Is it to pay off some annoying injured worker to make them go away?
Is it to rehabilitate /retrain the injured for a meaningful working life?
To make rich lawyers, specialists etc to get richer?Between $2-3500 each.
In a recent case e 23 yr who was a structural draftsman (3yr tertiary course) was injured at work. He may not be able to work again in an office.
It took three years to finalize the case.
40% of his payout went to Drs. 50% of the balance to lawyers he was left with >$10k to compensate him for his lost career… his HECs is three times that.
All he wanted was to be able to work at a reasonable job.
Everytime he applies for a job now he is obliged to mention the case and EVERY (despite interviews and being qualified.) job find a reason not to hire...most don't even tell him.If he mentions his WC on the phone they terminate the conversation there!
There has to be a better way. Any suggestions? Comments?

Dear examinator,

I watched ABC's "Q and A," programme last night
where this topic was raised. And the MP for
'disabilities,' made it quite clear that this is
a problem area. If any mention is made of your
being a WC case - ( or ever having been) you're not
going to be granted an interview for any job.

Where the answer to this problem lies, I'm not sure.
Re-educating our society? Putting certain anti-discrimination
laws in place? Will any of it work in reality?
"You can lead a horse to water..."

As we saw on the programme - glass ceilings do still
exist for women. Equal pay for equal work is not a reality.
People are still judged by appearances. And an employer
still decides who they will or will not hire - not matter
how many laws are put in place.

Foxy,
I watched that and of course it's right.
What bothered me was all the stress he and his family had to endure and for what? Everybody got rich off him. All he'll get is about $10k in leu of a life. I didn't mention that he has other problems that means that his best shot at a reasonable life(in our terms) was structural drafting now its DSB at 26? getting married children etc are now unlikely. I immagine how he will go meeting women.
"Hi what do you do?"
"DSP"
"oh"
He's frightened of being a social security sponge and potentially only able to attract bogans. His words.
What do you say that's meaningful? Nondirective is fine but it runs thin and he's at the thinest edge. His parents are worried.
But that's a side issue
In my mind the issue is that the system has failed him. Healthy rich specialists benefited but did he. WC would have spent the same ...ergo what a waste of money my calc is he could have trippled his take paid off Hecs if there was a better system than the one that exists.

PS The more I see of Chris Pyne the less convincing he appear to me terms like... well... $3 bills come to mind lots of them. His contribution to the discussion was pathetic. All the rest contributed more. I liked the ethicist and even the labor man said useful things.

examinator,

Do you (or Foxy, or anybody, for that matter) have a link for the transcript of that Q&A program?

This is a topic I find extremely interesting, but I'd like to be better informed before I venture an opinion.

I'm also intrigued by the observations in the postscript of your second post. I didn't see the program. Was it Chris Pyne's actual words, or his body language, that caused you to form your view? I ask because he chaired a Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee back in 2000, from memory. I think it was the Electoral Matters committee, and they were inquiring into the integrity of the electoral roll.

examinator,

You raise good points - this particular issue is fertile ground for any humanist.

As usual, the system extracts more than its fair share out of the victim. Why go and see doctors, specialists, etc if they do nothing for you? Society has this thing about referring onesself to authority as though just by seeing them all will magically be fixed. Utter garbage!

I also saw Q&A last night and couldn't agree more about Pyne - I think I called him a political chihuahua in an OLO thread once because of the constant stream of sharp yapping that comes out of his mouth. I thought all he did last night was hide behind Liberal cant. I wasn't that impressed with Bill Shorten either although I can see the real difficulty the Government has in changing the culture of society which is the real obstruction to solving the problems that you raise.

Even though the two (and a half) women on the panel were very sympathetic to the issue and did raise some good points, they are very much part of the layer of society that indirectly does well out of keeping others down. What I would like to see more of is these people putting some weight and actions behind their words. In this case I'm talking about Shorten who, when put on the spot by a woman in the audience saying that despite certain assurances from him the bureaucracy still didn't come through with a workable solution to her son's disability, kept rabbiting on with Labor ideas, values and promises. This is the easy bit and often all pollies are good for.

It's time for the political rabbits to disappear back into their hats and allow the real problem-solvers to come to the fore.

RobP

I saw Q&A last night also - terrific TV. I agree that Shorten was put on the spot by that woman in the audience, however I think he came out looking far better than Pyne who offered nothing more than rhetoric.

As a past compensation claimant myself, I never mention that I have received a claim. I would prefer to be honest, however, also prefer to have a job.

What is the point of worker's compensation? I think it is a highly sophisticated experiment developed by laboratory rats to see how many hoops a hapless employee can jump through before collapsing in a worse state than when they were originally injured. Pure evil.

WC is equally onerous on small business. It is not insurance against costs of an injured employee so much as a scam where the costs to the employee will be delayed, but ultimately gouged back thru steeply increased premiums. In answer to my question "what happens if one of my employees is severly injured?" my insurance coy. rep said "off the record, bankrupt yourself before we bankrupt you, we will double then redouble your premiums until we get our money back".

The average cost of an industrial death is over $16 million in NSW, almost all of it spent on the gravy train. Good for lawyers and insurance companies.

This interests me examinator, Fractelle has it right, a job is nearly the first thing victims want.
The first is to return to the way things had been one day before the cruel event.
Wish I had seen it ,I am very much a follower of Shorten, and those he left behind to lead on entering Parliament.
Strange but true, in its efforts to cut workers comp costs the Carr government did far worse than the last Liberal government in NSW.
If we could get a sliding scale of benefits that only had to be proved not fought over.
If bosses and employees lawyers acted only in the workers interests we would see money go to victims not ambulance chasers.
Unions, two, one branch one full union left the NSW ALP in a stand against dreadful insulting changes to WC, I remain extremely proud of that action, we did return.

Fractelle, RobP, palimpsest,others
WC’s focus is wrong in my opinion. It should be geared to giving the individual a life not a pocket full of money and goodbye and bugger you. By all good cost benefit analysis this system is dysfunctional. Like the lady on TV Social Security to provide services to help ameliorate the problem and get the person back to work where appropriate, reduce the cash in hand kiss off. This would also limit the impetuous for frauds.
Social Security shouldn’t be run like a bloody commercial insurance company…whose main focus is on profit therefore not paying out and to hell with justice or the genuinely needy.
In truth WC should be truly universal no self insurance by the big corps, then gouging recovery wouldn’t be necessary.
As it stands the injured employee signs away their right to any further claim. In reality the injury will get worse as they get older.

They need real retraining/help not a pittance.
As for Centre Link employment agents… a waste of tax payer’s money (sorry Mrs R But they are). If you’re ‘this’ class of client they’ll do UP to X and no more, If ‘that’ category Y. When the money runs out so does their interest.

Imagine if this lad goes back to uni to get extra training how does he pay 2 X HECS debts and how does he live in the mean time.

Mean while endless knock backs and Centre Link on his case to get a job and they’ve told him he won’t get dole until his bank is less than 2K. He’s depressed … why? It’s all too common.
Yes folks I’m pissed off with the injustice of a clearly dysfunctional the system. I do understand that Shorten etc are constricted by legislation by what really peeves me is you watch what will happen when and if legislation is introduced. Payne oops Pyne said it all money to rich schools now. Society should be humanistic each to their NEEDS not their selfish wants.
Ok reverend examinator has left the building now rip it up

Once again you are all going off half cocked because you don't know the whole story.

What were the circumstances of his injury?

Was he partly to blame for his injury?

If WC had not been ripped off by so many fraudsters for so many years it would most likely be a resonable system. It is after all a form of insurance.

I suggest you all gain the full details before you make judgement.

Remember, WC costs the employee ZERO. If you feel you are under covered, then take out personal injury insurance, after all, it is tax deductable and can give you peace of mind and provide financial security.

Dear Forrest,

Try the following website:

http://abc.com.au/tv/

You can download that particular Q&A programme.

Hope this helps.

Dear examinator,

Shorten did come across better than I
expected - and it will be interesting to wait and
see whether his promise of doing something for
that lady in the audience will eventuate in the
government's scheme of things - for people with
disabilities in the future. Shorten sounded sincere,
and I guess bureaucracies do move slowly - but I'm
sure he'll follow through on his promises.

Miracles don't happen overnight - but at least this
man is going to try to do something. Which is a step
in the right direction.

As for WC - where would workers and their families
be without it? The system is not perfect - but what
system is? Yet imagine having to cope and try to be
rehabilitated - after an accident at work without WC?

The meaning of worker’s compensation is at begin a small support for workers but when they return back to work they are the first who will lose their job and the last, the very last who can find work.
If we can not protect them from discrimination to find a new job, then probably workers lose of cause the WC than benefit from it.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

rehctub,

Half cocked it is not. I do know this case well his mum asked me to help him when he first was injured and I was involved in every step. I also have experience with WC as both a senior manager in a large concern, as a small business owner and as someone who has also made a compensation claim. I feel comfortable to comment.

I think you missed the point it is not about this young man per se it is about the system his case was merely an amplification of the Q&A show. A vector if you like.

rechtub that was a shameful post truly I had thought much better of you.
Half cocked?
Maybe you went of half cocked evidence would be put before the court tribunal on the events leading to his/her claim.
Always the degree of self contribution to that event is taken into account, always.
You then,[truly why] lurch into a reminder in your view the poor old employer had to pay for the injury, you do mean your customers don't you?
Some compo victims mate, payed with an arm or leg, our dead mate Bernie paid with his life tens of workers die or are crippled at work, so the cost of insurance has blinded you to human pain.
examinator yes Chris Pyne is going now place I got that one wrong.

Belly and Examinator
I to have been involved in a few compo cases.

When I cut my hand I was paid compo immediately, no questions, but that was in the late 70's. The system has been screwed over since then.

In the mid 90's I recieved a sumons in the mail and was being sued personally for $300,000 with a worker claiming that I was negligent.

After many sleepless nights and thousands of dollars defending myself, it was proven that the guy was intoxicated when he arrived for his shift as a cleaner. He had not yet commenced his shift and slipped over outside my shop, yet I had to defend myself. Why?

My point is that it is unlikely that a worker will be denied compo if it is an open and shut case. There must be more to this guys case than we are reading about.

Once again I remind you that there are a range of personal insurances available for EVERYONE.

Workers comp has always been viewed as a safety net, not an income replacement.

Finnaly, if one injuries are such that they are un-employable again then this is a seperate issue and one that requires compensation of a slightly different kind.

I also dispute your argument that people become un-employable just because they had a compo claim.

If you wish to point the finger, or lay blame, blame the countless number off compo cheats, as it is they who have made compo what it is today, not the compo board or the employers.

our dead mate Bernie paid with his life

Belly, you have to be kidding. This is a case where this guy was effected by the use of a building material that nobody knew was so dangerous at the time.
There are extreem cases where people are suing either governments and or companies the're not your average WC claim.

poor old employer had to pay for the injury, you do mean your customers don't you?
More evidence that you have no idea what retailers are facing today.

Unlike building sites where workers can demand to be paid X or they won't turn up, retailers can not pass on all costs and most are finding that thier margins are getting tighter every day. We are 100% governed by what the consumer wants to pay and that's it!

WC, super and many other bills come from our own pockets.

Now if you go back to the thread, it is:
' What is the point of worker’s compensation?'
Quite simply it is there as a safety net so as an employee, if genuinely injured at work, can get some financial assistance while they are in recovery.

If on the other hand they are seriously injured, then they make a civil claim for damages and must prove their case. Again, blame the rip offs for years, not the WC or employers.

As far as I am concerned I would love to see it go and be replaced wholey by personal injury insurance, as this is 100% tax deductable. It is just that if the employer is not forced to pay it, then the majority of employees would not bother as it would cut into thier spending money and they wouyld be un-insured.

A teacher recently fell from a rolling chair while standing to attach a personal notice on the lunchroom wall. She got compo, why?

Becasue she argued there was nothing else to stand on. Now is that fair?
This is why WC is in the shape it's in!

I've expressed this notion before.Why not make workers comp part of super.This will mean peole will get extra super if they are careful in the work place and don't make vexatious or false claims.It other words we use both carrot and stick approach .We could exclude the insurance companies and lawyers to a large extent thus ensuring that the workers gets more benefits.

On thing is certain,workers comp is dysfunctional and needs a total overhaul.

The last three posts in this thread inflame me!
ON what evidence rechtub do you base your claim we did not know asbestos was dangerous?
That was part of Bernie's claim
THEY KNEW they HID it!
your crimson costs rechtub are those of the consumers who buy your products.
You make a net profit in business and costs to defend your self are coming back to them.
do not measure workers comp by the fraud, think of the true victims.
yes in fact this is true, the ALP in NSW betrayed injured workers crippled the system, put in place by the Liberals.
stop fraud gaol for those who are doing it, lawyers would Be first, but stop destroying the lives of victims too.
I will till my last breath be proud to be union, to fight uninformed or uncaring people like you rechtub and Arjay so that a workplace injury is not life destroying, and that people are not branded because they got hurt.

Belly
We are treading on sensative ground as this proud man has paid with his life, so please forgive me as it is nothing personal about this man. but,
You said he knew it was dangerous, yet he continued to work there then cry foul afterwards.

Now I have not paid much attention to this case however the penny may have dropped, thanks to you.

Maybe this was the defence argument of JH. A bit like the tabaco industry, people smoking all thier lives and, if not knowing it was dangerous, at least susspecting it was, only to sue for damages years, sometimes decades latter.

And Belly,your union crap is just becomming a bore. You acuse PALE and others of highjacking threads yet you turn each and every thread into a union affair.

Give it a rest mate, many of us could not give a toss about unions.

Finnally, our current WC system is the bi-product of corrupt workers minipulating and cheating on what was once a reasonable and reliable system put in place to assist injured workers, many of them union menbers.

I don't think anything should be done to fix WC unless the employees, the very group who screwed the system over, are prepared to dig into thier own pockets to better cover themselves, such as personal injury insurance.

After all, it cost this group ZERO and it was they who stuffed it up through thier greed. Why should either the employers, or the government fix something that they did not break.

Belly,save your diatribe for those who want to luxuriate in victim status.
Those of us who really care,make the individual responsible first before they can have any claims to rights.Workers comp has been rorted by insurance companies ,workers and lawyers.This is why it has failed.

Workers Comp has destroyed many industries in this country and done virtually nothing for the worker.It would be better that we give the premiums to the worker and then they and go find their own accident insurance.Premiums and claims would fall precpitiously!

Those two posts did not change a thing for me.
I still think rechtub is not as bad as reading his posts would suggest.
That he does not understand some issues.
Sorry Arjay, but as you long ago did with me I have formed my opinions of you,
No chance they will change.
workers compensation, hardly an issue a unionist can stay out of.
After all while we refuse to admit it, it was won by unions for workers in far worse times than now.
Workers got hurt and dumped before that.
rechtub bore you it may, but unions fought battles for fairness and equity that won todays conditions, we will never back away from our path.
Now I truly am concerned at the stupid idea that workplace injury's are fraud? what always?
some are, some lawyers are criminal too, but surely not all?
A farmer some place in this country in the next few weeks will have a tractor roll on him, a truck driver will die in his office the cab of his truck before months end.
If they live they may do so in a wheel chair, forever, insurance may not cover the costs but should.
Fairness and equity, rechtub you highlighted your own injury, you got looked after.
If you got killed or crippled would you want insurance?
Who pays your insurances?
Is it not in the end your customers?
Do you know how many employers despite it being LAW do not insure workers?
Or wrongly insure them?
How many family's of dead construction workers got near nothing because of company fraud in not insuring?
fairness and equity.

Belly,just a few yrs ago ie [pre the Bob Carr debacle] a business near mine had a workers comp claim of $750,000.00 for a bad back.The claiment was a holiday worker from Europe.The nurses at the hospital sprung him and they got proof that it was a false claim.

The insurance company did not want to fight it in court and so settled out of court for $300,000.00.The business owner wanted to fight it but had no say in the settlement.His premiums went up enormously over the next few yrs to cover the settlement.This sort of crime has sent many businesses broke and has limited employment for your members.

Belly you are too blinded by your own indignation and union tribalism to see the truth.It is pointless arguing with you.The problem is that the unions are often very like the corporate criminals whom they profess to detest.

You in fact Arjay are the one blinded.
You are quite right, before Carr took workers comp rights to a new low claims often got 3 times what is possible today.
You are also right fraud, often from legal Representatives got more than the victim.
And yes, would ANY person claiming understanding of the subject not be concerned about illegal claims?
Both you and rechtub however, Have Not Once Drawn a line between fraud and honest injured victims.
Not Once.
Claims workers should pay insurance them selves, resorting to tribalism claims, no wonder I have formed opinions.
Let us look at the facts.
Unions won workers comp.
Before that injured or killed workers ended up on the public purse social security.
The costs do go up, are a weight in the saddle of business, but that is a cost of business passed on to us all.
Unions, the good ones, do not just seek fairness in the work place, they play a roll in the community few see.
Including being there for those who can not defend themselves, blindness to crippled people injured in the workplace is something you should separate from true concerns about fraud.
Employers pay by law, and last rechtub that dead man ,like hundreds asked was it ok? he never had proof never knew he would die.
Evidence clearly said his bosses knew it was dangerous.

Belly, you said
Both you and rechtub however, Have Not Once Drawn a line between fraud and honest injured victims.
Not Once.
Try these!

1.My point is that it is unlikely that a worker will be denied compo if it is an open and shut case. Care to respond?

2.If you wish to point the finger, or lay blame, blame the countless number off compo cheats, as it is they who have made compo what it is today Did I say ALL WORKERS?

3.f WC had not been ripped off by so many fraudsters for so many years it would most likely be a resonable system.

4.Quite simply it is there as a safety net so as an employee, if genuinely injured at work, can get some financial assistance while they are in recovery. Note the word GENUINELY?

5.If on the other hand they are seriously injured, then they make a civil claim for damages and must prove their case. Again, blame the rip offs for years, not the WC or employers. Again, Not EVERYONE!

And this, do not measure workers comp by the fraud, think of the true victims.
Now this is the very reson why WC is in the state it's in today. Fraurd.

Belly
A farmer some place in this country in the next few weeks will have a tractor roll on him,
Most farmers have private insurance. perhaps you meant a farm worker?

a truck driver will die in his office the cab of his truck before months end.

Many truck accidents are contributed to by over tiered drivers, cheating the system. Care to defend these union members, or are they a protected spiecies?

At no time have I said that ALL WORKERS ARE COMO CHEATS, it is just that once backed into a corner your type look for ways out.
Continued

Continued
and for the record, I do not hate unions, nor do I think that they are not important. All I ever ask for is fairness, both ways.

Jobs are about to go, pay rates are about to slow, all becasue demand is dropping.

If you are truely independant and honest, you will acknowledge that and let it be.

Finnally, I like the suggestion that workers be paid extra and then take out thier own insurance. Now if they choose to WASTE THE MONEY, rather than insure themselves, then tough! At least my premiums won't increase if they make a claim on thier own policy. Thier's may though which may well force them to reconsider that fraudulent or silly claim.

Gee I wish 'facts' wouldn't put an end to threads.

The old 'don't let the truth get in the way of a good story hey'!

The fact is that WC was a system set up to provide assistance for injured workers. It was never meant to be an income replacement scheem. That is what income protection insurance is for.

It was funded wholey by employers yet rapped for years by the cheating and scamming employees and that group are now crying foul. (not all employees are cheats of cause)

Just think of the million of dollars spent on legal fees fighting and defending these cases of WC fraud.

The point is, that like most things that are funded by someone other than the beneficiaries, a certain portion of these beneficiaries can't help themselves and proceed to rape the system for what ever they can get.

Just take a look at the security required in order to protect public property from thieves. Everything from roadside fence pannels to batteries from machinary are stolen if not bolted down, even then some of them find a way.

The fact remains that WC is what it is through little fault of the employers. Some of the employees own members wrecked it, so let them fix it.

One faulse claim back in the 90's cost me in excess of $20,000 through legal fees and increased premiums and I was innocent!

The guy was pissed, fell over and though he would blame someone else.

By the way, I didn't get my 200% fee increase on my premium refunded either.

rechtub I am sorry.
But your self assurance is miss placed.
Facts did not drive me from this debate.
You never backed me into a corner.
Your remarks about poor dead Bernie underlined in my mind you do not know the whole story.
And that you do not want to.
I laugh sometimes at the anti worker themes in your posts.
And wait endlessly for you to focus on true fraud, the fraud that crippled our way of life, big business fraud.
Billions trillions stolen, and you focus on alleged fraud, yesterdays fraud in workers comp.
the system is in ruins, workers sometimes the very best, are dumped on us all as WC is gutted.
Social Security is poor reward for those permanently unable to work ,no fault of their own rechtub.
I will not ever leave debate with you tail between my legs,I leave because we will never get a resolution, you with one eyed thoughts of how it was me concerned with how it should be.

Dear Belly,

I can't understand why some people have to
tear things down. Why they can't look at life
with hope, instead they have to bring a
negative fear into everything. We've got
so much to really be grateful for in this
country. We've got a National Health Insurance
Scheme, an Aged Pension, a Racial Discrimination
Act, Workers Compensation, and much more.

Things arent' perfect, but overall - we're indeed
lucky!

cont'd

Henry Lawson sums it up beautifully in his poem,
and I quote:

Too old to rat!

"I don't care if the cause be wrong,
Or if the cause be right,
I've had my day and sung my song,
And fought the bitter fight.
In truth, at times I can't tell what
The men are driving at;
But I've been Union thirty years,
And I'm too old to rat.

Maybe, at times in those old days
Remembered now by few,
We did bite off in various ways
Much more than we could chew -
We paid, in sodden strikers' camps,
Upon the black-soil flat;
We paid, in long and hungry tramps -
And I'm too old to rat.

The Queensland strike in 'Eighty-nine
And 'Ninety's gloomy days -
The day the opera comp'ny sang
For us the 'Marseillaise';
The sea of faces stern and set,
The waiting 'bitter cup,'
The hopeless hearts, unbeaten yet,
The storm cloud rushing up.

The fighting, dying 'Boomerang'
Against the daily Press;
The infant 'Worker' holding out;
The families in distress;
The sudden tears of beaten men -
Oh! you remember that!
And memories that make my pen
Not worth its while to rat.

I've wept with them in strikers' camps
Where shivered man and beast;
I've worn since then the badge of men
Of Hell! - and London East!
White faces by the flaring torch!
Wraith wives! - the slaves of Fat!
And ragged children in the rain -
Yes! I'm too old to rat!"
-Henry Lawson.

He knew about workers' problems.

Rehctub, ajay,
Both you gentlemen are arguing on emotional grounds, neither is offering facts merely hearsay and personal prejudices. At least Belly has got facts/history on his side.
What both of you don’t seem to understand is that it is the system that is dysfunctional and often driven by money not the welfare of the injured as for compensation for the genuine… not where I’m sitting.

Many businesses aren’t all that keen to abide by the letter of the law as it affects their bottom line.
I remember a boss I had retitling (blatant lie) his drivers job id to pay a lower premium . When one was hurt the boss did everything including threats and bribes to avoid responsibility because if WC had been involved he would have been fined heavily. His lawyers advised him to pay off the employee with a lump less than the fine and the increase in premiums. After two more injuries it was a union that bought him to book .

Another boss refused to spend $1700 on a safety cage for workers up on a reach truck. Until I as their manager threatened to involve OH&S. My boss threatened to sack me for gross disloyalty however a week after we installed the safety cage a nasty accident was avoided because of that cage. The board congratulated my boss for his foresight.

At 18 I was sent up a pile of wheels they collapsed, I was sent home when I returned I was sacked to avoid WC.

Major Corporations self insure as they can control it easier. Given the number of premiums lost to the system WC has too small a base from which to recoup and as such small businesses cop the bill. The losses of premiums far FAR FAR out weigh dud claims…..fact.

In short there are as many dubious bosses as there are dud claims. Sure the system would be better if there were no dud claims, or dud bosses and ALL businesses had to belong to the same scheme.

examinator I agree with much of what you say in that there are definately more legit WC claims than there are crooked ones.

I also agree that there are many crook employers out there as well.

I do however dispute your claim that my case is based on emotion, rather than fact.

Fact. WC is wholely funded by employers. Compo cheats have made it the failed system that it is today.

Fact. My WC premium in 1989 was approx .5% of my staff wages. Today it is almost 5% of my staff wages. Almost a 1000% increase, do you think this is fair?

As an employer, who has always paid my compo for 20 years, including my 200% loading when it was proven I was not in the wrong, I feel I have every right to have my say when it comes to WC.

Once again, my views are not emmotional, they are based on fact.

Belly
I say again and again, WC WAS NEVER established as an 'income replacement'. Income protection insurance is available, for most workers and it is tax deductable. This is an income replacement scheem.

How can you possiblly expect a system that is not contributed to by workers to provide for workers full financial needs if they are injured and not able to work.

Of cause if there is negligence involved by the employer, then this is a whole different case.

At the risk of continually reapeating myself, again and again, it is a 'safety net' system that would be in far better shape if not for the selected few who ripped it off over the years.

I would also remind you that the billions and trillions you speak of has nothing to do with WC.

Finnaly, if I were you belly I would be more focussed on the huge job losses your unionist are about to create with Kruds new IR laws. WC won't matter to them hey!

Dear rehctub,

'Workchoices' helped contribute to the Liberal
Party's losing the last election.
You may not like the 'new industrial relations laws,'
as you put it - but most people do support
the right of all workers to protect their livelihoods.

I'm sure that you'll agree that
the only way in which our
country can work properly is for management and
labour to co-operate with one another. We're in
critical times here in Australia - and what we don't
need is constant attacks on employees by employers.
That does little for industrial relations - and long
term planning

Thanks for the poem Foxy it brightened my day.
To the contrary rechtub WC is to pay a worker unable to work again, it is also to pay people like you for temporary lost work.
The alternative is Social Security, we all pay bare less than living wage.
Your story's of fraud are true, but yesterdays sins.
Far more are dead, crippled or forever and ever marginalized , because one day their hopes and plans died.
I have NEVER met such a person who had one wish, not money but a return to life before that event.
In construction top up insurance is provided by the best firms.
It tops up wages lost if on long term compo, it gives extra benefits if unable to return to work.
Workers comp costs have risen, so have prices and fees charged by those who must pay for it.
That is the nature of business.
A side issue can never be ignored, the community expects injured workers to be insured, expects that they the community and the injured do not pay the costs of workplace injury.
right now sadly, some bosses are insuring construction workers as security guards, see it both costs less[less risk] and pays far less if injury happens.

In lunch sheds or offices all around Australia sit bored injured workers .
Arms or legs in plaster some in real pain, but the boss bought them back to sit and wait, it cuts workers comp claims costs and increases.
Some are far worse, small firms take paper work home to bed ridden workers , for the same reasons.
A young man informed his boss he was unable to work with wet concrete, he was going to burn badly, a fitter he was told do your job.
Horrific burns needing skin grafts followed.
In dreadful pain he sat in his doctors rooms, site safety official with him.
Doctor said you will need a lot of time away from work.
Site safety official took over the interview, no! we have work for him!
NO he did not! that young bloke had skin grafts is still unable to return but gets weekly insulting visits from guess who?
fraud and crimes against fairness and equity continue in workers comp.
Slip from workers bar at the club to the bosses end of the bar, strange workers are not one bit different than bosses as they enjoy a beer while watching the sport.
Find me any group, sport social, religious, that has not got good bad and ugly amung its members.
Unionist are human, I am too old to rat, never too old for change or fairness but too old to forget workers are human too.

Dear foxy, I have no argument with what you say, however, many wages paid today are the result of extreem supply V demand deficates in yesterdays workplaces.

By all means protect workers rights, but not the unrealistic wages that have been paid in recent years. Even Belly has admited this.

Supply V demand must work both ways to be fair. If you don't allow this you are risking many jobs. Wait and see.

Belly
To the contrary rechtub WC is to pay a worker unable to work again, it is also to pay people like you for temporary lost work.
Belly, this will go tit for tat for ever as we simply don't agree on many things.

Do you agree that WC is a basic cover and does not include any loading, overtime, bonnuses etc?

The alternative is Social Security, we all pay bare less than living wage.
So why don't workers have thier own 'top up' insurance if they feel they are under insured?

Your story's of fraud are true, but yesterdays sins.
Yes, but they are also part of the cause of todays problems.

In construction top up insurance is provided by the best firms.
It tops up wages lost if on long term compo, it gives extra benefits if unable to return to work.
AND IT IS EXACTLY MY POINT, 'top up' as WC is a 'safety net.

some bosses are insuring construction workers as security guards,
Yes I understand this and I don't support it, but Isn't it a shame that bosses have to employ security guards, often because workers theft is so high.

Workers comp costs have risen, so have prices and fees charged by those who must pay for it.
Yes, but only for the employers, workers have never paid one red cent for WC. A free system wrecked by yesterdays fraudsters, as you put it.

Your 'fitter' has my full sympathy. His boss should be finned, simple as that.

I would rather pay 5% on top workers wage and let them insure themselves. How much cover would this give them I wonder. Anyone?

One of the biggest grey areas in WC is that people often say they can't work anymore.

Well define 'can't work'.

Sure, they may not be able to work in thier chosen field, but, if thier injury was ligit then surely they would be compensated.

Can't work is a very strong statement and one that is continually argued in the courts. It is also considered when a ruling on compo payouts are made.

People that are wheel chair bound often gain work in offices, some even as check out attendants.

I saw a guy recently who had no arms, no legs, yet, he was a very succesfull motivational speaker. Surely there are many who claim 'they can't work' that are better off than this guy.

Just remember, we all live in a lucky country but if we keep pushing the boundaries then maybe one day we won't be so lucky.

WC was designed to pay injured workers with genuine injuries. It was not set up to be frauded or to feather lawyers nests.

This is where the problems lie. Address these issues and you may well turn the corner to a better system.

Dear rehctub,

The system should be fair to both the employer and
the employee - I agree. And perhaps it is time
that we had a re-assessment of the relationship.
What we don't need is the old , "kick the worker"
attitude. You sound like a fair man - you also sound
like one who's had far more experience in this area
then I've had - so I respect your point of view.
All I'm asking for is proper protection - and an
equitable system that serves both the worker and his
employer. And I believe that this can be achieved
through co-operation between the two, not condemnation
of each other.

rechtub I do not disagree with Foxys view of you, in fact I share it.
But mate you are badly informed and lack knowledge of just how it is, like that sling about security hired because workers thieve, a low blow mate
Get this clear,NEVER NOT EVER will I support a thief in the workplace, or a fraudulent claim for workers compo. NEVER EVER.
I never left a job the boss did not ask me to stay, offering more money if I did.
I believe a fair days pay deserves a fair days work.
Construction workers get overtime included for a time in compo, via top up.
Like all insurances compo has a social reason, prior to it workers fell back on social security, always.
you mate are blinded to the fact we all, every one of us pay for workers comp you like every business man pass it on to us.
criminals do steal from work sites, huge amounts, including plant doing weekend foreign orders and trucks removing gear soil and more.
ALWAYS cleared by a STAFF member in control of a black tax free market, no workers involved they may tell.
As those involved are not workers or unionists are their crimes important?
You are not a bad bloke but under informed and biased strangely against Joe average, who could well be the back bone of your business.

rehctub,
You still ignore the fact that if you have a smaller pool of contributors than existed in 89 check when the act changed to allow the big employers to self fund.
Where are the figures that prove your point that the major cost is employee fraud…. all the issues I raise as fact can be sourced.

The case which I was referring too Generated $33k (itemized) costs by WC for what 5 specialist visits and an occupational therapist twice the lad spent nearly that much in specialists and Medicare want 10% of his payout even though their input didn’t come close to that. WC Lawyers, barristers weren’t itemized but presumably were extra.

As the lawyer said it’s not the right/wrong or justice of the issue it comes down to who might win in court when the case is based on narrow legal issues. e.g. WC’s doctor would be more listened to because he saw the lad 3 times over 3 years. Even thought his report was full of mistakes and errors in fact. Symptoms were ignored because they weren’t in the field of the specialists and went un-investigated. Pursuing them would have cost more and wouldn’t win the case

Also medical technology in 89 CAT scans unheard of …today MRI & PET scans and bone scans even ultra sound is high tech and are a big ticket items and can be called in to play.
The way we manage medicine has changed there are several new diseases, conditions, new expensive diagnosing techniques et al. New issues that can now be tested .i.e. ABC offices in Brisbane (11 year cancer cluster) this site enquiry spent millions investigating with a nil result. 30 yrs ago claims like this didn’t exist.

When I made my claim 20 yrs ago the cost to fight the case was less than 15% of the award. This lad will be lucky if he gets 30% of the settlement.
Nearly $98k (itemized)was spent to give him a pittance for his lifetime injury.

Sorry but you’re out of touch with the costs today and the way it’s played.

Dear Belly,

To me your integrity is beyond reproach.
If I was ever in any kind of trouble -
workwise, I'd want you by my side advising me.
You're honest, you care, you tell it like it is,
and you tell it straight. And besides - you're
a great guy! :)

I hope that I haven't embarrassed you.

examinator
I never said fraud was the 'major 'cause of Wc increases or its demise.

However, just try to imagine the million spent on lawyers, private investigaters etc all in an effort to search out the compo cheats. Now you can't tell me thast if there were no cheats that they system would be in the mess it is today.

Furthermore, you say that there are not enough contributing businesses left to provide suficient funding hey. Then why punish the ones who are contributing then?

Perhaps you have just amplified my call for additional funding by way of 'top up' personal injury insurance.

It is simply unfair for anyone to expect my business to pay ten times the premium percentage for WC.

I leave the thread,we can not ever come together here.
That rise in costs rechtub complains about is more than matched by fuel and much more.
And if you remember his costs are said to have risen over nearly 30 years, what has not by that percentage.
Like a butcher workers have to eat, if forced to pay their own insurance?
Anyone doubt they too would pass it on?
Underlining costs and who pays them, no honest employer is not trying hard to cut his costs by reducing claims.
A safer workplace is the result.
It stuns me that unions and workers to some are near evil, yet they like you and I are humans too.
living next door or over the road, a union card is no different than membership of a bosses union, we have many of them.
We understand we can not forever pay workplace injury's costs from the public purse but we are doing so right now more often than not.

Belly, two things I wish to point out as you exit this post. And I would appreciate you point of whether or not you consider this fair.

The time frame is in fact 20 years , not 30 as you state.

The other point is that I agree that costs rise, however it is the percentage that has concerned me.

Eg: Back in 89 I PAID 50 cents FOR EVERY $100 of an employees wage for WC insurance.

Remembering that my company has had no claims, which means I run a 'AAA' rated workplace yet I NOW PAY $5.00 PER EVERY $100 of an employees wage.

Imagine if you where taxed 5 cents for every dollar you earned back in 89 and now you got taxed 50cents for every dollar you earned today.

Now be honnest! Do you think this is fair on me considering I am a 'AAA' rated employer?

I have contributed tens of thousands of dollars into this fund yet, even though I have not drawn from it, you people want me to pay more.

Where is the fairness in that.

Retchub

Every year I spend my hard earned dollars on insurance for my home, contents, third party, car and more.

Only twice in my life have I had to claim on any of this insurance - that was when I was burgled and when a car ploughed into my car at speed.

If you provide the level of safety as any good employer should, then I don't understand your problem. Bad things happen and all too often to good people, this is why we spend on insurance and this how insurance companies remain viable.

I have been a victim of workplace injury and can agree it is not good value for money - I have not been retrained nor did I receive equitable recompense for what was done to me.

However, it is better than nothing at all.

What would be a fair, equitable and affordable system than what is in existence at present?

Fractelle
Every year I spend my hard earned dollars on insurance for my home, contents, third party, car and more
Correct, Your Car, Your House, Your Contents. I also have all of these to pay as well, for MY personal benefit! Although I must admit, with the way that the INSURED have been treated as oppossed to the UN-INSURED in the Vic bush fires, I can see a lot of insured people scrathing thier heads right now wondering why they bothered to pay thier insurance!

If you provide the level of safety as any good employer should, then I don't understand your problem.

Here is my problem.
Back in 89 I paid approx two dollars per week per employee for WC.

Today I pay approx FORTY FIVE DOLLARS per week per employee.

Now if wages had gone up the same as WC my staff would be earning around $9,000 per week.

So do you still call this fair?

What would be a fair, equitable and affordable system than what is in existence at present?
Leave just as it is today. If you want additional cover then pay for it and claim it back on your tax.

Every nail you drive into small business is one nail closer to closure. But you need not worry because if these new IR laws come in, most small businesses will either stop expanding, down size or close.

I did not wish to come back to the thread however you rechtub deserve an answer.
It is yes.
The system is too important not to be properly funded.
The Innocent victims too must not find no future because of an accident.
However the debate focused on your claims of corruption, fraud, almost every case seemed to be fraudulent to me from your posts.
Here are the fact as I see it.
In NSW claims at that time had become massive, not just workers comp but car trauma events and even people jumping in to shallow water at night, while drunk, sued councils.
Some got hundreds of thousands of dollars for that!
NSW had a mission to cut such claims, the amounts awarded and ruled out some claims .
At the same time as WC was being redrafted.
Now fraud has always been with us in all three areas.
Too few perpetrators go to prison for it.
The ALP like any party charges in to mistake ridden ground, this was such a case.
We, surely most of us? had had a gut full of million dollar pay outs to car drivers who caused the event.
You I and the world knows law firms prosper on WC.
Not as much as they once did, a workers rights eroded under Labor, people are rated on extent of injury's, not ability to work.
It is a sham, it however is cutting workplace injury's, the costs see bosses try to work safer.
But as growing costs exist so too must your fees, the ones you get tax breaks from then pass on to us in your mystery bags.
We need a better fairer system, less lawyers more money for victims, prison for fraud

Well belly I thank you for that however I don't think that everyone is a compo cheat, nor do I have a problem with anyone making a ligit claim. And yes, we do provide safer workplaces, my record is 'AAA'.

My point is quite simple, why am I the one who has to pay the penalty. I have not even drawn on my fund yet today I pay FIVE times the percentage in fees.

If my WC premium was still at 50cents per $100 I would not have a problem.

Can anyone explain to me why THE PERCENTAGE of wages I pay in my WC premium has increased tenfold.

Now if your household insurance went from say $200 per year to $4,500 per year would you be happy. This is what has happened to me as such.