On this page
Decision
[1] The Claimant is not entitled to a Canada Pension Plan (CPP) disability pension.
Overview
[2] The Claimant worked seasonally as a ski lift attendant until 2015 when she suddenly went blind due to complications from her diabetes. The Minister received the Claimant’s application for the disability pension on November 9, 2016. The Minister denied the application initially and on reconsideration. The Claimant appealed the reconsideration decision to the Social Security Tribunal.
[3] To qualify for a CPP disability pension, the Claimant must meet the requirements that are set out in the CPP. More specifically, the Claimant must be found disabled as defined in the CPP on or before the end of the minimum qualifying period (MQP). The calculation of the MQP is based on the Claimant’s contributions to the CPP. I find the Claimant’s MQP to be December 31, 2011 with a proration date of September 2012. This means that in order for the Claimant to obtain a disability benefit I must determine whether she became disabled on or before September 30, 2012.
Issue(s)
[4] Did the Claimant’s conditions result in the Claimant having a severe disability, meaning incapable regularly of pursuing any substantially gainful occupation by September 30, 2012
[5] If so, was the Claimant’s disability also long continued and of indefinite duration by September 30, 2012?
Analysis
[6] Disability is defined as a physical or mental disability that is severe and prolongedFootnote 1. A person is considered to have a severe disability if incapable regularly of pursuing any substantially gainful occupation. A disability is prolonged if it is likely to be long continued and of indefinite duration or is likely to result in death. A person must prove on a balance of probabilities their disability meets both parts of the test, which means if the Claimant meets only one part, the Claimant does not qualify for disability benefits.
Severe disability
Did the Claimant’s limitations prevent her from regularly pursuing any substantially gainful employment on or before her MQP?
[7] I must assess the severe part of the test in a real world contextFootnote 2. This means that when deciding whether a person’s disability is severe, I must keep in mind factors such as age, level of education, language proficiency, and past work and life experience.
[8] The measure of whether a disability is “severe” is not whether the person suffers from severe impairments, but whether the disability prevents the person from earning a living. It’s not a question of whether a person is unable to perform their regular job, but rather the person’s inability to perform any substantially gainful workFootnote 3.
[9] From 2011 to 2015 the Claimant worked seasonally. She worked as a ski lift operator from December to March. After that she stopped going to work. During that time she would work three days a week for eight hours a day. She was a lift operator so she would watch for any accidents that occurred on the lift. She would assist in getting skiers on and off the lift. She would have to push and pull skiers on and off the lift. She would need to stand all day during her shifts. She was not provided with any accommodations by her employer. Her duties were the same as other ski lift operators.
[10] The Claimant stated that for the rest of the year she did not work. She had diabetes during that time and was focused on controlling her condition. I accept her evidence in this respect. During that time she was taking a cocktail of medication to assist with her diabetes management. She spent time at home and relied upon her husband for support.
[11] Much of the medical evidence deals with the Claimant’s blindness which occurred in her left eye in 2015 and in her right eye in 2016. There is no doubt that she has long standing diabetes. However, the question I must address is not whether she has a severe disability but rather whether her disability makes her incapable regularly of pursuing any substantially gainful occupation. The evidence in this respect demonstrates that the claimant was able to work seasonally well after her MQP. She would work eight hour days for three days a week. She had to do all aspects of the employment activities. This evidence from the Claimant demonstrates that she was able to regularly pursue substantially gainful employment after the end of her MQP.
[12] I note that the representative suggested that if the Claimant had only applied for a benefit in 2014 she would have been approved. This is not the case. As I mentioned the Claimant’s MQP is prorated to September 2012. She worked beyond this time period and in fact worked seasonally for three more years. As such she would not otherwise have been entitled to a disability benefit.
[13] While it is plainly obvious that the Claimant now suffers from a severe disability as she is blind, this was not the case at the time of her MQP.
[14] I am bound to follow the CPP and as such I cannot allow an appeal when a Claimant did not have a severe disability at the time of her MQP. As such I must dismiss this appeal.
Conclusion
[15] The appeal is dismissed.