Robbins SCE Research
Home| British Columbia Polls| Canada Polls| US & the World Polls| Contact| Register| Search| Donate
Glen P. Robbins writes Letter (1) to New Premier John Horgan - About Crooked WorkSafe BC - You need an Exterminator here John
  Jul 18, 2017

Commentary
From: Glen P. Robbins
To: Premier John Horgan, Langford – Juan de Fuca Community Office 122-2806 Jacklin Road Victoria, BC Fax: 250 391 2804 john.horgan,mla@leg.bc.ca (email sent to other parties)
Subject: BC Liberal Corporate Corruption continues – WorkSafe BC
WorkSafe BC – Glen P. Robbins 09016830 (GPR address for Cl No 09106830 at WBC to be used)
Background:
Began working here and there with Labour Unlimited in Autumn 2008. I was interested in process for hiring, payment, treatment of many workers with drug or mental problems by these labour brokers.
Was 'picked up' by Veolia Environmental ES from Labour Unlimited to work here and there, mostly Union sites, landed at Shell Refinery in Burnaby worked there for number of weeks then transferred to Chevron site also in Burnaby BC on Willingdon Ave.
I was the sole worker with Veolia ES at Shell Refinery when a spill occurred in the pond areas. An independent assessment was done with SN Lavelin, Shell and Veolia boss 'Tom'. Instead of taking random samples from the spill pond they planned (in front of me) to talk the young woman with Lavelin to take all spill samples from an area of the pond directly at point of filter (further from more areas of the spill pond more polluted with oil run off).
[I provided my business card of www.robbinssceresearch.com to the Lavelin employee and told her of what I knew and had seen]. I was soon transferred to Chevron.
I had graduated from the pool of labour earning $10 per hour or thereabouts for a day or half day's work, often for money for cigarettes (and other). The companies pay these organizations about $20 per hour.
The Injury:
To get to Veolia work trailer at Chevron Refinery worksite, (new workers to Chevron had to sign in at Security on Willingdon Avenue), while long term workers there entered through higher ground (parking) well lit. I could not access entrance to this location because I did not possess an employee card.
On January 19th or thereabouts (during a brutally cold winter) I was walking on Chevron property located against the ocean to my work trailer, dressed in civilian clothes (not dressed for work). Work required special foot wear, and other protective gear for the dangers associated with the job.
The 'lower road' required of new workers was poorly lit and black ice was everywhere.
It was impossible to assess the width and breath of the black ice on that day, but the assumption was made after hours of safety training at Chevron that someone there would have anticipated the walking conditions. The fact that most of the traffic on the lower road of Chevron Burnaby belonged to large trucks and not people, including me, likely left this deficiency in safety as a blind spot with Chevron.
Exposing my very serious injury to the court processes of assessment for damages considering how negligent Chevron had been would have reflected poorly on executive and staff, and cost them dearly with WorkSafe BC insurance.
Any reasonable person can see the motivation for the corruption.
Chevron Refinery Burnaby screwed up and screwed up badly. Veolia ES and confederates with WorkSafe BC had a choice, follow the law and provide appropriate compensation (or accommodation well considered by S.C.C., or cheat me. They made the collective choice to conspire to cheat me.
It is important to note here that at previous deployment at Shell and Lafarge Refinery (Richmond) and other so called union sites with Veolia ES, it was made clear to me the expense that such a large employer might incur with any Worksafe injury.
As they say more often in criminal cases (hint here) this goes to motivation.
I slipped and fell on the ice, seriously injuring my right knee and thoracic spine. It occurred on Chevron property in Burnaby City.
The right knee eventually required complete knee reconstruction, after a year of large needle injections of steroid in my right knee. The thoracic spine continues to present issues of pain and discomfort.
The right knee surgery took place in spring 2010 some 15 months after the initial injury.
[I had two previous WorkSafe BC claims – one originating from a construction site in Alberta BC both involving my right knee. The Alberta claim occurred following right knee surgery on my right knee from playing University sports on Astro Turf (primarily in the United States)].
The point here is to establish the 'Threadfact' (R) of continuation of right knee issues from WorkSafe BC claims which amounted to a week or so of payment. This would remove me from the changes made by Adolf Winter in 2002 essentially grandfathering me on loss of earnings from workplace accidents.
[Veolia ES was aware of the my right knee in originated application for employment required of all employees].
Veolia ES was gathering part time casual workers from Labour Unlimited and other similar styled sites.
This goes to show WorkSafe BC Board corruption and delays relating to classification as between regular and casual sites (as indirect evidence in support). A regular employee has more powerful rights and distinct provisions of compensation under the Act than a Casual worker.
Compensation:
As soon as I was able to, I contacted lawyers about what my rights were. I telephoned Stephens & Holman from the television commercials, seeking out free legal consultation who informed me that such an injury can only be addressed with WorkSafe BC even if the injury was not work related. They provided me with the telephone number for WorkSafe BC Legal Division.
I accepted this as legal advice based on the temporary retaining of Stephens & Holman under their free consultation.
I wrote to WorkSafe BC legal and (actual) Board of Directors and gave a detailed account of the 'matter', a copy of which I also sent (out of an abundance of caution to Burnaby City Hall (given Chevron is in Burnaby).
Someone in Burnaby City indicated I was just days late for notifying Burnaby City Hall about the incident at Chevron Refinery (in its jurisdiction).
A legal agent of the Board of Directors (the Board with the heightened awareness of fiduciary responsibility), wrote back to me saying that WorkSafe BC refused to act within the law and insisted on treating the injury as an injury other than a work place injury. (Again goes to potential punitive damages).
These documents already noted as filed with Burnaby City Hall were in 2014 provided to me upon my request with a stamped copy of these documents from their possession provided to WorkSafe BC and Minister responsible Shirley Bond (former Attorney General).
By this 'point in time' numerous causes of action had occurred.
None of my matters have been properly addressed within 3 years and 3 months as considered by the Supreme Court of Canada.
WorkSafe BC insisted on treating my injuries as workplace related, which they were not. The reason for this was to ensure I was not properly compensated. No other conclusion can be arrived it based on the evidence.
There may be motive however. The evidence of WorkSafe BC investigator “J” indicated that Veolia ES was aware of my pre work injuries.
In any event section 10 of the Worker Compensation Act [RSBC 1996] Chapter 492 applies to circumstances involving injury including those personal injuries not work related.
Stephen & Holman provided me with the free legal advice that WorkSafe BC was responsible for taking my case to court, and this proved to be accurate advice. Indeed, the Act mandates that WorkSafe BC be properly compensated for represented me in court.
Obviously the cost benefit of throwing an injured worker under the bus was more compelling to WorkSafe BC Legal Division than taking on Chevron in court or filing the action and mediating a settlement
WorkSafe BC failed to follow the law from the point of the (Executive Board of Directors) and Legal Division.
The Board (not BOD) & Wage Rate:
In March 2009 a Board member determined from application (following written BOD denial of regular injury to the courts where it belonged as personal injury) determined that my injury was a workplace injury (the work clothes required for work at a refinery do not resemble civilian clothes).
WorkSafe BC Board of Directors and Legal Division ought to have initiated legal proceedings against Chevron on my behalf. Why didn't they?
A few weeks later after cashing the first WorkSafe BC check for earnings replacement (five weeks) another claims manager (6 in all) indicated that I was not injured because of work and stopped payment forcing me to appeal. The appeal required 20 months (WCAT) to overturn.
It was more cost effective to run me through the WorkSafe BC 'Haunted House' than through the BC Courts.
While waiting for back pay from that initial WCAT decision, another WorkSafe BC Board decision maker (on purpose) mistakenly described me as a casual worker, despite my file, and the WCAT decision referring to me and determining me to be a regular worker under the Act.
The Act classified me as a worker of less than 12 months requiring the employer provide certain information or that if that information is not available to seek out other information form other similar work.
At no time since 2009 did Veolia comply with the law on determining wage rate, and WorkSafe BC did not properly compel them to provide it, but rather enabled them to not provide it. (Veolia workers received significant overtime pay, which I had received as well).
Pay generally was determined at $40,000 per year (my earnings). I was aware from speaking with others that the average income was closer to $70,000 on the basis of overtime work. My earnings to date had indicated much of my work to date being overtime. (This would also establish that the right knee was up to the job) (Once cannot climb high ladders with a bum knee).
My union (Painters Union) had taken payments from me but did not declare me a member and would not provide me with any support.
Again, no proper application of the law occurred on wage rate.
Ultimately, the Board Wage Rate Officer initially determined my wage rate as the one I was earning at the time of the personal injury.
*NB that Veolia settled a BCHRT complaint filed by me for failure to accommodate. Veolia International had been on a campaign to hire older employees (over 50). I was that age at the time of the personal injury.
I note that section 33.3 deals with Regular Workers employed for less than twelve months. Section 33.2 deals with Apprentice or Learner and 33.4 deals with Casual Workers.
Again, at all times I was a Regular Worker under the Act.
Here is the provision under the Act for Regular Worker: “In the case of a worker employed, on other than casual or temporary basis, if employed for less than 12 months immediately preceding the date of the injury, the Board's determination MUST (sic) be based on the gross earnings, as determined by the Board, for the 12 month period immediately preceding the date of injury, of a person of similar status employed in the same type of classification of employment (a) by the same employer, or (b) if no person is so employed, the assessment (sic) is to made of another persons gross earnings.”
In the 1st wage rate consideration (2011) the employer Veolia ES refused to provide any information. In the 2nd (2015) following order from WCAT to provide a proper wage rate assessment, the WorkSafe BC employee 'Cecilia' refused the WCAT order and only acquired T4 information from Casual employees (following a 6 month delay from the WCAT order).
Vocational Rehabilitation:
Sometime in 2011 I sought out Vocational Rehab from WorkSafe BC indicating that I wanted to go to Justice Institute to become a Mediator. Discussions with other Mediators had indicated that a JI cert would provide a greater opportunity for business as Institutions like ICBC won't use Mediators who don't have it (or who aren't lawyers). *7 in 10 Mediators in BC are lawyers.
VR entertained my request but then denied it.
FOI documents provided to me (all of which were provided to Ombudsperson BC – who then sent them along to me following my filing with them) revealed that WorkSafe BC had agreed internally to the VR. (At this point I believe WorkSafe BC has moved from civil contempt to criminal contempt of the law).
Reasons given for no VR (despite the fact that an independent assessor said I was perfect for the job based on resume and experience and the nominal cost relative to other VR for JI @ $7,500.
VR demanded I provide applications for work while they paid me at rate. I provided nearly 200. I did not receive any response back. My resume reflected my distinct propensity to be self governed in business (formerly entrepreneur, free 'enterpriser', Socred).
Despite my pleadings to VR (& to ensure success of my Hansel and Gretel approach of a chain of bread crumbs), they refused to offer any accommodation.
Wait until you see this WorkSafe BC Motivated Malfeasance:
As is a constant in the process I was assessed for a loss of function award which commenced sometime in 2010 at $310 per month. As is required, a loss of earnings assessment MUST be performed by the Disability Committee of WorkSafe BC.
No lawful independent medical legal assessment was every performed by WorkSafe BC. It remains outstanding and incomplete. I have been living on $310 (now raised to $315) per month since August 2010.
I was not able to keep promise to my wife of 37 years that I would pay the mortgage (at the time under $1,000 per month).
Instead, the Vocational Rehabilitation department (remember its discretionary limitation under the Act which it used to deny me VR), the one internally that agreed to Justice Institute (Ombudsperson Office has every document of some 600 pages) and my 6th Claims Manager, made the decision of my loss of earnings assessment.
So... WorkSafe BC has never provided a proper lawful earnings assessment or wage rate assessment, on the two occasions these rates were required, the second one as directed from order of WCAT.
WorkSafe BC suggested I was able to earn employment based on the strength of my resume, University degree and other certification and experience. Unfortunately my work experience is an owner operator or independent self employed person made this wishful thinking on WorkSafe BC's part.
{WorkSafe BC was aware that Veolia ES had settled out with BCHRT for no accommodation – and here they were were going to lengths to avoid the statute or any of the regulations in properly dealing with this person injury} (goes to awareness/fairness).
WCAT:
There were a number of appeals to WCAT. The only two that are particular relevant matter (beyond the jaw dropping overall read of the malfeasance) involve (a) the decision directing a wage rate be provided, where the WorkSafe BC Wage Rate Officer failed to obtain the documents available to her to satisfy the provisions of her duty as a Board Officer & (b) no proper legal loss of earnings assessment.
There is no appeal to WCAT on the loss of earnings assessment as a decision on this subject by VR and Claims Manager is ultra vires their authority to do so. One cannot appeal an administrative decision made by the BC Lions Cheerleaders for WorkSafe BC any more than one can appeal a loss of earnings decision based on a decision of VR and Claims Manager.
WCAT and its corrupt legal division (read the file) are/were made fully aware of the facts.
BCSC 106413:
Claim No. 109413 is a BC Supreme Court case where both WorkSafe BC and WCAT remain defendants, really to ensure saving of action in terms of time limitation and documenting this matter relative to other torts (Shylock Vancouver lawyer Ron Bakonyi and clients Peet & Cowan Financial -Cambridge Mortgage) which carried on concurrent to these events.
The WCAT files have to be fully considered to understand how truly awful it was as well. The legal department there lied through their teeth and caused many delays and further unnecessary problems, damage and harm.
As the BC Attorney General rules established by then AG Mike de Jong (a lawyer) established, WCAT and WorkSafe BC are not exempt from litigation where they have operated recklessly.
One BC Attorney General lawyer wrote to me in August 2014 following service of Mediation to WorkSafe BC Legal Division and WCAT (the BC Attorney General) under the prescribed rules for Mediation and indicated he was on holidays and would get back to me in September 2014 to arrange a mutually agreeable date, and then wrote to me indicating that he, a lawyer with BCAG refused to attend, in breach of his lawful obligation to attend.
The Supreme Court of Canada deadline of 3 years and 3 months is a factor here.
So..both lawyers for the BC Government and for WorkSafe BC refused Mediation despite the air tight service of Mediation and no order dismissing the cause of action.
Lawyers for WorkSafe BC also refused. The lawyers for WorkSafe BC cited orders of corrupt BC Chief Justice Chris Hinkson (the lawyer then working with BC Law Society in my BCHRT matters including defamation on Google of calling me a pedophile), (an applicant had erroneously used in ex parte testimony which the Tribunal Member purposefully placed in Judgment)- as their reason for refusing to Mediate, even though Mediation only requires the filing of an action, and notice within certain prescribed times.
I might also note that Chevron's lawyer was placed on BC Law Society Board of Governors. Naturally this is simply random – because BC's legal system (BC Rail – payout to criminal Basi & Virk) is so above reproach (sarcasm intended with amplification).
The Correct Decision to Make in Remedy:
As indicated the Ombudsperson has all of the documents associated with complaint, but I don't want them to handle this – because I want it concluded very fast – at 'Trump Speed' (TS).
Premier Horgan you must direct this to your Labour Minister and monitor its completion (these people get together over a cup of coffee and can come up with anything, often it seems out of their own imagination than the law).
I prefer your Labour Minister to deal with this claim No as job #1.
What I am seeking (without prejudice/without punitive damages) are the following:
Pain & Suffering: $75,000 for prosthetic knee, $25,000 for thoracic spine.
Loss of Earnings: The cheaters at WorkSafe BC say I can earn $65,000 per year, I earned $315 or $26,000 (rounded) over (7) seven years.
I expect to be paid at the mission impossible rate established by the cheaters at WorkSafe BC ($65,000 per year) for a period of 6.5 years or $422,500 prior to even one severance payment being made to any other government employee.
Based on the $65,000 per year for 7 years or $455,000 subtract $26,000, leaving $429,000.
I make note the JI graduates in Mediation I have spoken with were earning $125,000 per year. Had WorkSafe BC acted properly as they had internally decided, or neglected to decide, then I would have been in practice by spring 2012 and earning that type of money for 5 years.
ICBC :
ICBC's HR woman has no credibility, as FOI documents reveal she linked a future dated email to an earlier dated email to support her contention that no hiring was valid.
The HR woman at ICBC says this isn't the case at all.
When I was not hired following an interview with management, I made inquiries through FOI. It was determined (Ombudspersons Office has documents as well) in those documents that my name was included in grid to advance to ICBC adjuster.
Stefan Fraser boasts its clients hire using their test higher at 95% rate and further boasts that these hires stay for years. Tax payers shell out big money for these tests.
The job would have paid what WorkSafe BC said I might have earned.
In 2015 I applied for a job as an adjuster with ICBC – it was my 3rd application over as many years (following notice of search for employees) (these were the type of cases I was seeking to Mediate). I met all the qualifications and scored well on their Stefan Fraser testing including a '91' on ability to take new information.
BCSC S111171 as you now know is the same file number (the Grauer matter) where CJ Hinkson colluded with Shylock Law Society lawyer Kleisinger (no Smith or Jones here) to use his office in a clearly proven SLAPP lawsuit - to prevent me from initiating a class action lawsuit against BC Mortgage Brokers (it actually occurs in the first instance of LSBC submissions) (the evidence), following my notice to Kleisinger that he was threatening me in contemp of Grauer J. order and intended to commence an action against LSBC.
As you know from going to elementary and junior and senior high schools with me, I have six other brothers and sisters, all very successful. My sister Judy won a Woman of Distinction award for BC.
On balance, although I have no law school experience – all things being relatively equal I believe I could give Ryan a good fight in any court. I am all this and more!
I would also point out that my nephew Ryan Dalziel – one of the premier lawyers in the country was the youngest person ever to pass the bar in Canada at age 20 or 21 I believe. (I would add that Ryan is a constitutional lawyer who clerked at Supreme Court of Canada and would suggest Ryan be considered for the opening at the S.C.C., as replacement for current justice Beverley McLachlin as a type of balance to the Quebec lawyer would ascended to S.C.C. Ryan is all this and more!
This goes to show that my ambitions in Mediation are not outside the realm of possibility if a child of mine can do the job commencing at age 26.
A family member 'K' is handling the most serious of ICBC injury cases as an adjuster with that Crown Corporation which she has done for going on 2 years of the 5 years she has worked there. She has attended many Mediations.

Home| British Columbia Polls| Canada Polls| US and the World Polls| Contact| Register| Search| Site Map
Copyright Robbins SCE Research Inc. ©2017