Sylvie Gravel, Ph.D., Professor École des sciences de la gestion,

1. Immigrant Workers’ Access to Compensation for Workplace Injuries or Illnesses“Should I Stay or Should I Go?”Metropolis Presents: Policy-Research Seminar on Temporary MigrationMarch 12, 2008, Ottawa, Ontario Sylvie Gravel, Ph.D., Professor École des sciences de la gestion, organisation ressources humaines, UQAM gravel.s@uqam.ca

2. 4a - Rehabilitation 3a - Accepted 5a - Consolidation • Me dical • Psychosocial • Vocational 1 - Report 2 - Claim 3b - Refused 4b.1 - Refusal / description of facts 6a - Return to work: 4b.2 - Refusal / diagnosis • Same work 4b.3 - Refusal / work-injury link • Same employer 4b.4 - Refusal / rehabilitation • Adapted position 4b.5 - Refusal / functional limitation • Suitable position 4b.6 - Refusal / consolidation 4b.7 - Refusal / return to work 5b.1 - Challenge: administrative Accepted Refused review division 7.1 - Did not return 7.2 - Did not return 5b.2 - Commission des lésions professionnelles (CLP) to work to work Refused e Accepted • Disability • EI • Income security • D e pendence on Refused 5b.3 - Superior Court Accepted family Logical model of the administrative compensation process in Quebec

3. Causal relationship Influence Barriers to compensation encountered by immigrant workers OHS workplace conditions Cause of injury Difficulties in medical consultations Difficulties reintegrating into the workplace Difficulties in legal consultations Human problems Difficulties in Administrative procedures Compensation Worker’s personal situation

4. Sample and analyses 104 workers • Analysis of matches • Taxonomy 51 NON-immigrants Two interviews 53 immigrants 3. Case studies 10 most difficult cases Third interview 4. Lexicological analysis Claim forms 67 workers and employers 23 workers 14 none

5. 51 NON-immigrants 2 claim interviews 53 immigrants 53% men, 47% womenAll having claimed compensation for MSIsRecruitment:3 partners (OHS medical clinic, legal research office, NGO for workers’ rights) Sample 104 workers Evaluation of difficulty scores 104 workers 10 cases 3rd interview Worst cases

6. Results: Difficulties in medical consultations Immigrant workers have more • Inaccurate diagnoses (64% vs. 42%) (p=0.08) • Difficulties being understood during the medical examination (23% vs. 20%) (p=0.017) • Medical and psychological complications (NS)

7. Results: Difficulties with administrative procedures Immigrant workers • Use a third person to draw up their claims(58% vs. 8%) (p= 0.04) • File their claims late(32% vs. 24%) (p=0.05) • (Allophones) do not understand the administrative procedures (65% vs. 62%)(NS) • Do not understand the decisions (58% vs. 50%) or the correspondence from the compensation agency (49% vs. 42%) (NS)

8. Results: Difficulties with legal consultations Immigrant workers • Have a higher rate of refusal(52% vs. 24%) (p=0.08) • Are more often challenged by their employers(64% vs. 24%) (p= 0.09) • Appeal the decision rendered less often (55% vs. 62%) (p= 0.7)

9. Results: Difficulties upon returning to work Immigrant workers • Do not benefit from a gradual return or from a lighter workload(66% vs. 41%) (p=0.06) • Are frequently dismissed after their injury or illness (74% vs. 62%) (p=0.05)

10. Results:Group analysis

11. Results: Case studies Of the immigrant workers who experienced particularly difficult compensation procedures: • 10/10 were dismissed because of a decrease in productivity • 9/10 have been unemployed since they were dismissed • 6/10 were subject to an incomplete or contradictory medical examination

12. Lexicological analysis of claims(SCAN method) • Analysis of the quality of incident descriptions in claims • Number of words (no result) • Number of errors (no result) • Number of segments: incident, pain, situation, movement, load, and presence of witnesses (no result) • Comparison of employee and employer versions: similar, same meaning, contradictory, identical (of concern)

13. Lexicological analysisComplete / incomplete report “I fell off the ladder while holding the signwhile my co-worker was in the truck. I don’t know what happened, whether the ladder slipped or a pedestrian knocked it. When I fell on my right shoulder, I felt a sharp pain that spread to my back.” • Possible segments: incident, pain, situation, movement, load, and presence of witnesses

14. Refusal rate for identical / non-identical reports

15. Conclusion Poorly consolidated or uncompensated workplace injuries or illnesses result in accelerated deterioration of immigrant workers’ physical and mental health, loss of skills, lower productivity, dismissal, and an unemployed worker losing his or her skills Social and health inequalities that lead to poverty

16. Reflection: Compensation of immigrant workers and ethics of the economic development in employer countries of a transnational workforce Rely on abilities Receive fair treatment Lose / use abilities Be involved in economic growth Curtail abilities Sen’s theories Maintain worker status Sustain an injury Immigrate Receive compensation Earn an income Develop skills and abilities Receive no compensation or not enough compensation Report the injury Return to work Compensation of workplace injuries Work income Meet achievement needs Claim compensation Income security Be dismissed Receive compensation without encountering any pitfalls Enter the labour market No income Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5