Decision No. 342/26, 2026 ONWSIAT 793 separates two questions that can easily be mixed together: whether modified work exists and whether the worker is medically capable of doing any work at all.
The worker suffered a distal amputation of the left middle finger in November 2024. Medical evidence restricted use of the injured hand and supported the conclusion that he could not work through January 15, 2025. The employer nevertheless offered modified clerical duties.
WSIAT found there was no need to decide whether the clerical position would otherwise have been suitable. The medical evidence established that the worker was not capable of working during the period in dispute. Refusing the proposed duties therefore did not justify ending his loss of earnings benefits.
The employer also argued that benefits should stop during its planned annual shutdown because no work would have been available and the worker was outside the country. The Tribunal rejected that position. The temporary closure did not change the worker’s injury related incapacity, and the applicable policy generally maintained benefits already in place when a temporary layoff began.
The employer’s appeal was dismissed and full benefits were confirmed through the recovery period, including the shutdown.
For employers, the decision shows why modified work analysis starts with medical capacity. If the evidence establishes that the worker cannot perform any work, the existence of a theoretical light duty position does not resolve the benefit question. Temporary business closures also do not necessarily break the connection between an accepted workplace injury and continuing wage loss.