief, this would not extend WSIA coverage and might only provide a contractual remedy against the employer, which is outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction.