APPEAL #
PART C – Decision under Appeal
The decision under appeal is the June 29, 2015 reconsideration decision of the Ministry of Social
Development and Social Innovation (the Ministry) in which the Ministry denied the Appellant Persons
with Persistent Multiple Barriers (PPMB) status based on her employability screen score of 12 and
the determination her medical condition does not preclude her searching for, accepting, and
maintaining employment as under the Employment and Assistance Regulation Section 2(2), 2(3) and
2(4).
PART D – Relevant Legislation
Employment and Assistance Regulation (EAR) , Section 2
APPEAL #
PART E – Summary of Facts
Preliminary Matter: The Appellant did not call into the tele conference hearing. After confirming that
the Appellant was properly notified of the hearing, the Panel proceeded with the appeal hearing in
accordance with section 86(b) of the Employment and Assistance Regulation.
The evidence before the Ministry at the time of reconsideration included the following:
●
A PPMB Medical Report completed by a general practitioner (GP) and dated March 17, 2015.
The GP notes he has been the Appellant’s GP 6 months or more. The GP states the
Appellant’s primary medical conditions are depression, post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD),
anxiety, rheumatoid arthritis and hypothyroid with scoliosis as a secondary medical condition.
The medical conditions have existed 5 years and the expected duration is 2 years or more.
The GP states the medical conditions are continuous in nature and that the Appellant has
been referred to a specialist. The GP describes the treatment for depression and PTSD has
not been effective or poor effect to date. The conditions are not episodic in nature.
●
A letter from the Ministry to the Appellant dated May 25, 2015 informing the Appellant that she
no longer meets the requirements for PPMB status and her support will be reduced at the end
of three months.
●
An employability screen completed for the Appellant with a score of 12.
The Appellant states in her request for reconsideration that she still meets the criteria because she
has been on assistance at least 12 of the last 15 months and her doctor has confirmed that she has a
medical condition that has been ongoing for a year and likely to continue for at least 2 years. She
states her health conditions have not improved but worsened. The medications are not effective and
she has been working with her doctor to no avail. She concludes that she is unable to work as even
getting through the day to day chores at home is very challenging.
In the notice of appeal the Appellant writes she disagrees with the Ministry’s decision because her
GP was not specific so she will ask him for more information.
At the hearing the Ministry reviewed the reconsideration decision and noted the Appellant had been
receiving income assistance for more than 12 of the preceding 15 months. The Ministry stated the GP
has been the Appellant’s physician since at least 2011.
The Panel finds as fact that the following:
•
The Appellant has been receiving income assistance for more than 12 of the preceding 15
months
•
Her employability screen score is 12.
•
The Appellant has medical conditions that have been confirmed by a medical practitioner and
have existed 5 years and the expected duration is 2 years or more.
•
The medical conditions are continuous, not episodic in nature.
APPEAL #
PART F – Reasons for Panel Decision
The issue on this appeal is whether the Ministry reasonably denied the Appellant a Persons with
Persistent Multiple Barriers (PPMB) status based on her employability screen score of 12 and the
determination her medical conditions do not preclude her searching for, accepting, and maintaining
employment under the EAR Section 2(2), 2(3) and 2(4).
The following legislation applies to this appeal:
EAR Section 2
(1) To qualify as a person who has persistent multiple barriers to employment, a person must meet the
requirements set out in
(a) subsection (2), and
(b) subsection (3) or (4).
(2) The person has been a recipient for at least 12 of the immediately preceding 15 calendar months of one or
more of the following:
(a) income assistance or hardship assistance under the Act;
(b) income assistance, hardship assistance or a youth allowance under a former Act;
(c) a disability allowance under the Disability Benefits Program Act;
(d) disability assistance or hardship assistance under the Employment and Assistance for Persons with
Disabilities Act.
(3) The following requirements apply
(a) the minister
(i) has determined that the person scores at least 15 on the employability screen set out in
Schedule E, and
(ii) based on the result of that employability screen, considers that the person has barriers that
seriously impede the person's ability to search for, accept or continue in employment,
(b) the person has a medical condition, other than an addiction, that is confirmed by a medical practitioner
and that,
(i) in the opinion of the medical practitioner,
(A) has continued for at least one year and is likely to continue for at least 2 more years, or
(B) has occurred frequently in the past year and is likely to continue for at least 2 more years, and
(ii) in the opinion of the minister, is a barrier that seriously impedes the person's ability to search for,
accept or continue in employment, and
APPEAL #
(c) the person has taken all steps that the minister considers reasonable for the person to overcome the
barriers referred to in paragraph (a).
(4) The person has a medical condition, other than an addiction, that is confirmed by a medical practitioner and
that,
(a) in the opinion of the medical practitioner,
(i) has continued for at least one year and is likely to continue for at least 2 more years, or
(ii) has occurred frequently in the past year and is likely to continue for at least 2 more years, and
(b) in the opinion of the minister, is a barrier that precludes the person from searching for, accepting or
continuing in employment.
The Appellant argues her GP was not specific in the medical form and she will ask him for more
information. She also argues her medications have not been effective and her medical conditions
have worsened and she struggles with day to day chores.
The Ministry argues the Appellant has had the same GP since 2011 and the GP would be
knowledgeable of the Appellant’s conditions and be in a position to provide detail of her restrictions
and that this information is lacking. Because the GP does not explain the nature of restrictions or how
it
affects the Appellant’s employability, the Ministry is not satisfied that the Appellant is precluded from
all types of employment.
There is no information on the medical report as to the nature of any restrictions specific to the
Appellant’s medical conditions and the Appellant has not submitted any additional information from
her GP. The Panel finds the Ministry reasonably determined that it did not have enough information to
make an informed decision as to whether the Appellant’s medical conditions are a barrier that
precludes her from searching for, accepting or continuing in employment and that Section 2(4)(b) of
the EAR was not met.
Accordingly, the Panel finds the Ministry’s determination to deny the Appellant PPMB level assistance
was a reasonable application of the legislation in the circumstances of the Appellant. The Panel
therefore confirms the Ministry’s decision.
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.