9:00 a.m.Official transcript
The committee met at 0900 in room 151.
Legislative Assembly of Ontario · Committee
Thursday, June 4, 2026
Standing Committee on Government Agencies · Room 151
The official transcript of the meeting, from Hansard, by heading. Ministers, officials and witnesses appear as the transcript names them; committees have no live transcript, so the record appears once the Assembly publishes it.
9:00 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Good morning, everyone. Welcome back to the Standing Committee on Government Agencies. We’ll now come to order. As always, all comments by members and witnesses should go through the Chair. Both of our intended appointees are virtual today.
9:00 a.m.Official transcript
9:00 a.m.Official transcript
9:00 a.m.Official transcript
Ms. Laura Smith
A purposive reading of the relevant standing orders does not support the interpretation that the subcommittee has decision-making authority that supersedes the authority of the committee itself, particularly when it comes to meetings of the committee during an adjournment of the House. Standing order 110(f), paragraph 13, appears to serve two purposes. First, it provides a mechanism for the committee to be recalled during an adjournment of the House that exceeds one week so that it can conduct its regular business. Second, it limits the number of potential meetings during an adjournment to three per month. The context of this recall provision is important. Before the introduction of standing order 120, the only other mechanism available for a committee to meet during an adjournment of the House was for the House to authorize that committee to meet before the House adjourned. That was limiting, and I think the reason a special recall mechanism existed for this committee specifically was because of the nature of its work. Unlike most committees, which generally consider business specifically assigned to them by the House, the Standing Committee on Government Agencies has a regular role in reviewing intended appointments. Those appointments may arise during an adjournment of the House, and the committee’s review is subject to a specific timeline. The recall mechanism in paragraph 13 makes sense in that context. It allows the committee to meet during an adjournment where appointments may need to be reviewed within the required period of time. However, I do not think paragraph 13 can reasonably be read as giving the subcommittee an authority that is final, binding and non-amendable by the full committee. In my view, paragraph 13 is a technical recall provision. It facilitates a mechanism by which the committee can be recalled when it otherwise could not meet. It does not expressly state that the subcommittee’s decision supersedes the authority of the committee itself. The role of the subcommittee on committee business, as reflected in the standing orders, is to report to the committee on the committee’s business and to make recommendations. While the subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Government Agencies has specific administrative responsibilities under standing order 110(f), that does not change the fundamental relationship between the subcommittee and the committee. The subcommittee remains a subordinate body. This is also supported by the structure of the standing order 110(f). Paragraphs 3 and 4 give the subcommittee certain responsibilities regarding the selection of intended appointees for reviewing and reporting those selections to the committee. Even there, the committee’s practice of voting on the adoption of subcommittee reports supports the principle that the full committee retains authority over reports from its subcommittee. If the subcommittee’s decisions were entirely binding and non-amendable, it is not clear what purpose would be served by the committee voting on adoption. Paragraph 13 does not state that dates selected by the subcommittee for meetings during an adjournment are unamendable by the committee. I understand that the provisions must be structured so that the subcommittee can set meeting dates during an adjournment, because the committee may otherwise not be able to meet to make that decision. However, that practical structure should not be interpreted as a conscious decision by the House to remove the committee’s normal authority over its own proceedings. In other words, the fact that the subcommittee is given a mechanism to recall the committee during an adjournment does not mean the subcommittee can bind the committee against the will of the committee once the committee has met. An interpretation that the committee cannot cancel future meetings set by the subcommittee would effectively give the subcommittee the same type of authority that would normally only follow from a vote of the House on a routine motion setting the meeting dates and times of a committee. That would elevate a subordinate body, potentially composed of only a small number of voting members, to an authority otherwise retained by the full House or by the full committee. Such an interpretation can be reasonably reached without explicit and unambiguous language in the standing order—the language that does not appear to exist. It would also be inconsistent with the democratic principles underpinning the standing orders and the operation of the Legislature, including the considerations of orderliness under standing order 1(b). For those reasons, a member of the standing committee ought to be able to move a motion at a duly constituted meeting to rescind the subcommittee’s decision to schedule future meetings during the current adjournment and to direct that the remaining notices of meetings be cancelled. This motion would not frustrate the purpose of paragraph 13. This committee has met pursuant to the standing orders. The full committee would then be determining as the principal body the future meetings scheduled by its subcommittee are not required. If new circumstances arise, the subcommittee would still have ability to exercise the recall mechanism again, subject to the same authority of the committee once convened. Standing order 110(f)(13) provides a mechanism for the subcommittee to determine days on which the committee may be recalled during an adjournment of the House. It does not expressly provide that the subcommittee’s decision is final, binding or non-amendable by the full committee. The subcommittee remains a subordinate body of the committee. The committee has met today in accordance with the standing order. The question now before the committee is whether the committee itself as the principal body may rescind future meeting dates set by its own subcommittee. An interpretation that prevents the full committee from reviewing the decision of its subcommittee would elevate the subcommittee to an authority greater than the committee itself, without clear language in the standing orders. This motion should therefore be considered and voted on by the committee as a whole. I move that the Standing Committee on Government Agencies rescind the decision of the subcommittee—
9:07 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Sorry, I need to interrupt. In a point of order, you cannot move a motion, and we do have our intended appointees scheduled.
9:07 a.m.Official transcript
9:07 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
You have to move it outside of the point of order, and we do have intended appointees scheduled. So if we can do the appointees first and then get back to the business—
9:07 a.m.Official transcript
Ms. Laura Smith
I’m going to do the point of order now, before the scheduled individuals.
9:08 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
We do have them waiting, and I personally feel it’s respectful to follow the procedure. They’re giving up their time to meet with us and—
9:08 a.m.Official transcript
Ms. Laura Smith
I’m respectfully submitting that the Clerk of this committee be directed to cancel all remaining notices of the meetings arising from this decision—
9:08 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
As I mentioned, you cannot move a motion on a point of order. So let’s go to our attended appointees and respect their time. We will definitely come back after we meet with our attended appointees. Our first one today is—
9:08 a.m.Official transcript
9:08 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Is the committee in agreement for a recess? No? You can move the motion for a recess.
9:08 a.m.Official transcript
9:08 a.m.Official transcript
9:08 a.m.Official transcript
9:08 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
A 10-minute recess: All those in favour? All those opposed?
9:08 a.m.Official transcript
9:08 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
It’s too late. The motion is carried—a 10-minute recess.
9:22 a.m.Official transcript
The committee recessed from 0909 to 0922.
9:22 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Good morning again, everyone. We’re bringing the Standing Committee on Government Agencies back to order. We will start with MPP Smith.
9:22 a.m.Official transcript
9:22 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Sorry. You want to move a motion? Historically, in this committee, we deal with the intended appointees first—I’m mindful of their time—and then we deal with business afterwards. So that is the way I intend to proceed today. We can take your motion after the intended appointees.
9:22 a.m.Official transcript
9:22 a.m.Official transcript
9:22 a.m.Official transcript
9:22 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Sorry. There’s nothing to appeal. That’s my ruling.
Mr. Adam Melnick
9:22 a.m.Official transcript
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Adam Melnick, intended appointee as chair, Office of the Employer Adviser.
9:22 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Let’s welcome our first intended appointee today. Adam Melnick is appointed as chair of the Office of the Employer Adviser. Adam will be coming to us virtually today. Good morning, Adam. We welcome you to our committee. You have 10 minutes to share your story—sorry. You can share your story for as long as you want, and then your time will be deducted from the government. They have 10 minutes—we’re all happy to hear your story—and then the official opposition and the third party will have 10 minutes to ask you questions. The floor is yours.
9:23 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
Good morning to you, Chair, and to the members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today regarding my intended appointment as the chair of the Office of the Employer Adviser. I’m honoured to be considered for this position, and I appreciate the opportunity to share a bit about my background and interest in serving Ontario employers through this important work of the office. Throughout my career, I have worked across the labour relations, workforce development, apprenticeship, skilled trades, and employer relations sectors. I’ve had the privilege of working with employers, workers, labour organizations, educators, government officials and community partners across Ontario and Canada. Today, I serve as the executive director of the Construction Employers Coordinating Council of Ontario. Prior to that, I held leadership positions with the Provincial Building and Construction Trades Council of Ontario and the International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Allied Workers. I’ve also had the opportunity to serve as a youth adviser to the Ontario’s Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development, where I worked alongside stakeholders from across the province on issues related to the skilled trades strategy, apprenticeship and workforce development. Throughout my career, I’ve served on numerous boards, committees, advisory groups and governance bodies involving employers, labour organizations, government representatives, educators and community leaders. Those experiences have reinforced the importance of collaboration, transparency, accountability and respectful dialogue when addressing complex issues. I’ve also developed a strong appreciation for the challenges faced by Ontario’s small and medium-sized employers. Many employers operate without dedicated legal counsel, human resource departments or specialized workplace expertise yet are expected to navigate increasingly complex workplace obligations and regulatory systems. This is why I believe the mandate of the Office of the Employer Adviser remains so important. The office provides employers with education, advice, representation regarding workplace safety and insurance matters and occupational health and safety reprisal proceedings. In doing so, it helps ensure employers have access to information, support and fair process within Ontario’s workplace system. If appointed, I would approach the role with professionalism, integrity and respect for the office’s legislative mandate. I understand that the role of Chair is one of governance and stewardship. It is not to advance personal views or organizational priorities but to help ensure that the office remains effective, accountable and responsive to the employers it serves while fulfilling its statutory responsibilities. Throughout my career, I have worked with individuals and organizations representing many different perspectives. Those experiences have taught me the importance of listening carefully, focusing on facts, respecting process and finding common ground wherever possible. I believe my background in labour relations, governance, workforce development, stakeholder engagement and employer relations has prepared me well for the responsibilities of this role. I want to thank you all again today for your time, and I would be pleased to answer any questions the committee may have.
9:27 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Thank you very much, Adam. We will now move to the government side. You have six minutes and 54 seconds. MPP Smith.
9:27 a.m.Official transcript
Ms. Laura Smith
Thank you so much, Mr. Melnick, for being here today. You talked about a wide range of professional experiences, and I’m just wondering if you can advise on what interest brought you to want to serve as chair of the Office of the Employer Adviser.
9:27 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
Working now with the employers across Ontario, with the Construction Employers Coordinating Council of Ontario and in my previous capacity working with the International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators, I have been and continue to be working closely with many construction employers who are small to medium-sized businesses. I understand the challenges they face in securing work, in growing their workforce and competing in a very competitive market. But I also know the critical backbone and role they play and the risk they take in navigating that space. When I think of the complexities they operate in, in understanding the capacity the Office of the Employer Adviser plays, I would love to bring the opportunity of my experience forward and help ensure that the OEA is able to deliver on its legislative mandate and continue to do the great work that it does in servicing those small and medium-sized employers. The challenges they face are large, and this office and this agency plays a very integral role in their successful operation within Ontario’s system of framework.
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
You’re passing on your time. Okay, so, over to the official opposition with MPP Gates: 10 minutes.
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Well, we’re in the middle of an interview, but is there unanimous consent on that?
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Okay, MPP Gates, 10 minutes to interview Adam Melnick.
9:29 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Wayne Gates
Thanks for being here, Adam. You are seeing how the committee doesn’t work, so I’m glad that you’re here. I’m going to ask some questions that are kind of normal for us. Certainly, no disrespect to you as a person, but I think they’re very important for this committee to know. Have you ever donated to any party?
9:30 a.m.Official transcript
9:30 a.m.Official transcript
9:30 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
All three in Ontario—I shouldn’t say all three—three of the four in Ontario that I have donated to. I have donated to New Democrats, I have donated to Liberals and I have donated to Conservatives over my career.
9:30 a.m.Official transcript
9:30 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
I don’t have a favourite. I participated along the way. I have done everything from helping support the New Democrats of Durham try to rebuild their riding association. I have door-knocked and worked with representatives. To be honest, having come from my background working around advocacy for both labour and employer associations, it’s often connecting with candidates around the priorities of the constituents that I served and helping connect those dots from the representative that was running or looking to pursue running, and those that I represented.
9:30 a.m.Official transcript
9:31 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
I am now from Leeds and the Thousand Islands, but that was only recent. Previously, I lived in Orono, so just outside of—I was actually in the minister’s riding.
9:31 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Wayne Gates
I know where Orono is only because I played slo-pitch there. They used to have a big slo-pitch tournament there.
9:31 a.m.Official transcript
9:31 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Wayne Gates
One year when we went down there, we actually beat all the local community teams. We won the tournament. That’s why I remember that; it was probably the only tournament my slo-pitch team ever won. It’s a very nice little community there.
9:31 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
I was just going to say, I don’t want to carry on about the community too much. It is lovely.
9:31 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Wayne Gates
I wanted to start by recognizing that you have a serious background in unionized construction, apprenticeship, health and safety and government relations. I believe that experience matters, so I want to say that, on the surface, it looks like your credentials are extremely good in a wide base and probably reflective of why, over your career, you’ve supported all three parties—just a guess. It’s probably how that game works a bit, right? You throw here. You throw here—keep everybody happy. That’s kind of how it works. My questions are about your background in chairing, which is a big responsibility—as our Chair is finding out today that her responsibilities are extremely big. The Office of the Employer Adviser advises and represents employers in WSIB—I believe that is correct—WSIAT and OHSA reprisal matters. So, is that the basis of what you’re thinking as you become chair? Maybe elaborate on that a bit.
9:32 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
I understand the capacity—and to be honest, the OEA, I would say, for the majority of my career, flew under the radar. But in my recent years, working closer with employers across Canada and Ontario, I started to understand not only the specificity that the office plays here in Ontario but actually the uniqueness and almost the envy the office plays with other jurisdictions. In that, I learned more and was able to engage a lot of my employers at the time regarding the service and recognizing it’s often underutilized by many of them. I think about the peril they take, so the importance to ensure that this is an opportunity that they utilize is huge. Helping it deliver on its legislative mandate is key. Chairing is certainly a challenge. I chair the Durham Workforce Authority not-for-profit; I am the chair and president of their board. I recognize the challenges in that capacity, and I tip my hat to today, recognizing that. But working in good governance matters. Even the work here today is good governance, and it matters. That is something I hope to be able to bring through my background and skills, whether it be in an executive director capacity, chair or board member over the years in a variety of ways, both national and community-based organizations that I’ve served on in a board capacity. I hope to bring that experience to this role and hopefully serve it well.
9:34 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Wayne Gates
It was interesting you said that what we’re doing today is good governance, yet here we are arguing whether people like yourself should actually come to this committee for five months while we shut down. It’s interesting that you made that comment. I’m not putting you in a box here. I’m just saying I picked up on your comment, and I agree 100% with that comment. It is important to have good governance. It is important to have meetings. It is important for people like you, that have the skill and the ability to get appointed to a chair, to show that talent so this committee can make a decision whether you’re a good candidate or a bad candidate. I think that’s a fair comment and I thought I would recognize that you even said that in your comments. I think that’s good on you. Your employment material lists you as director of government and community relations with heat and frost insulators and allied workers Local 95. But public material also congratulates you on becoming executive director of the Construction Employers Coordinating Council of Ontario—and if I’m wrong on any of this, you can tell me. So for the record, what is your current role today, and what was your role when you applied for this appointment?
9:35 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
I’m currently the executive director of the Construction Employers Coordinating Council of Ontario. I have held this role since November of 2025, and I transitioned from the international association of heat and frost insulators to this role. And when I applied for this role, I was in this capacity as the executive director with the construction employers coordinating council.
9:36 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Wayne Gates
Were all your current paid and unpaid roles disclosed to public appointments and this committee? Was that done?
9:36 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
I have the most up-to-date résumé that, I think, went forward. I sent it to the office. I will admit the challenge, I would say, for folks on that, if you’re keeping up with my career: The last year has had some interesting transitions that I’m thrilled to have the opportunity to have, but they happened quickly—
9:36 a.m.Official transcript
9:36 a.m.Official transcript
9:36 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
—that may have happened in missing that transition last fall formally on paperwork.
9:36 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Wayne Gates
As chair, will you commit that the OEA should not encourage employer strategies that rely on fictional and unrealistic earning assumptions that leave injured workers worse off?
9:36 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
That is an interesting comment. I think that the role for a chair is not to really advocate for any particular policy outcomes. My role would be to help ensure the office is effectively fulfilling its legislative mandate. I think that starts to get into policy advocacy. In this role as the chair, I would see fit to serve the role as chair focusing on the policy mandate and the obligations of the Office of the Employer Adviser.
9:37 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Wayne Gates
Okay. You might not know this; I don’t know how much you follow my career. I know a lot of people do, but I don’t know if you have yet. You can follow me on Facebook at Wayne Gates, if you like. But I wrote and sponsored over half a dozen bills to eliminate deeming in Ontario. It’s a bill the government refuses to make into law. Do you think it is important, given your experience, to get rid of deeming in the province of Ontario?
9:37 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
I’ll be honest with you: I haven’t given context to that conversation in a very long time. It’s kind of a fresh piece. To be honest, I would hold back comment until I can look a little deeper into that framing. I’m being dead honest: When it comes to deeming and the conversation, I think that it warrants a heck of a lot more conversation, and I’m not up to speed in that conversation at this moment.
9:38 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Wayne Gates
Well, maybe I’ll help you because I’m a nice guy, and it is Thursday morning and it’s a nice day out and the Jays lost five games in a row. The deeming issue is clear as a worker, as somebody that has been involved with the labour movement for a number of years. I go to work, I get hurt at work, I am deemed and then I end up on a phantom job that I can’t do because of my injuries, and then I have to live in poverty.
9:38 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Sorry, I forgot the one-minute warning. We’re now at 21 seconds.
9:38 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Wayne Gates
Anyway, my suggestion to you is to really advocate for injured workers. They are workers that you represent, that I’ve represented for years. I would suggest, in my humble thing, that every person that has been a worker in their lives should never want any worker to live in poverty.
9:39 a.m.Official transcript
9:39 a.m.Official transcript
9:39 a.m.Official transcript
The Chair (Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon)
Or, sorry; thank you, MPP Gates. All right. Next up is the official opposition: 10 minutes.
9:39 a.m.Official transcript
9:39 a.m.Official transcript
9:39 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Stephanie Smyth
That’s okay. Adam, thank you for being here today. We’re really grateful that we are able to have a conversation with you and learn a little bit more about you and your appointment. Like my colleagues, I’m just going to ask you some questions that we do typically in these interviews. It is donation records. I know that you said you’ve donated to all political parties, pretty much. Can you confirm, provincially, you donated over $4,322 to the PCs over the last few years?
9:40 a.m.Official transcript
9:40 a.m.Official transcript
9:40 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
In the province of Ontario, yes. Actually, openly, yes, that is probably more than anybody. Yes.
9:40 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Stephanie Smyth
Right. We have on here that, in 2019, you donated to the Liberal Party and, in 2025, to the Conservative Party of Canada, both federal, and some—yes, okay, they’re provincial. Establishing that donation record—thank you for that. I want to go into exactly what this board is, because I think if most people are listening, the Office of the Employer Adviser—and you said yourself, even people in your own field—yourself, you weren’t aware of this board. How did you become aware of the board so that you would apply for this position?
9:40 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
It was brought to my attention by the Minister of Labour that this role was a potential opportunity that I might want to look into or explore.
9:41 a.m.Official transcript
9:41 a.m.Official transcript
9:41 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Stephanie Smyth
Okay, thank you—the provincial Minister of Labour. You talked about the mandate of the OEA. What exactly is the mandate, as you see it?
9:41 a.m.Official transcript
9:41 a.m.Official transcript
9:41 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
I’ll take it as the synopsis, because, I’ll be honest with you, I’ve been digging into this a lot for the past couple of months and trying to get my head around all of it. I see it—and I try to capture it as brief as I can, because I’m a long-winded person. My apologies.
9:41 a.m.Official transcript
9:41 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
The piece around the education, supporting education and training for employers, providing advice—the sound advice into handling and working through matters related to WSIB compensation claims and practices—and, of course, if there happens to be a reprisal under—they look to have a reprisal under Occupational Health and Safety Act. Supporting medium to small-sized employers through these processes, both through training, through education and through representation also, as well, which is a really unique piece that this agency offers. To support those employers through this process—I think it’s integrally important, because it ensures that this process is not only adhered to but navigated well. That way, it becomes a part of the fundamental system that we all practice and stay in.
9:42 a.m.Official transcript
9:42 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
And it’s true, in that employers are utilizing WSIB, that they are paying their premiums. And when they understand a system like this is in play, they support them. I think that’s integral, particularly when small to medium-sized contractors—and from my world, in construction, the risk factor that these folks take to open a business, employ individuals and pursue work is very challenging. It’s complex—more than they think it is when they start. So having an agency that serves this purpose, related to a topic—when we think of workplace safety and insurance, it can be nerve-wracking for an owner and a contractor to understand that world. To know this is there to help support them—and not to help them get around the system, but to actually, effectively work within the system, I think, is integral.
9:43 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Stephanie Smyth
With WSIB or any of these things—let’s talk. I want to backtrack to how difficult the conditions are right now for the construction industry—you mentioned for smaller employers. Can you comment on that, right now?
9:43 a.m.Official transcript
Mr. Adam Melnick
It’s just challenging. The changing of supply chains, the prices related to the industry—fuel prices are a current industry challenge right now that everyone is trying to figure out how to navigate. I’ve heard from employers that are trying to absorb the cost, as opposed to having to readjust pricing. They’re looking at how do they forecast bids—into those pieces as well. There is a labour supply context as well. There are challenges, and there always have been challenges in taking on construction. Right now, there are unique challenges. I would say, in my 20-plus years in the sector, I’ve seen a variety of unique challenges come forward. What’s interesting is that there is a wonderful ecosystem that exists, particularly in the province of Ontario, that is there to support. The Office of the Employer Adviser is another great example of something. But often, we all suffer from the challenges of not knowing what we don’t know, and not knowing that this office exists and the role and capacity it plays to serve those—particularly those small to medium-sized employers who are participating well within the system, paying their WSI premiums, trying to do the best they can. This is an agency that can support them, can train them ahead of time as well—prevention. The route to prevention is training, and that’s a big, key piece that the office has.
9:45 a.m.Official transcript
MPP Stephanie Smyth
In your role as chair, you said, it’s not to advocate but to fulfill your mandate and serve, focusing on policy. How do you see that reconciled, for instance, with a WSIB claim, or how does that even work with you in your role and smaller employers coming to you for advice about education? Do you adjudicate WSIB claims, or how does that work as the chair?
9:45 a.m.Official transcript
9:45 a.m.Official transcript