Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada : Research, Policy and Practice logoLink to Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada : Research, Policy and Practice
. 2022 Jul;42(7):272–287. doi: 10.24095/hpcdp.42.7.02

Original mixed methods research - Experiences, impacts and service needs of injured and ill workers in the WSIB process: evidence from Thunder Bay and District (Ontario, Canada)

Chelsea Nol 1, Deborah Scharf 1,2, Joshua Hawkins 1, Jessie Lund 1, Jewel Kozik 3, Anna Pfoyo Kon 2
PMCID: PMC9436453  PMID: 35830217

Abstract

Introduction:

Individuals experience negative physical, social and psychological ramifications when they are hurt or become ill at work. Ontario’s Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) is intended to mitigate these effects, yet the WSIB process can be difficult. Supports for injured workers can be fragmented and scarce, especially in underserved areas. We describe the experiences and mental health needs of injured and ill Northwestern Ontario workers in the WSIB process, in order to promote system improvements.

Methods:

Community-recruited injured and ill workers (n=40) from Thunder Bay and District completed an online survey about their mental health, social service and legal system needs while involved with WSIB. Additional Northwestern Ontario injured and ill workers (n=16) and community service providers experienced with WSIB processes (n=8) completed interviews addressing similar themes.

Results:

Northwestern Ontario workers described the impacts of workplace injury and illness on their professional, family, financial and social functioning, and on their physical and mental health. Many also reported incremental negative impacts of the WSIB processes themselves, including regional issues such as “small town” privacy concerns and the cost burden of travel required by the WSIB, especially during COVID-19. Workers and service providers suggestedstreamlining and explicating WSIB processes, increasing WSIB continuity of care, and region-specific actions such as improving access to regional support services through arm’s-length navigators.

Conclusion:

Northwestern Ontario workers experienced negative effects from workplace injuries and illness and the WSIB process itself. Stakeholders can use these findings to improve processes and outcomes for injured and ill workers, with special considerations for the North.

Keywords: occupational injuries, occupational stress, mental health, rural health services, workers’ compensation, WSIB

Highlights

  • Individuals in Northwestern Ontario who were hurt or became ill at work experienced negative effects on their physical, financial, social and psychological well-being, including some related to or worsened by the WSIB process. This is consistent with research conducted elsewhere in the province.

  • Injured and ill workers in Northwestern Ontario may face additional regional barriers to proper care and recovery, including limited employment opportunities, “small town” privacy concerns and the costs and burden of carerelated travel, especially during public health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

  • Suggestions to improve the WSIB process provided by Northwestern Ontario injured workers and service providers included general system improvements (e.g. streamlining and explicating WSIB processes, increasing WSIB continuity of care, designating an arm’slength system navigator), and several suggestions particular to the northern context.

Introduction

When individuals get hurt or become ill at work (henceforth “injured workers”), they encounter a cascade of negative effects on their physical, financial, social and psychological well-being.1-3 Ontario’s Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB), formerly known as the Workers’ Compensation Board, is intended to help. First introduced in 1914, the Worker’s Compensation Board provided compensation to injured workers in the form of wage replacement and health care benefits, regardless of fault, in order to reduce adversarial relations between workers and employers when workplace injury or illness occurred.4 The current WSIB, having undergone several substantial changes over time, is now an independent trust agency responsible for balancing interests of employers and injured workers.5 The WSIB describes its function as collecting appropriate premiums from employers in order to provide timely and fair compensation to individuals who are hurt or become ill at work, while supporting their recovery and return to work.5

Although most WSIB claims are adjudicated quickly and smoothly, and most injured workers return to work with minimal disruptions to life and career,6 evidence suggests that approximately 20% of claims are prolonged, complicated and litigious, accounting for approximately 80% of total compensation claim costs.3 Furthermore, when the WSIB denies a worker’s claim and the worker files an appeal, they may be without income and necessary health and social supports for years while the appeal is resolved. Such situations inevitably lead to catastrophic consequences to workers and their families.1,7 Examples of such situations are frequently profiled in the media,8,9 illustrating the vulnerability of injured workers and the power that the WSIB system has to support or deny workers in need.

Recourse pathways and resources for people wanting to appeal WSIB decisions are fragmented and scarce. In Ontario, specialized, Toronto-based, community legal clinics assist injured workers across the province. Smaller, satellite community legal clinics also exist in other locations, but many of those clinics, including the ones in Northwestern Ontario, are not fully staffed; frequently they do not employ a lawyer at all, and often do not have the resources to provide assistance in workers’ compensation matters. Moreover, while the Ministry of Labour’s Office of the Worker Adviser provides no-cost representation to non-unionized injured workers, their waiting list is years long, leaving people without the financial means to pay for legal assistance, and without recourse. Altogether, individuals who become engaged in the WSIB claims and appeals processes frequently experience a toll on their finances, families and mental health.7

The risk of developing or exacerbating psychological illness during the WSIB claims and appeals process is high. Recent data suggest that up to half of individuals who get hurt or become ill at work develop depressive symptoms within a year of injury.10,11 Such emergent mental health conditions further impede workers’ long-term recovery and potential to return to work.12,13 Many workers also lose the ability to access mental health services and supports once they become injured or ill because they lose access to employer insurance and the income needed to pay for mental health services. In Ontario, waitlists for free, public mental health services are often six months or more.14

In northern, rural or remote areas of Ontario, at least two additional challenges may further impede recovery and return to work. These include a general lengthening of the WSIB process, as workers frequently must travel to access specialists for assessments to justify receipt of WSIB benefits, and difficulties in accessing appropriate care once benefits are in place. For example, with just 11 WSIB-registered psychologists in Thunder Bay City and District15 (a region geographically larger than countries such as Germany and Spain), workers with benefits may have to wait months to begin receiving services and then travel several hours by car or plane to receive care when in-person services are required.

In order to improve the services and outcomes for injured workers in Northwestern Ontario, WSIB, policymakers and community stakeholders need research that describes workers’ needs throughout the WSIB claims and appeals processes, predictors of worker WSIB experiences and the available supports in the region. The WSIB, policymakers and community stakeholders particularly need research that describes the mental health and social service needs of injured workers engaged in the WSIB process in northern, rural and remote areas such as Thunder Bay City and District, in order to identify service gaps and quality issues, and to inform future system improvements in this high-needs, underserved region. Thus, our study describes Northwestern Ontario injured workers’ experiences with the WSIB process and its impacts, plus system factors affecting WSIB experience, and suggestions to improve it.

Methods

Study design and participants

This study included a convergent, parallel, mixed methods design,16 including a quantitative online survey (n=40 injured workers) and semistructured qualitative interviews with n=16 injured workers and n=8 service providers experienced with WSIB processes in Thunder Bay City and District (Ontario). Lakehead University’s Research Ethics Board approved the study procedures (reference no. 1467879).

Eligibility criteria

Eligible injured workers (1) were at least 18 years of age; (2) were able to read and write in English; (3) were residents of Thunder Bay City or District; (4) were previously injured at work or ill from work; and (5) had filed a WSIB claim or were involved with the WSIB compensation process (including appeals) within the past five years. Injured workers elected to participate in either the online survey or semistructured interview.

Eligible service providers (1) were at least 18 years of age; (2) had the ability to read and write in English; and (3) had provided services to at least eight injured and ill workers in Thunder Bay City and District in the past two years.

Recruitment

Our team recruited injured workers through social (e.g. Facebook, Kijiji, Reddit) and print (e.g. local newspapers, hardcopy flyers) media. We recruited service providers through (1) emails to listservs and service organizations; (2) professional networks; and (3) snowball sampling, with the intention of interviewing service providers from diverse service (legal, social and psychological) backgrounds.

Instruments

We designed and used three separate data collection tools for the study, including separate tools for workers and service providers. Our worker survey instrument was primarily designed to collect quantitative information, and both interview guides were designed to collect exclusively qualitative information.

Online survey and worker interview guide

We developed online survey and worker interview guides that included questions about (1) demographics; (2) workers’ injuries or illnesses; (3) workers’ experiences engaging in the WSIB claims (and separately) appeals processes; (4) workers’ use of any community or supplementary services during the claims and appeals processes (e.g. food bank, or legal or community mental health services); and (5) workers’ suggestions for improving the WSIB claims and appeals processes. Workers also reported their perceived impacts of the WSIB claims (and separately) appeals processes. In the online survey, workers responded to the question, “How stressful was the claims (or appeals) process?” on a 5-point Likert scale from “not at all” to “extremely” stressful.

Service provider interview guide

Service providers were asked about similar topics, but from their point of view. Service providers reported (1) personal demographics and professional experience with injured workers; (2) perceived impacts of WSIB claims and appeals process on workers; (3) experience supporting workers engaged in the appeals process; (4)workers’ use of supplementary services while in the WSIB claims or appeals processes; (5) challenges supporting workers in the WSIB claims and appeals processes; and (6) suggestions for improving the WSIB claims and appeals processes.

All data collection tools are available by request.

Data collection

We collected data between November 2020 and March 2021. We collected data from both sources (survey and interview) concurrently.

Online survey

Upon confirmation of eligibility and written informed consent, research assistants sent participants an email with a link to the online survey, hosted on the SurveyMonkey platform. The survey included 70 questions and took participants approximately 14 minutes to complete.

Qualitative interviews

Clinical psychology graduate students (JH, JL, CN), trained and under the supervision of a registered clinical psychologist (DS), interviewed injured and ill workers and service providers experienced with WSIB processes via Zoom or telephone (respondent’s choice). Because we collected data during the COVID-19 pandemic, we did not offer participants the option of in-person interviews. During each interview, interviewers reiterated the purpose of the study, collected verbal informed consent and posed questions to guide discussion. Interviewers encouraged participants to elaborate, specify and discuss their experiences. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed.

Data analysis

We analyzed qualitative and quantitative data separately, using different but complementary approaches.

Quantitative analysis

Our team used descriptive statistics to characterize the sample, including workers’ injuries, needs, experiences and associated health and social service use. We also ran very preliminary, exploratory, univariate general linear models to suggest factors that might be associated with workers’ self-reported stress (on a 5-point Likert scale) separately during the claims and appeals processes. Due to our small sample size, we limited these analyses to a short list of demographic and injury-related factors derived from the literature and authors’ clinical experiences. These factors included participants’ age, sex, employment industry when injured (agriculture, manufacturing, transportation and warehousing; construction and mining; education, health care and social assistance; emergency services; hospitality, retail, arts, entertainment and recreation; and other industries), and permanence of disability (permanent, not sure, no permanent disability). All analyses were performed using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA).

Qualitative analysis

We (DS, CN, JH, JL) conducted a thematic content analysis,17,18 first by reviewing transcripts and extracting relevant themes related to workers’ experiences and needs, and then by identifying convergent and divergent issues using a mixed analysis grid.18 More specifically, we developed an initial coding framework for deductive analyses based on the preliminary themes used to organize the interview guide (experiences with and impacts of the WSIB process, system factors affecting WSIB experience, and suggestions to improve it). As there is a dearth of research related to injured worker experiences with workers’ compensation in rural, remote and northern communities in Ontario and in Canada overall, we kept themes in the initial coding framework minimal and broad, allowing for maximal generation of new themes and categories reflecting injured workers’ experiences.19 Accordingly, we also conducted an inductive analysis to identify emergent themes and categories, which resulted in many new emergent themes (i.e. WSIB-specific risk factors vs. broader system risk factors affecting WSIB experience, varying suggestions to improve the process) and categories (e.g. various WSIB claim impacts) that we included in the final categorization.

To do this, we first familiarized ourselves with the data collected through the online surveys and qualitative interviews. Second, we summarized data into smaller fragments of information that were first descriptive (paraphrases), then interpretative (words representative of underlying concepts, called “codes,” selected by coders). We then grouped codes that reflected similar meaning under categories, and we grouped categories into themes within the coding framework.18 We analyzed data continuously until saturation was reached (i.e. no new themes emerged). We finalized the coding framework, scheme and final categorization using co-coding and discussion, and we resolved disagreements through consensus.

Results

Participants

Injured worker characteristics are shown in Table 1 . Injured workers were largely between 35 and 54 years of age, male, not legally married (i.e. single or common-law) and with no dependents. Participants largely identified as White. Nearly all participants were born in Canada, lived in Thunder Bay, Ontario, and spoke English as their first language. Gender and ethnicity were representative of the worker demographics of the region, but, in comparison, our sample was slightly older than other workers in the region.20

Table 1. Demographics of injured and ill worker respondents to survey and interviews about WSIB experiences, Thunder Bay City and District (Ontario, Canada), November 2020 to March 2022.

graphic file with name 42_7_2_t01.jpg
Open in a new tab

Service providers (n=8) were mostly female, with an average of M=12.9 (SD=14.25) years’ experience providing services to injured workers. Providers practised in the areas of mental health, legal and physical rehabilitation services and described their geographic practice areas as including Kenora, Thunder Bay, all of Northwestern Ontario, or all of Ontario including the North.

Workplace injuries, disability and need for accommodation

Injured workers described their workplace injuries, the presence of disabilities and their needs for accommodation through the online survey and semistructured interviews.

Survey

The majority (n=28; 70%) of survey respondents’ injuries occurred in the past five years. Respondents’ injuries were largely physical (n=32; 80%) as opposed to psychological or occupational disease. Respondents made claims while working in the following sectors: education, health care and social assistance (n=8; 20%); agriculture, manufacturing, transportation and warehousing (n=10; 25%); hospitality, retail, arts, entertainment and recreation (n=8; 20%); construction and mining (n=6; 15%); emergency services (n=5; 12.5%) and “other” (redacted due to small cell size).

Half (n=20; 50%) of survey respondents stated that they were working either full time (n=15; 75%) or part time (n=5; 25%) since filing a WSIB claim. Among respondents who stated that they were currently working (n=20), 40% (n=8) stated that they had accommodations in place including modified tasks, a modified workspace, reduced hours, delayed return to work and changes in their role. The majority (n=25; 62.5%) of respondents stated that the workplace injury changed their life “a lot” or “completely.” Nearly half (n=19; 47.5%) of all respondents reported sustaining a permanent disability from their workplace injury.

Interviews

The majority (n=12; 75%) of interviewees’ injuries also occurred in the past five years. This means that a quarter of interviewees’ injuries occurred more than five years ago, yet they were still engaged in the WSIB process at the time of their interview. Their injuries were mostly physical (n=12; 75%), with many fewer psychological and occupational diseases (n=4; 25%). Injured worker interviewees also largely made claims while working in the education, health care and social assistance industries (n=8; 50%). Other (n=8; 50%) interviewees made claims while working in construction and mining, agriculture, manufacturing, transportation and warehousing and emergency services (% redacted due to small cell sizes). Fewer than half of all worker interviewees reported that they were working full time at the time of the interview (n=7; 43.8%).

Experience and impacts of the WSIB claims and appeals processes

Injured workers and service providers described the experiences and impacts of the WSIB claims and appeals processes on injured workers through the online survey and semistructured interviews.

Survey

Although most (n=32; 80.0%) respondents reported that their original claim was accepted, the majority of these still rated the claims process as “extremely” (n=13; 32.5%) or “very” (n=9; 22.5%) stressful. Similarly, among the nearly half of all respondents (n=18; 45.0%) who reported appealing a WSIB claim, less than half of those appeals (n=8; 44.4%) were accepted, and nearly one-quarter (n=4; 22.2%) were still in progress. Nearly all respondents described the appeals process as “extremely” (n=10; 55.6%) or “very” (n=4; 22.2%) stressful. Respondents who filed claims only, or both claims and appeals, described the processes as having negative impacts on their psychological health, physical health, relationship with their family, relationship with their friends, hobbies, community involvement, financial security and career ( Figure 1 ).

Figure 1. Impact of WSIB claims and appeals processes on respondents to injured workers survey, across multiple domains, Thunder Bay City and District (Ontario, Canada), November 2020 to March 2021.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

With full recognition of our small sample size (n=40 survey respondents), we conducted very preliminary univariate linear regression analyses designed to identify worker and injury characteristics potentially associated with elevated levels of claim- and appeal-related stress, largely as potential suggestions for future research. Our univariate predictors included age, gender, injury type, industry and disability permanence, and our outcome was self-reported claim-related stress, measured on a 5-point Likert scale. Workers’ mean self-reported claim-related stress was 3.4 (SD=1.5), and their mean self-reported appeal-related stress was 4.1 (SD=1.3). Only presence of a permanent disability was found to be associated with claim stress (R2 = 0.17, F2,47 = 3.78, p=0.03). Specifically, workers reporting a permanent disability (Β=1.49, p=0.01) experienced significantly more claim-related stress than workers with no permanent disability (reference group). None of the variables that we examined were significantly associated with appeal-related stress.

Interviews

We used Northwestern Ontario injured worker and service provider interviews to describe the ways in which the WSIB claims and appeals processes affected workers’ mental health. Worker and service provider responses fit within nine common themes: (1) family role instability and conflict (e.g. partners and children transitioning to wage-earning roles; loss of respect or authority of injured worker with reduced ability to provide for others); (2) financial anxiety and insecurity (e.g. worries about the onset, duration and extent of WSIB wage replacement); (3) frustration and anger (e.g. about WSIB paperwork requirements, difficulty accessing case representatives and having the validity of their claims constantly questioned); (4) helplessness and hopelessness (e.g. processes were slow, requests for support to promote return to work were delayed or denied); (5) job insecurity (e.g. unavailability of pre-injury job after recovery or appropriate accommodated or alternate work); (6) loss of professional or occupational identity (e.g. disappointment about inability to work in the field that they were trained for and where they had careers); (7) retraumatization (e.g. needing to recount traumatic details of the workplace injury to multiple WSIB workers and reassert the validity of the claim); (8) guilt and shame (e.g. about not being able to work and support families); and (9) social isolation (e.g. separation from coworkers, self-isolation from friends and loved ones associated with workplace injury–related depression). Illustrative quotations may be found in Table 2 .

Table 2. Nine common themes emerging from worker and service provider descriptions of the mental health impacts of the WSIB claims and appeals processes, Thunder Bay City and District (Ontario, Canada), November 2020 to March 2021.

graphic file with name 42_7_2_t02.jpg
Open in a new tab

System factors impacting workers’ WSIB experiences

Injured workers and service providers also described system factors impacting workers’ experiences with the WSIB through the online survey and semistructured interviews.

Survey

Respondents selected (from a list) aspects of the WSIB process that went smoothly and those that were challenging, separately, during the claims (n=40) and appeals (n=18) processes ( Figure 2 ).

Figure 2. Injured and ill workers’ reports of the smooth and challenging components of the WSIB process, Thunder Bay City and District (Ontario, Canada), November 2020 to March 2021.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Injured workers identified some aspects of the claims and appeals processes that went smoothly (n=34; 85.0%), including medical expert assessment and consultation (n=15 [37.5%] for claims and n=5 [27.8%] for appeals, respectively), interactions with coworkers (claims: n=10 [25.0%]; appeals data redacted due to small cell size) and scheduling meetings and appointments (n=11 [27.5%] and n=6 [33.3%], respectively).

All participating workers chose to identify challenges during the claims process. These included communication with WSIB (n=29; 72.5%), paperwork (n=22; 55.0%), finances while off of work (n=22; 55.0%), medical expert assessment/consultation (n=19; 47.5%) and going through the application process while still injured/ill (n=18; 45.0%). Findings were similar for the appeals process. Respondents reported encountering challenges related to communication with WSIB (n=14; 77.8%), paperwork (n=9; 50.0%), medical expert assessment and consultation (n=7; 38.9%) and going through the application process while still injured/ill (n=13; 72.2%) during the appeals process. More information about the nature of these challenges came from worker interviews (see next section).

Workers were also asked if they had accessed non-WSIB community supports during the WSIB claims and appeals processes. Some (n=16; 40.0%) workers reported accessing support services in the process of making claims or appeals, including psychological and legal services, chronic pain programs, employment services, injured worker groups, employee assistance programs, foodbanks, crisis lines, transportation services, income supplement services and the Office of the Worker Adviser (n’s and percentages redacted due to small cell sizes). Among workers (n=16) who accessed support services, the majority (n=14; 87.5%) described them as “very” or “extremely” helpful.

Interviews

Northwestern Ontario workers and service providers described system factors that positively and negatively impacted their WSIB claims and appeals experiences, including both WSIB-specific and broader system factors. Corresponding sample quotations for themes and categories are shown in Table 3 .

Table 3. Injured and ill workers’ and service providers’ descriptions of challenges and protective factors of WSIB processes, Thunder Bay City and District (Ontario, Canada), November 2020 to March 2021.

graphic file with name 42_7_2_t03a.jpg graphic file with name 42_7_2_t03b.jpg graphic file with name 42_7_2_t03c.jpg
Open in a new tab

Protective (i.e. positive or experience-enhancing) factors identified by workers were: (1) access to adequate services (e.g. psychological); (2) the recent introduction of a WSIB online portal to coordinate and file claims and appeals; and (3) WSIB transparency (i.e. instances in which workers knew exactly what to expect from WSIB and what procedures to follow).

Risk factors (i.e. negative or factors that detract from the experience) specific to WSIB identified by workers included: (1)care coordination and treatment planning issues (e.g. accessing and aligning services between providers); (2) communication challenges (e.g. difficulty getting in touch with WSIB representatives); (3)paperwork (total amount, complex nature); (4) staff turnover and continuity of care (e.g. having to repeat basic injury/illness information to multiple new workers); and (5) transparency (e.g. uncertainty about process steps and requirements). Worker-identified broader system risk factors included: (6) location and ability to access medical experts for assessments, consultation or services; (7)employer and union relations (e.g. pressure from employers to return to work, or work in ways negatively impacting recovery, or tensions between unions and employers); and (8) having to go through the WSIB process while injured or ill (because it is complex, it requires multiple actions, taking up time that could have been spent in rest and recovery).

Suggestions for improvements

Workers and service providers made a number of suggestions for improving the WSIB system and how it functions overall and in the context of Northwestern Ontario.

Survey

Survey respondents’ suggestions for how they would improve the WSIB process included increasing access to supplementary services (n=15; 35.0%) such as counselling or psychological services (n=7; 17.5%). Individuals also listed legal aid, pain or rehabilitation specialists and disability compensation (n’s<5) as ways to improve services for Northwestern Ontario injured workers.

Survey and interview

As survey respondents also proposed suggestions to improve the WSIB process in an open-ended fashion, we analyzed interview transcripts and answers to open-ended survey questions jointly. Injured worker and service provider suggestions for how to improve the WSIB processes were tightly aligned and included the following themes: (1) the addition of a systems or arm’s-length navigator to help workers understand and move effectively through WSIB processes; (2) greater compassion from WSIB workers; (3) continuity of care (e.g. more opportunities to speak with WSIB representatives familiar with workers’ cases); (4) increased access to and knowledge about support services, within and outside of WSIB-funded care; (5) more responsive communication from WSIB; (6) special considerations and succession planning for Northern providers; and (7) transparency (e.g. information about worker pathways and options, including available services). Corresponding sample quotations for these themes may be found in Table 4 .

Table 4. Sample suggestions by Thunder Bay City and District (Ontario, Canada) injured and ill workers and service providers for improving the WSIB experience, by theme, November 2020 to March 2021.

graphic file with name 42_7_2_t04a.jpg graphic file with name 42_7_2_t04b.jpg
Open in a new tab

Discussion

Although workers’ compensation systems such as the WSIB are devised to reduce financial harms and promote recovery and return to work,5 research has demonstrated that injured workers generally have poor physical health, mental health and occupational outcomes.21-26 In our study, injured workers and service providers in Northwestern Ontario described the range of impacts from their workplace injuries, incremental impacts on injury, illness and recovery from the worker compensation system, and suggestions for improving the system intended to support them.

Consistent with previous research on workers elsewhere in the province, the Northwestern Ontario injured workers in this study described a wide range of negative impacts from their injuries and illness, including impacts on their psychological, physical, social,21-29 recreational,30 financial30 and occupational31 well-being. In particular, this study identified a high rate of psychological distress among injured workers, with most survey respondents stating that their workplace injury changed their life “a lot” or “completely.”

A key finding from this work is that Northwestern Ontario injured workers clearly described incremental negative impacts from being involved in the workers’ compensation claims and appeals processes. More than half of the participants in this study rated the claims and appeals processes as extremely or very stressful. These findings are consistent with research conducted elsewhere in the province showing that injured workers involved in workers’ compensation systems report considerable levels of stress and are at greater risk of developing persistent mental health problems than those who were not injured at work, and the general population.32,33 The injured workers and service providers highlighted several aspects of the process that could contribute to a negative claim or appeal experience, outlined below.

The injured workers in this study described specific mental health impacts of the WSIB process, including feelings of helplessness, hopelessness, shame, guilt, frustration and anger, as well as retraumatization, financial and job anxiety and insecurity, the loss of professional or occupational identity, social isolation and family role instability or conflict. These results substantiate previous research highlighting power differentials between claimants and the workers’ compensation system, and build upon previous injured workers’ accounts of de-legitimization, coercion and stigmatization perpetrated by compensation system actors4,34,35 occurring elsewhere in Canada. Moreover, the mental health impacts of the WSIB process described by participants lend support to previous injured worker studies describing feelings of frustration, helplessness and hopelessness resulting from “adversarial” and unjust workers’ compensation experiences,3,34-38 and the consequent negative ramifications of these processes and experiences on career plans, hobbies and community involvement, finances and mental health of claimants.30,31,36,38-40

We also found some very preliminary evidence that stress related to claims and appeals was different across groups. Specifically, we found that sustaining a permanent disability following workplace injury was a significant predictor of claim-related stress. This finding helps to substantiate previous research demonstrating that injured workers with permanent impairments have poorer outcomes than injured workers who fully recover and return to work, and the general population.10 More research with larger samples is needed to confirm and identify other potential subgroups of individuals (e.g. lower preinjury income, English language learners) at risk for negative mental health impacts from the claims and appeals processes, in Northwestern Ontario and beyond. If replicated, special considerations (e.g. enhanced supports for managing stress, and different expectations for income replacement among workers unable to return to their workplaces in the same capacity) might benefit workers in the WSIB system.

Although our sample was restricted to workers and service providers in Northwestern Ontario, claimants and service providers described many challenging aspects of the claims process consistent with previous research conducted elsewhere in the province. These included care coordination and treatment planning issues,38,41-44 communication challenges,38,45 paperwork,34,40 staff turnover and lack of continuity of care35,38,46 and lack of transparency.34,38,47 As expected, being involved in the appeals process negatively contributed to injured workers’ experience with the WSIB, and interviewees and survey respondents reported that, due to the adversarial nature of their appeals, already challenging aspects of the WSIB process were even more unsatisfactory during the appeals process. While these themes for workers in the WSIB system are not new, ours is the first study that we are aware of that shows that these issues persist in small, northern and rural communities throughout Northwestern Ontario.

Critical to the importance of our work overall, we also identified risk factors (i.e. negative, or those detracting from the experience) specific to WSIB claimants in Northwestern Ontario. For instance, we easily traced several region-specific issues to anticipated problems accessing services, including legal, social and health care services. In particular, well-known health services issues endemic in the North, such as insufficient numbers of providers to meet the population need, clearly affected the injured workers in our study. Importantly, problems related to low or no access to primary care services had cascading effects on workers, because primary care providers must assess the need for and initiate referrals to specialists, as well as plan and coordinate assessments and care. Limited access to specialist providers was also problematic, including long waitlists for local providers or the cost, logistics and time needed to travel for assessments or care while workers were ill and had family responsibilities. The COVID-19 pandemic also restricted travel for several of the workers in this study, further delaying access to assessments and care. Communication infrastructure issues were also common within this sample, including low or no access to reliable Internet or telephone service, which are likely less common in more populous parts of the province. These regional issues are consistent with research documenting disproportionate negative impacts of workplace injuries on injured workers in remote and rural communities and associated lack of access to care.44,48-51

We also documented regional cultural impacts of workplace injury, including loss of equipment for local recreational pastimes. For example, workers described losing boats and snow machines (snowmobiles), which serve as transportation and connection to community, when their income was not adequately replaced. Policies that require individuals to sell all of their belongings in order to qualify for benefits are likely to have unintended, negative impacts on the overall recovery of people who become hurt or ill at work.

Finally, service providers in the North were very concerned about succession planning, noting that in small communities of practitioners, the whole service system suffers (and in some cases, can cease to function) when individuals, often serving as the sole providers to populations or regions, retire, move away or die. Attracting and training local providers to offer community and culturally informed services must be a priority for the WSIB to ensure adequate system function in the North.

Factors associated with the presence of psychological distress related to claims and appeals are modifiable,52 as workplace response to injury and insurance claims and appeals processes can be altered.53,54 Some aspects of the WSIB process that were described as protective can be maintained and enhanced for potentially underserved groups, such as access to adequate support services (mostly psychological or legal). Several workers also touted the recent introduction of a WSIB online portal to coordinate file claims and appeals; in consultation with workers and providers, WSIB may be able to further leverage technology to simplify and enhance small, rural, remote or northern community workers’ experiences.

Workers and service providers also suggested system improvements, such as

creating arm’s-length navigators to help workers understand and move effectively through WSIB processes;

enhancing WSIB employee compassion;

increasing continuity of care (e.g. greater opportunity to speak with WSIB representatives familiar with one’s case);

improving access to and knowledge about support services within and outside of WSIB-funded services;

ensuring more responsive communication from WSIB;

engaging in workforce development or succession planning, making special provisions for northern providers and special populations (e.g. enhanced provider training); and

increasing transparency about WSIB’s role and the claims and appeals processes overall.

The main goal of all of these suggestions is to improve the well-being of injured workers.

Strengths and limitations

Although ours is the first study we are aware of describing the experiences, impacts and social service needs in small, northern and rural communities throughout Northwestern Ontario, our results should be considered within the limitations of the research design.

This study was cross-sectional, meaning that participants provided risk factor data specific to injury impact and to WSIB processes at the same time. Thus, some of our findings may have been subject to reverse causality effects, with workers experiencing negative impacts from their injuries inadvertently attributing some of their injury-related experiences to the WSIB system itself. Our design also did not give us access to information about workers’ preinjury (baseline) mental illness, which could have had an effect on workers’ descriptions of their injury impacts and risk factors while involved in the WSIB process.

We are also aware that our sample size is very small, although in line with other published, well-cited studies of the WSIB. Therefore, our findings may not represent the experience of all Northwestern Ontario workers and service providers, even though the total population of providers in the region is very small.15 We are also aware that our assessment of risk factors is underpowered; future research with a larger sample (e.g. existing WSIB data) is needed to replicate and extend our analyses of workers’ claims- and appeals-related distress.

Our sample, besides its small size, was also limited to English speakers who were able to communicate with researchers over the telephone or computer. The experiences of new immigrants with limited English skills, very remote workers and completely indigent individuals were not fully captured in this research.

Finally, the quantitative survey measure used to assess injured workers’ experiences with the WSIB was developed for the study, and is not a validated measure of workers’ experiences. Future research is needed to validate our findings and assess their generalizability to larger samples of workers and service providers in Northwestern Ontario.

Conclusion

This mixed-methods study adds to the existing research on the plight of injured workers in Northwestern Ontario—a large and unique geographical region whose outcomes following workplace injury and illness are poorer than elsewhere in the province. It provides novel information about the experience of Northwestern Ontario injured workers, how they are multiplicatively impacted by their injuries and how the system intended to support them imparts negative impacts of its own. These workers and service providers familiar with the Ontario workers’ compensation system suggested improvements from their unique perspectives. The WSIB, policymakers, researchers and other stakeholders can use the findings in this research to improve supports for Northwestern Ontario injured workers to promote equity in their timely recovery, improved well-being and return to sustainable work.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a grant to DS and AK from the Injured Workers Community Legal Clinic in Toronto, Ontario.

Conflicts of interest

Declaration of interest: through her part-time private practice, Dr. Scharf provides psychological services to injured and ill workers whose care is paid for by the WSIB.

Authors’ contributions and statement

CN led the manuscript writing, contributed to data analysis and interpretation, figure preparation, and document preparation. APK designed the study, contributed to manuscript writing, data collection, analysis and interpretation. JH and JL contributed to the study design and data collection and interpretation. JK contributed to the study design, data interpretation and manuscript writing. DS led the study design and contributed to manuscript writing and data analysis and interpretation. All authors contributed to and have approved the final manuscript.

The content and views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Government of Canada.

References

  1. Ballantyne PJ, Casey R, O’Hagan FT, Vienneau P, et al. Poverty status of worker compensation claimants with permanent impairments. Crit Public Health. 2016;26((2)):173–90. [Google Scholar]
  2. Kosny A, Newnam S, Collie A, et al. Family matters: compensable injury and the effect on family. Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40((8)):935–44. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2017.1283450. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S, Chambers L, et al. The “toxic dose” of system problems: why some injured workers don’t return to work as expected. J Occup Rehabil. 2010:349–66. doi: 10.1007/s10926-010-9229-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Lippel K, Eakin JM, Holness DL, Howse D, et al. The structure and process of workers’ compensation systems and the role of doctors: a comparison of Ontario and Qubec. Am J Ind Med. 2016;59((12)):1070–86. doi: 10.1002/ajim.22651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. WSIB. Toronto(ON): About us [Internet] Available from: https://www.wsib.ca/en/about-us. [Google Scholar]
  6. WSIB. Toronto(ON): 2011. Statistical supplement to the 2010 annual report. Available from: https://collections.ola.org/ser/138745/2010.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  7. McGuinty’s choice of WSIB chair called a betrayal of injured workers. ONIWG. 2012 Available from: https://injuredworkersonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/PressR_ONIWG_20120430_WSIBChair.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  8. Lancaster J, et al. Ex-cop finally paid $630K in lost wages due to PTSD after years of living in poverty. Ex-cop finally paid $630K in lost wages due to PTSD after years of living in poverty. CBC News [Internet] Available from: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ralph-thistle-wsib-toronto-police-1.6088103. [Google Scholar]
  9. Mercer G, et al. Claims system for workers with cancer outdated: study. Claims system for workers with cancer outdated: study. The Globe and Mail [Internet] Available from: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-claims-system-for-workers-with-cancer-outdated-study. [Google Scholar]
  10. O’Hagan FT, Ballantyne PJ, Vienneau P, et al. Mental health status of Ontario injured workers with permanent impairments. Can J Public Health. 2012;103((4)):e303–e308. doi: 10.1007/BF03404240. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Carnide N, Johnson S, et al, et al. Course of depressive symptoms following a workplace injury: a 12-month follow-up update. J Occup Rehabil. 2016;25((2)):204–15. doi: 10.1007/s10926-015-9604-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kellezi B, Coupland C, Morriss R, et al, et al. The impact of psychological factors on recovery from injury: a multicentre cohort study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2017;52((7)):855–66. doi: 10.1007/s00127-016-1299-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. et al, et al. Long-term psychological outcome of workers after occupational injury: prevalence and risk factors. J Occup Rehabil. 2014;24((1)):1–10. doi: 10.1007/s10926-013-9431-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. CAMH. Toronto(ON): Mental illness and addiction: facts and statistics [Internet] [Google Scholar]
  15. WSIB. Toronto(ON): Community mental health network psychologist directory [Internet] Available from: https://www.wsib.ca/en/community-mental-health-network-psychologist-directory. [Google Scholar]
  16. Creswell JW, Clark VL, rd ed, et al. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 2017 [Google Scholar]
  17. Braun V, Clarke V, et al. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3((2)):77–101. [Google Scholar]
  18. Miles MB, Huberman AM, nd ed, et al. Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. SAGE Publications Inc. 1994 [Google Scholar]
  19. Fereday J, Muir-Cochrane E, et al. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int J Qual Methods. 2006;5((1)):80–92. [Google Scholar]
  20. WSIB. Toronto(ON): By the numbers: 2020 statistical report [Internet] Available from: https://www.wsib.ca/en/bythenumbers. [Google Scholar]
  21. Orchard C, Carnide N, Smith P, Mustard C, et al. The association between case manager interactions and serious mental illness following a physical workplace injury or illness: a cross-sectional analysis of workers’ compensation claimants in Ontario. J Occup Rehabil. 2021;31((4)):895–902. doi: 10.1007/s10926-021-09974-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Mason S, Wardrope J, Turpin G, Rowlands A, et al. Outcomes after injury: a comparison of workplace and nonworkplace injury. J Trauma. 2002:98–103. doi: 10.1097/00005373-200207000-00019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Zelle BA, Panzica M, Vogt MT, Sittaro NA, Krettek C, Pape HC, et al. Influence of workers’ compensation eligibility upon functional recovery 10 to 28 years after polytrauma. Am J Surg. 2005:30–6. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.01.042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Harris I, Mulford J, Solomon M, Gelder JM, Young J, et al. Association between compensation status and outcome after surgery: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2005;293((13)):1644–52. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.13.1644. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Cheriyan T, Harris B, Cheriyan J, et al, Spine J, et al. Association between compensation status and outcomes in spine surgery: a meta-analysis of 31 studies. Spine J. 2015;15((12)):2564–73. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.09.033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Gu JK, Charles LE, Fekedulegn D, Ma CC, Violanti JM, Andrew ME, et al. Occupational injury and psychologi-cal distress among U.S. jsr. 2020:207–17. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2020.06.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Bartys S, Frederiksen P, Bendix T, Burton K, et al. System influences on work disability due to low back pain: an international evidence synthesis. Health Policy. 2017;121((8)):903–12. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.05.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Collie A, Sheehan L, Lane TJ, Iles R, et al. Psychological distress in workers’ compensation claimants: prevalence, predictors and mental health service use. J Occup Rehabil. 2020;30((2)):194–202. doi: 10.1007/s10926-019-09862-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Helliwell JF, Huang H, et al. New measures of the costs of unemployment: evidence from the subjective well-being of 3.3 million Americans. Econ Inq. 2014;52((4)):1485–1502. [Google Scholar]
  30. Kirsh B, McKee P, et al. The needs and experiences of injured workers: a participatory research study. Work. 2003:221–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Gewurtz RE, Premji S, Holness DL, et al. The experiences of workers who do not successfully return to work following a work-related injury. Work. 2019;61((4)):537–49. doi: 10.3233/WOR-182824. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Orchard C, Carnide N, Mustard C, Smith PM, et al. Prevalence of serious mental illness and mental health service use after a workplace injury: a longitudinal study of workers’ compensation claimants in Victoria, Australia. Occup Environ Med. 2020:185–7. doi: 10.1136/oemed-2019-105995. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Kim J, et al. Depression as a psychosocial consequence of occupational injury in the US working population: findings from the medical expenditure panel survey. BMC Public Health. 2013:303–7. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Beardwood BA, Kirsh B, Clark NJ, et al. Victims twice over: perceptions and experiences of injured workers. Qual Health Res. 2005;15((1)):30–48. doi: 10.1177/1049732304268716. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Lippel K, et al. Workers describe the effect of the workers’ compensation process on their health: a Qubec study. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2007;30((4-5)):427–43. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2007.06.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Murgatroyd DF, Cameron ID, Harris IA, et al. Understanding the effect of compensation on recovery from severe motor vehicle crash injuries: a qualitative study. Inj Prev. 2011;17((4)):222–7. doi: 10.1136/ip.2010.029546. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Pollard WM, et al. Injured teachers’ experiences of the Victorian workers’ compensation stress claims process: adversarial and alienating. Health Sociol Rev. 2014;23((2)):102–12. [Google Scholar]
  38. Kilgour E, Kosny A, McKenzie D, Collie A, et al. Interactions between injured workers and insurers in workers’ compensation systems: a systematic review of qualitative research literature. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25((1)):160–81. doi: 10.1007/s10926-014-9513-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Sullivan MJ, Thibault P, Simmonds MJ, Milioto M, Velly AM, et al. Pain, perceived injustice and the persistence of post-traumatic stress symptoms during the course of rehabilitation for whiplash injuries. Pain. 2009;145((3)):325–31. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2009.06.031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Elbers NA, Akkermans AJ, Lockwood K, Craig A, Cameron ID, et al. Factors that challenge health for people involved in the compensation process following a motor vehicle crash: a longitudinal study. BMC Public Health. 2015:339–31. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1694-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. MacEachen E, Ferrier S, Kosny A, Chambers L, et al. A deliberation on ‘hurt versus harm’ logic in early-return-to-work policy. Policy Pract Health Saf. 2007;5((2)):41–62. [Google Scholar]
  42. Soklaridis S, Ammendolia C, Cassidy D, et al. Looking upstream to understand low back pain and return to work: psychosocial factors as the product of system issues. Soc Sci Med. 2010:1557–66. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.08.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Hubertsson J, Petersson IF, Arvidsson B, Thorstensson CA, et al. Sickness absence in musculoskeletal disorders - patients’ experiences of interactions with the Social Insurance Agency and health care. BMC Public Health. 2011:107–66. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Kilgour E, Kosny A, McKenzie D, Collie A, et al. Healing or harming. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25((1)):220–39. doi: 10.1007/s10926-014-9521-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Loisel P, Baril R, Gervais J, Falardeau M, et al. Interorganizational collaboration in occupational rehabilitation: perceptions of an interdisciplinary rehabilitation team. J Occup Rehabil. 2005;15((4)):581–90. doi: 10.1007/s10926-005-8036-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Murray M, et al. Fish harvesters with injuries’ accounts of their experiences with the workers’ compensation system. Work. 2007;28((1)):47–56. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Cacciacarro L, Kirsh B, et al. Exploring the mental health needs of injured workers. Can J Occup Ther. 2006;73((3)):178–87. doi: 10.1177/000841740607300304. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Aurbach R, et al. Breaking the web of needless disability. Work. 2014;48((4)):591–607. doi: 10.3233/WOR-141913. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Caruso GM, et al. Biopsychosocial considerations in unnecessary work disability. Psychol Inj Law. 2013;6((3)):164–82. [Google Scholar]
  50. Collie A, Newnam S, Keleher H, et al, et al. Recovery within injury compensation schemes: a system mapping study. J Occup Rehabil. 2019;29((1)):52–63. doi: 10.1007/s10926-018-9764-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Gray SE, Collie A, et al. Comparing time off work after work-related mental health conditions across Australian workers’ compensation systems: a retrospective cohort study. Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2018;25((5)):675–92. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2018.1473176. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Collie A, Sheehan L, Lane TJ, Gray S, Grant G, et al. Injured worker experiences of insurance claim processes and return to work: a national, cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2019:927–92. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-7251-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Grant GM, O’Donnell ML, Spittal MJ, Creamer M, Studdert DM, et al. Relationship between stressfulness of claiming for injury compensation and long-term recovery: a prospective cohort study. JAMA Psychiatry. 2014:446–53. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.4023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Elbers NA, Collie A, Hogg-Johnson S, Lippel K, Lockwood K, Cameron ID, et al. Differences in perceived fairness and health outcomes in two injury compensation systems: a comparative study. BMC Public Health. 2016:658–53. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3331-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada : Research, Policy and Practice are provided here courtesy of Public Health Agency of Canada

RESOURCES