Knob Award #2: Fletcher takes MPI to court - yet again

How would that be double dipping? You get a benefit which covers some costs of your accident. Your employment income is based on the work performed, not your needs.

If I earned $100 month and MPI paid income REPLACEMENT insurance then for every dollar I earn MPI should not have to pay me another dollar.

I don't see how this is NOT double dipping...

I see now... I missed the part about replacement income insurance. Thanks.

Ok...thanks for filling me in on the details (or some of them).

If he needs 24/7 care...how is he able to work? Or is it 24/7 care temporarily till he gets used to his new situation?

As far as insurance goes...you can ALWAYS get additional insurance. There is additional insurance which can be bought which picks up where MPIC leaves off. I don't have it...most people don't...as most of us live with buying only minimum insurance...it's just that though...minimum.

His medical bills are paid for (just from being a Canadian), there are plenty of services available for those with handicaps that are free...and unavailable to non-handicapped. $3000/month for 24/7 care...so basically $36k/year. Is that the average salary for a home-service assistant? And don't most "in-home" assistants actually live at the residence? Or if the person gets changed around every few hours...break it into the service time.

$36k/year with 24 hours per day of work hours does seem low...and it may be worth challenging that to increase it for the service worker...but not to give to him.

On top of the $3k/month, does he not collect disability cheques each month? Does he not get his MP salary? And should it not work like anyone else who's injured but working...that they get up to a maximum of disability, and if they work that amount goes down if required to "top off" that maximum?

I have a friend who works as a home-care worker. According to her, the company she works for gets subsidized by the government, and the people she cares for pay a fee as well, usually from money they get from the government. I'm assuming that would be the $3k/month he's getting. So it's really more than that...he just gets the $3k for him...the agency gets more money to cover everyone.

I will agree there may be a case here though...but it seems he's arguing the wrong one. He's crying poverty in his case when he's maintaining a high-profile, well-paid career...if he presented the case as one for that home-care worker, or as a class-action suit with others who are actually in need...then he's probably win.

But from everything I've read here so far...he sounds more like he's just playing a violin...a very small whiny one.

Well he needs 24/7 care because he cannot walk or move his arms....he is paralyzed from the neck down. I am glad he hasn't given up on life and decided to work. Maybe those sitting on their asses collecting welfare should take a page out of his book...most on welfare are able bodied. If Mr Fletcher can change things then that's great....cause that'll change it for everyone. I don't see it as whining...I see it as fighting for care he deserves.

Ummm, you're missing a little more than ya think AA...

The man is a quadriplegic. Meaning has has no control over his body from the neck down. He needs an attendant to take care of everything you and I take for granted.

Extra insurance is moot. He had MPI.

His medical bills are paid for by MPI. While most Canadian's needs are covered under our health system this is covered by his insurance.

If he has a home care assistant 24/7 (which I doubt) and they earned $24k annually then he'd need at least $72k annually. More if these attendants earned more.

I don't believe this to Fletcher crying poor. I believe it is he asking for adequate coverage.

If it's care he "requires"...then I'm all for it.

There's no such thing as care he "deserves"...nobody "deserves" any care.

If they did...then I could claim I "deserve" to be bathed daily by bikini-clad women with little inhibitions.

If he requires 24/7 care in order to function daily...then by all means...and with a modicum of dignity and respect. And if he chooses to work and succeed in life, and requires some extra assistance in performing that job...then his job should accommodate him and provide that extra assistance.

If we hire a guy in a wheelchair here...and don't have wheelchair facilities...then we have to create them.

In this case...he's a publicly elected employee...therefore tax dollars should automatically pay for his transportation to/from work, work accommodations (ie.ramps, toilets, desks, etc.), and that "home-care" worker...should be paid for during his hours of work, by the government. It should be standard procedure to make these accommodations, and the people elected him...so they obviously want him in the position.

Actually I disagree with what he deserves. He paid insurance. He deserves proper coverage.

grumpy old man wrote:Actually I disagree with what he deserves. He paid insurance. He deserves proper coverage.

He got the coverage he paid for.

Insurance is not a handout...it's a business.

Look at your own insurance policies...read the fine print.

What's your deductible? What do you get if XXX happens?

If the insurance policy says it will pay for 24/7 healthcare if required...then he should get it...paid by the insurance company.

If the insurance policy says it will pay for 24/7 healthcare if required up to a maximum of $3k/month...then he should get as much as he needs...up to the maximum.

That's what he paid for.

Even if MPIC changes the maximum NOW to say $5k/month...he still should not get any more...because that's not what HE paid for. At the time of his injury...he was paying for $3k/month coverage.

One major flaw in that logic: you can't shop around for competing insurance policies. Basically MPI says this is it - tough noogies if you don't like it.

No...you can shop within MPI...and as I said before...you CAN buy "additional" insurance coverage.

Nobody thinks they're going to get hurt...that's why they don't buy extra...but it is possible..even in Manitoba.

In the US, where insurance companies are all over...most people only buy the minimum...and then are surprised when they have an accident that their ride in the ambulance, and the emergency room coverage was not covered by their insurance company. It's all a matter of what you buy...and how much risk you're willing to assume yourself, versus depending on someone else (like an insurance agent).

I listened in on some CBC radio this morning and there was a mother talking about her $3000 per month "insurance" from MPI. She has mortgage payments, a kid and all sorts of problems managing on the $3000 allowance, which apparently has not been increased in many , many years.

At issue , probably is the dollar amount given out, and what should be expected. She mentioned that if she works then MPIC takes back 75% of the money.
Her accident was nobody's fault as per our Manitoba coverage. The real question is someone needing full time help and receiving $3000 per month , that the $3000 is completely too low to subsist!
The dollar amounts agreed to are the problem.
Another question comes up, she caused the accident, apparently falling after getting out of the car, so why would MPI pay her anything for her disability?

After reading all of the comments as well as reading the articles that have been published in both papers as well as other online sites (cbc.ca for one) my only comments are:
3K per month as a salary is not great BUT from this he does not have to pay rent/mortgage as that is paid for by Fletcher, as is the insurance for the vehicle(s) he drives, the food he eats, all of the utilities, etc. so his only expenses incurred montly would be personal (credit card, entertainment, cell phone. clothing, etc). His air fare is paid for because of the special clause written into the legislation that now allows for him to sit with Fletcher in house (to turn pages of written script, to raise his hand or stand to say yay or nay on votes, etc.) as he is considered part of Fletcher's sitting MP position. Personally 3K per month for personal expenses is pretty good for a single person but cost of living increases should be part of any payout.
And has been pointed out previously, do we know if this person is employed by an agency that provides a base salary and the 3K is an addition to his base salary? If I had 3K/month to spend on my personal expenses I would be doing just fine in life.

"If they did...then I could claim I "deserve" to be bathed daily by bikini-clad women with little inhibitions."

I definately deserve that

Women should not be judged by the size of their inhibitions!

FlyingRat wrote:Women should not be judged by the size of their inhibitions!

I said "in"hibitions...not "ex"hibitions

hehehe

He is a knob and a boob.

I once double dipped.... she was not happy.

But seriously... he says he needs it to maintain an active lifestyle? Doing what exactly, rolling his eyeballs? The guy cannot move!!!! If there is ever a need for him to enter a competitive staring competition, I will gladly foot the bill for that!

AGEsAces wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:Actually I disagree with what he deserves. He paid insurance. He deserves proper coverage.

He got the coverage he paid for.

Insurance is not a handout...it's a business.

Look at your own insurance policies...read the fine print.

What's your deductible? What do you get if XXX happens?

If the insurance policy says it will pay for 24/7 healthcare if required...then he should get it...paid by the insurance company.

If the insurance policy says it will pay for 24/7 healthcare if required up to a maximum of $3k/month...then he should get as much as he needs...up to the maximum.

That's what he paid for.

Even if MPIC changes the maximum NOW to say $5k/month...he still should not get any more...because that's not what HE paid for. At the time of his injury...he was paying for $3k/month coverage.

Then we should be allowed to buy insurance elsewhere in order to get the coverage we want or do not want.

The 3k for 24/7 assistance is a joke, the Government of Manitoba did not take into consideration that maybe someday a person who becomes a quad would want to live on their own or would want to try to fit in with the rest of society when they wrote sec 131 of the MPI act. They did not take into consideration that this person does not want to be stored in an institution where he can get 24/7 assistance, but would rather live life as he did before the accident, free of any institution.

It's worthy of mention too, that he is now able to afford a lot of things now with his election, so is doing this for the greater good IMO.

and... doer is going to change the law.
http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Manitoba/2008/11/26/7545846.html

seems anything that hits the paper lately that does not look good.. doer does something about...
the power of the press eh?

If it is based on what he made in the year of the accident , not as he wanted future earnings. Yes the limits should be raised for his care but , doe's he need some watching him sleep as he stated he can't roll over .

How doe's the aid or who ever know he wants to , Iam not familiar with the care level of this person , just questioning it .

It should be based on future potential earnings. If a doctor or engineer, one could easily calculate future earnings. Ditto that of a plumber or electrician. The fact he was young and earning the lowest one with his education should not be a lifelong penalty.

Deank wrote:and... doer is going to change the law.
http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Manitoba/2008/11/26/7545846.html

seems anything that hits the paper lately that does not look good.. doer does something about...
the power of the press eh?

Thats because Evil Doer knows how to fix things....throw more money at it. So much for the independence of a Crown Corporation. Wait, Crown Corporations under the NDP never did have much independence anyway!!

next thing you know the crown corporations will be "encouraged" to donate money to some worthless causes or worthless premiers

DeanK- I think I would be willing to support your "bathing by bikini-clad women" with low morals, or was that low inhibitions?
Best idea yet on the forum!
I think I heard the Premier mention that he was going to investigate on the dollar amount being authorized. Somewhere I heard or read that the amount hasn't been raised in 10 or 15 years.
If that is so it is like the City's housing allowance that hasn't been raised in the same period of time, and we all know that renting a place hasn't gotten more expensive in the last 15 years, right?