Mobilization of Social Services (M.O.S.S.) Business Case
 

Mobilization of Social Services (M.O.S.S.) represents approximately 265 social service agencies, many of which are not-for-profit registered charities.

Issues:

a)                  To obtain a reduction in premium rate levels that is affordable for all agencies under Rate Groups 858 & 861; and

b)                  To obtain funding to offset the increase in premiums.
 

Funding Pressures:

W.S.I.B. expects that all Rate Groups fully fund their portion of Unfunded Liability and Claims Cost. 

¨       In 1993 $9.5 Million was paid annually in premiums.  In 1998 premiums increased to $23.5 Million; an annual increase of $14 Million. 

¨       The agencies represented by M.O.S.S. do not have the funds to “absorb this cost of doing business”. 

¨       The stance of W.S.I.B. is that agencies must improve accident performance to achieve lower premium rates.  Improved performance would only decrease rates by a mere 20%.

¨       Agencies represented by M.O.S.S. have experienced:

a)      Coinciding reductions in funding (some as high as 10%) and/or

b)   Stagnation of subsidy levels from the funding Ministries. 
 

Revenue Limitations:

A “Catch-22” position has been created.  Agencies cannot afford to stay in W.S.I.B., yet they cannot afford to opt out. 

¨       Unlike other sectors, agencies have limited revenue sources.  The cost of premium increases cannot be passed on to a consumer.

¨       Other sources of funding are limited.  Fundraising is not an option for premium increases.

¨       The majority of funding comes from the funding Ministries. 

¨       Funding Ministries will not cover the higher premium levels.

¨       Funding Ministries will not cover the departure fees.  This impedes the ability of agencies to opt out of W.S.I.B. to find affordable alternative coverage. 

¨       Agencies cannot reduce services to pay for premium increases.

¨       Unlike other business models, agencies do not have the option of refusing service.

¨       Most agencies must comply with Ministry minimum staffing ratios as an expectation of licensing and to remain eligible for funding.

¨       Ministry funding can only be spent on items or the care services for which they were approved.  It is not permitted to allocate large amounts of the budget to unapproved expenditures, such as dramatic increases in insurance premiums.
 

Short-term and Long-term Consequences:

Paradoxically, the more funding redirected to pay W.S.I.B premiums, the less money to address safety in the workplace and the safe and early return to work for injured workers. 

¨       The increase in W.S.I.B. premiums without matching funding jeopardizes safety in the workplace.   An unsafe workplace threatens compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act and presents horrendous liability concerns.

M.O.S.S. Business Case, Continued

¨       Agencies who cannot pay the premiums or departure fees are threatened by W.S.I.B. with Writ of Seizure of Property and Assets.  Such seizures will result in agency closures.  When an agency dissolves, its assets revert back to the funder.  The seized assets thus belong to the Funding Ministry and to the taxpayer, not the agency. 

¨       As a temporary measure only, W.S.I.B. has frozen the collection process and the accumulation of interest until a solution can be found.

¨       Many agencies that pay the current premium levels are operating in deficit, thus threatening their long-term financial viability. Ultimately high premium levels will force the closure of valuable and needed services to the community. 

¨       Vulnerable clientele who depend on our services for survival will be without any support or shelter as a result of these closures.
 

Action to Date:

M.O.S.S. has exhausted every possible avenue in the attempt to resolve these urgent concerns.   The issues have been brought individually to the attention of W.S.I.B., the Funding Ministries, and several M.P.P.s.  In spite of this, we have been told that nothing can be done. 

These concerns have now been collectively presented to all parties and the Ministry of Labour with the hope that they can work together by “thinking out of the box” to rectify this problem.  We clearly need a multi-faceted systemic solution to address the impact that dramatic premium increases and Departure Fees have on agencies’ financial viability and their ability to provide safe workplaces for employees.

Uniqueness of Clientele:

The type of business that is operated is unique.  The consumer is a special population that exhibits volatile and unpredictable behaviour.  In other sectors, the danger in the workplace is normally inanimate objects which staff can refuse to operate.  The danger in our workplace is mainly attributed to the clients we serve.   Every attempt is made to focus on preventative management of aggressive behaviour and diffusing situations before they become violent.  However due to the unpredictability and the high needs level of our clientele, it is impossible to eliminate risk to staff.  As a result violence in the workplace is our every day reality.  Our agencies were created to treat this population.  Refusing service is not an option.

Agencies can successfully pass the Workwell Audit that is acknowledged by W.S.I.B. as an objective verification that an effective health and safety system is in place.  Despite such attempted diligence on the part of the agency, a poor claims experience may still be evident as a result of the unique and explosive nature of the clientele served.  

Precedents for Consideration:

Historically, Social Services have been granted special status due to their uniqueness.  Both the Provincial and Federal Governments recognize this unique status in the form of rebates for GST, Gas Taxes, Retail Sales Tax, PST, Municipal Realty Tax exemptions, etc.  This eliminates tax dollars being flowed to social programs and then rechanneled for other purposes.

Request:

a)                  Receive a significant reduction in premium levels.

b)                  Receive increase in funding to offset any premium increases.

c)                  Remove Departure Fees.

Prepared by: Mandy Bennett, Chair of M.O.S.S.       

Date Prepared: December 2, 1999    Revised June 2003