DRUGS AND DEATH AREN'T PART OF THE JOB

Talk about ridiculous.

The Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT) has ruled that the
families of two Terrace men killed by a drugged truck driver near
Williams Lake in August 2004 are not entitled to compensation from
ICBC or WorkSafe BC.

Why? The driver was so stoned, he couldn't form an intent to do
anything other than his job.

"We have found that the defendant's action or conduct that allegedly
caused a breach of duty arose out of and in the course of his
employment," the panel ruled.

In other words, it's OK to load up on amphetamines and cocaine and get
behind the wheel of a semi.

Since David Hart was working when the collision that killed him and
Dean Ganson and Richard Brown -- all truck drivers -- their families
could not sue for compensation under WorkSafe BC rules.

That rule needs to change, and immediately. If Hart had struck and
killed two tourists, would they be entitled to compensation because
they weren't "working?"

But what's worse than Ganson's and Brown's families not receiving
compensation is that the ruling sets a lethal precedent: You are still
considered to be "at work" while under the influence of drugs.

Tribune reporter Angie Mindus reported on the crash Aug. 24, 2004, and
her story does not paint a pretty picture of the crash or Hart's
behaviour beforehand.

He appeared to be trying to hit oncoming traffic between 150 Mile and
the Deep Creek store, a period of about 20 minutes, and did force a
number of vehicles off the road. He refused to stop for a Williams
Lake RCMP member dispatched to pursue him. And he was in the wrong
lane when he hit Ganson's and Brown's semi head-on. Highway 97 was
closed for 36 hours as investigators sifted through debris. A
toxicology report showed he had high levels of methamphetamine and
amphetamine in his blood, and detectable levels of cocaine.

The WCAT ruling says this: If you're a truck driver, driving your
truck, then becoming intoxicated, leading police on a chase, and
killing two men is part of the job.

"Clearly he was working and driving as a truck driver and engaging in
behaviour, while not acceptable, it's not that uncommon in that
industry," an ICBC spokesman said. He also said the use of stimulants
by long-haul truck drivers is a "well-known fact" that ICBC does not
condone.

Really? What does it do then? Clearly not compensate victims'
families.

Ganson's widow Tammy wants to see anyone using narcotics stripped of
their Class One licences, and we hope she gets what she wants.

And we hope that just because you drive a huge vehicle for a living
doesn't mean it's OK to ram it into the cars and trucks you share the
road with.

Even if you are on the clock.