Description
A forum for interaction about Workcover South Australia and the experiences of Injured Workers.
My Links
»
»
»
»
»
|
Unpopular comments
It seems that the comments of some on this blog are under scrutiny by our Parliamentary members in South Australia.
Whilst it is the intention of this site to give everyone a right to speak out freely against the current Workcover system we must ensure that the comments are fairly made.
If anyone objects to any posts on this site or wishes for them to be removed please post in this area or contact the webmaster at workedover@hotmail.com |
Posted: 11:38 AM, 22/11/2007 |
Add Comment |
Half the truth
| To the Parliamentry members who are reading this site, please keep in mind injured workers are only telling half the truth in fear of retrabution. It is unfortunate that some comments have became because workers are purely frustrated on the way they have been treated. |
Posted by d.perre at 12:46 PM, 22/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Mr Wortley... Face the Facts
I appreciate your time to mention some issues in parliament in answer to the issues raised by the Hon Anne Bressington.
To ensure you are better informed I hope that you will attend the next injured workers forum. Perhaps you will be in a better position then to address parliament with first hand knowledge of raw facts. And that many workers are targeted in what can only be described as Bully Boy tactics.
I know you are simply ensuring the integrity of the upcoming review but I can assure you unless injured workers are invited to speak out on any issues without fear of retribution in the review it will just be another facade.
The Public are all too aware of what happened to Thompson when matters were raised by him with his Member of parliament..Why would any injured worker want to speak out and complain to a minister if they knew they would be targeted in the way he has been by Workcover..
With no protection from the parliament.
Seems to me to be Workcover with all the power making the rules not parliament.
We have all seen what a facade the investigation into Workcover by Parliament can be.
Please ensure that you encourage a thorough and proper review into the system with no short cuts, for to do anything other than a proper review is doing injustice to all South Australians not just injured workers.
To assert that there is no problem and they are fixing the problem is too little action too late..
A razor gang is needed to get rid of the corrupt employees and practices within the corporation and it was needed many years ago.
If you need evidence then simply ask.
|
Posted by Reader at 1:03 PM, 22/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Point Proven
Thank you Mr Wortley for bringing the attention of this wonderful blog site to the eyes and ears of the public. It is unfortunate however that you have picked .0005% of the comments to use in your argument. I hope you did not over look the cases where deceased loved ones had to fight for their entitlements as to prove they were worth fighting for.
Edited by workedover1 on 12/12/2007 at 10:40 PM |
Posted by d.perre at 1:16 PM, 22/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Obviously no stranger to cover ups..
Select Committees:
Member - Allegedly Unlawful Practices Raised by the Auditor-General in his Annual Report, 2003-2004 -51st Parliament.
Chairperson - The Atkinson/Ashbourne/Clarke Affair -51st Parliament. |
Posted by Anonymous at 3:23 PM, 22/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Wortley a Port supporter anyway
I read on the parliament website that Wortley is a member of the Port Adelaide Power Football Club..
And here I was thinking all along he had some credibility..
|
Posted by Anonymous at 3:28 PM, 22/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Hon Wortley
I have just read Hansard and have found a couple of inaccuracies I picked up from Hon Wortley:
1) The Office of Employee Ombudsman DOES NOT deal with WorkCover issues.
2) The Ms Morgan issue is still current and although it started some 10 years ago it just comes to show how the system is managed.
Please Mr. Wortley, I am unaware who your research officer is but you might want to research for yourself to save more embarrassments.
|
Posted by DavidR at 7:54 PM, 22/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Mr Wortley
Mr Wortley stated and I quote
"WorkCover received in the order of 260,000 claims from workers of registered employers. I do not intend to make light of any injured worker's poor experience with WorkCover, but it is worth noting that the vast majority of those who made a claim had an experience with the scheme entirely different to the three or four cases described by the honourable member".
Mr Wortley, can i suggest to you is have a look at the cause list in The Advertiser and just see how many disputes are heard daily at the Riverside centre.
These are disputes that require the worker to seek legal representation at a cost to the worker. This cause list is much longer than any other court hearings day in and day out. When workers are continually scutinised whilst dealing with both physical and financial losses, it could be hardly said they are having a "good" experience.
Take this as an invitation to the next WorkCover Forum |
Posted by Peter.T at 9:35 PM, 22/11/2007 |
Link |
|
can someone help me
| eml have expressed giving me a 42 redemption how do i know what is a fair amount? |
Posted by Anonymous at 1:37 AM, 23/11/2007 |
Link |
|
redemptions
| Please refer to the below blog as we will keep this site for the members of parliament to read. |
Posted by b.vottari at 11:04 AM, 23/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Redemptions
Unfortunately there is a lot to be considered if a redemption is fair or not. One has to take into consideration of how much of your income maintenance will be redeemed.
If you are partially or fully incapacitated.
If you take a redemption on your full income maintenance, you are therefore deemed to have earnt your full wages until you are 65 years of age. You will never be able to claim any further entitlements for your current or any future incapacitations. In other words, you will have no income insurance for the rest of your working life.
My suggestion would be to think very hard and seek legal opinion with my theory in mind.
If anyone else has an input, please feel free.
|
Posted by b. vottari at 11:13 AM, 23/11/2007 |
Link |
|
can anyone help me
| thanks for the advice on the redemption i have a lawyer but they tell you they can get you so much but when i comes to crunch they tell you to take what ever workcover throws your way. i cant blame them though i have been off work for over a year now and after 4 or 5 tribunal hearings i am still not being paid correctly because eml could not calculate my rate of pay properly they had to have someone come in and show them how to do it. i could go on all day but thanks for the advice. |
Posted by Anonymous at 12:33 PM, 23/11/2007 |
Link |
|
redemptions
| Ask your lawyer what I have told you and have it in writing, remember you do not have to take the redemption if you think thats its not fair, likewise WorkCover has the same right. Taking a redemption is a favor for WorkCover espessially when its a 'token". |
Posted by b.vottari at 1:00 PM, 23/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Conciliation and redemption a joke.
I asked for a redmption and went through all the waiting times before I could lodge an appeal because Workcover had failed to do anything about it.
Then after waiting and waiting..must have been nearly twelve months I turned up at the tribunal for my big conciliation conference..unfortunately Workcovers lawyers did not turn up..
They did not want to give me a redemption and my lawyer said if they do not bother to turn up to conciliation conferences no point in pursuing them the ymade their intentions clear.
I guess I will have to endure a few more years of visiting doctors at their request just to please them and filling out paper work for travel and chemist expenses etc..
I must say if thats the standard injured workers can expect from Workcover no wonder they are having trouble balancing the deficit. |
Posted by Still waiting at 9:56 PM, 23/11/2007 |
Link |
|
compensation for non-economic loss
| i have had the same situation with my compensation for non-economic loss (sec43). my injury occured some 8 years ago and little has been done. at once stage i was sent to see an indepandant doctor for a examination to determine a percantage 3 days before surgery. i keep on getting told they can not make a determination because my condition has NOT stabilised. but when they have tried to reduce my wage as i may be fit to return to some capacity work they tell me my condition IS stabalised. |
Posted by waiting, waiting, waiting....... at 11:35 AM, 24/11/2007 |
Link |
|
can anyone help me
| thanks for all the replies about the redemption this is my second time around with workcover i was paid a 43 some 6 years ago for a 20% disability of the shoulder everything was fine until my boss decided he didnt like me anymore and gave me a job which he knew that were against my permanent restrictions.anyway to cut along story short i have now had 4 shoulder operations and been off of work for over a year.my experience with eml is that none of them no what they are doing they do not communicate and they play little kids games and they hide behind the work cover act. my advice to anyone on here is study the act and use it against them like they do to us. i have the workcover complaints number on my speed dial i haunt them in there sleep. do this and then see how quickly things happen. eml now want to give me a redemption and were not worried if my condition had stablized. you have to remember none of us asked to be on the system none of us asked to lose money,familys,friends. to all the non injured people who read this you can only kick people when there down for so long before something happens. sweet dreams. thanks everyone for listening take care. |
Posted by Anonymous at 2:52 PM, 24/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Down but not out yet
I have been on workcover for 12 years now. I have been trying to get a redemption. But they do not negotiate properly and try and complicate matters. They keep sending me to their dopey doctors time and time again and they get the same reports back.
I have been misled by so many different case managers( I have had a few) many of them do not know the act very well at all and just try it on..
I will keep on the system as long as they keep treating me like a second class citizen..I did want to return to some normality in life but it seems to hard to achieve while on Workcover..its easier to sit back and enjoy the ride, after all I am at least keeping EML in good business..
|
Posted by Injured Worker at 3:48 PM, 24/11/2007 |
Link |
|
From Page 47 of Saturday's Advertiser.
I have posted this here as not everyone gets the advertiser and it will probably not get posted in the advertiser every week until January.
PARLIAMENT 0F SOUTH AUSTRALIA
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES REVIEW
COMMITTEE
INQUIRY INTO THE WORKCOVER
CORPORATION 0F SOUTH AUSTRALIA
That pursuaant to section 16(1)(a) of the Parliamentary Committees
Act 1991, the Statutory Authorities Review Committee inquire into and report on the WorkCover Corporation of South Ausiralia (WorkCover), having regard to the extraordinary blow-out in the unfunded liability of WorkCover from $86 million in 20021o $843
million in 2007, the failure of the Government to properly and adequately monitor and manage the unfunded liability of WorkCover,
and the claim by Workcover in January 2006 that the sole claims manager would achieve necessary liability reduction to deliver a fully funded scheme by 2012-13, with particular regard to:-
(a) The deteriorating financial position of WorkCover;
(b) The effectiveness of outsourcing the claims management to a sole claims manager;
(c) The tender process and the probity of that process, leading to the appointment of the sole claims manager;
(d) The exposure of WorkCover to the sub-prime financial market;
(e) The 2007 actuarial report submitted to the WorkCover Board in September 2007; and
(f) any other matters-
Any person or organisation wishing to submit evidence to the Committee in relation to the above Inquiry should contact the Secretary, Statutory Authorities Review Committee, Parliament House, North Terrace, Adelaïde, SA 5000, Fax (08) 8231 9630
or email SARC@parliament.sa.gov.au,
Further information on the Committee and its functions can be found at www.parliament.sa.gov.au then follow the prompts to 'Committees' then 'Standing'.
Written submissions should be lodged by Friday 18 January 2008.
Mr Gareth Hickery
Secretary to the Committee |
Posted by Reader at 12:22 PM, 25/11/2007 |
Link |
|
committee
| Thanks for supplying the above details. I went to the WorkCover site and it wasnt there....... |
Posted by cheers at 12:51 PM, 25/11/2007 |
Link |
|
INQUIRY INTO THE WORKCOVER
I would say that every injured worker would be able to submit there Written submissions under these headings.
(b) The effectiveness of outsourcing the claims management to a sole claims manager;
(f) any other matters-
|
Posted by Cheers at 12:55 PM, 25/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Negotiating Redemptions
I tried to negotiate redemptions a number of times with my claims agent but they refused my requests or to enter into any negotiations.I spoke to my case manager about it and he did not seem to want to help me.
Some of my requests dated back over a number of years.
I later did an FOI application and there were no records that I had ever spoken to my case manager Garth Daniels about it.
I still can not understand how a case manager can negotiate $100,000 deals and keep no notes of records of conversations about it.
Perhaps the notes were destroyed like to many others to cover up their mismanagement and incompetence.
|
Posted by Toot Toot at 8:05 AM, 26/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Rehabilitation
I tried to negotiate rehabilitation in retraining and of course was refused. The thing is I had everything in writing and still do. When you look at my file as a whole you can see a clearer picture. Their goal was to rid of me the most cheapest and easiest way. One thing I have learnt is that the
"cheapest is not the most economical"
Every injured worker should be given a copy of the Workers rehabilitation and compensation act for "The Game" to be fair.
|
Posted by Peter.C at 8:52 AM, 26/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Annual report
Can anybody tell me if the investments are reported in the latest annual report? and has WorkCover SA ensured that there are sufficient funds to pay for current and future liabilities?
The money to fund the Scheme is collected from employers in the form of a levy. The levy is calculated as a percentage of remuneration paid to workers by an employer. WorkCover SA is not funded by taxpayers and they do not receive funding from the State or Federal Government. WorkCover SA manages the levy funds through investment. WorkCover SA is required to ensure that sufficient funds are collected to pay for current and future liabilities, administration and other costs.
|
Posted by cheers at 4:49 PM, 26/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Investments and renumeration
I thought that the unfunded liability was one aspect of the finances of workcover, the other I thought was the money that Workcover put in the bank( investments) to pay for injured workers super.
Or is it just a slush fund for the board to play with on the money markets.
How come no super is paid to injured workers in their renumeration?
Is this just another thing that injured workers miss out on as well as the 20% pay cut? |
Posted by Injured at work at 5:32 PM, 26/11/2007 |
Link |
|
can anyone help me
| Thanks for all the replys about the redemptions. I now have bigger problems if anyone can help. On my second to last tribunal hearing eml asked for my lawyer to submit a figure for my 42 for the next tribunal hearing. my lawyer and i discussed a figure and lodged it then i had a medical report done for all my injuries for my section 43. The doctor gave me 30% in one shoulder 20% for the other shoulder and 20% for my back and 5% for scaring. When we went to our last tribunal hearing my lawyer changed the figure and asked for about half of what we had agreed on without asking me.lucky they didnt have time to look at his second figure. Now today i get an email from him saying i will not even get that and i should take it otherwise i wont get anything and that my legal bills had just top 14 thousand and that if i leave it to long i wont get enough to even pay them. Does this sound right or do you think im being forced into this. I am only in my early thirties and with my injuries no one will give me a job so what do i do??? a hundred thousand dont go to far!!!! |
Posted by Anonymous at 9:02 PM, 26/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Conflicting interests
Be very careful in accepting a redemption.
Lawyers usually get paid regardless of how much money your receive.
You can negotiate how much your lawyer is going to charge.
Good lawyers are available for $600-$1000 a day.
Do not forget that workcover also reimburse them so sometimes they will work for free.
Do not get sucked in to the $2000-$2500 a day rates that many charge.
Yes you should pay that for trial lawyers but not for your every day negotiations and tribunal appearances.
Look also for lawyers that win in the tribunal and who are fighting genuine cases. There are a few who are dedicated.
If they received a percentage I am sure there would be higher redemptions.
They currently get paid by you and also get paid by Workcover.
Remember this as many lawyers simply charge injured workers for their services and do not disclose the fact that they also get paid by Workcover.
You need to find a very reputable solicitor. Sometimes the better known ones are not the best.
Be sure to write down everything for your lawyer. Keep a copy and make your instructions clear to him..take control.
Some ideas for you.
Ie I want $x I will not accept any offers at this stage. Please ensure you are committed to this when you communicate with Workcover lawyers.
Please also ensure that all communications are in writing.
It is a condition of my engagement of you as a solicitor acting on my behalf that you have no verbal communications with Workcover relating to my case without me being present.
The verbal communications which go on are the downfall of the negotiations as many solicitors that represent injured workers are compromised in their negotiating ability by their business associations with the Workcover lawyers. ie they are often "work colleagues or mates" that they are arguing against.
It is not supposed to happen but when they get paid the same amount at the end of the day..the easy road is often the first one they take..
If lawyers stood up more for injured workers rights in the past. Injured workers would not be getting treated like low life citizens, in the mess they are now..
|
Posted by Ripped off before at 10:34 AM, 27/11/2007 |
Link |
|
redemption, loss of files
| I have continually sought my file under the freedom act and surpriseingly found other injured workers case notes. i am unsure if this was a dileberate ploy or just plain stupidity. One of the notes I found was a redemption negotiations so i guess Mr Garth Daniels as stated in an above comment may have not being able to recall such negotiations because it was not files under the correct name. Having said all that, there should be a question raised about competancy or shall it be incompetancy on how this organisation is run. |
Posted by doubts at 11:37 AM, 27/11/2007 |
Link |
|
workcover board
| I just had a quick look at the workcover boards recommendations, is it true that they also want to cap medical fees and that if the workers continues to require medical help they have to seek the commonwealth insurance (medicare). A lot to ask when they have also recommended a huge reduction in income maintenance. I just wonder what the suicide rate will be if these recommendations are accepted. |
Posted by this is criminal at 7:51 PM, 27/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Other workers files
I have received another workers psychological report under 107B in an application. It was interesting reading I can assure you.
This problem can be put down to nothing but poor records management.
Perhaps if Workcover redeemed injured workers in atimely manner it would also cut down on administration and paperwork.
I guess they would be out of jobs then.
|
Posted by Don't get personal at 6:59 AM, 28/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Dear Minister
SHAMED multinational James Hardie made one last effort to rob dying asbestos victim Bernie Banton, using a doctor's report it had hidden for seven years.
As Mr Banton lost his battle with mesothelioma yesterday, it emerged that the building company and its former subsidiary used the critical report on a 34-year-old X-ray to try to again rort the 61-year-old of compensation.
And it doesnt happen here?
|
Posted by yeh right at 9:09 AM, 28/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Amended Transcript from stateline
Transcript from ABC stateline
WorkCover Not Working
Broadcast: 28/09/2007
Reporter: Angelique Johnson
IAN HENSCHKE: WorkCover's unfunded liability has now blown out to $843 million. Politically it's the focus is on the figures, but Stateline has gone behind the money to see what the bosses and the workers make of the scheme.
Their arguments differ over the causes, but they are unanimous on one thing - WorkCover is not working.
Angelique Johnson reports.
ANGELIQUE JOHNSON: According to WorkCover, it incurred more than 36,000 claims from South Australians last year.
DEREK THOMAS: All I see is the pointy end which is the worker ringing me up distraught because they believe they're get a rough deal either from their employer, the rehabilitation provider, the claims agent.
ANGELIQUE JOHNSON: 65,000 employers are tied up with the scheme.
DAVID FRITH: At the moment we are the worst performing workers compensation system in Australia.
ANGELIQUE JOHNSON: On both sides many are fed up.
57-year-old Donna Cunningham is one of them. She injured her back and shoulder while washing a resident at the Hillside Lodge aged care home in the Adelaide Hills. That was in 2003. She has been on WorkCover since.
To make matters worse, overcompensating for a weaker right shoulder caused her to injury her left one.
DONNA CUNNINGHAM: I have had to sell my home that I bought three years ago and renovated, because I now can't get out of the driveway. I can't vacuum carpets. I put French doors in my home so I can't clean windows any more.
ANGELIQUE JOHNSON: That might not sound like the end of the world, but Donna Cunningham wishes she could do simple cleaning chores and return to work.
Her injuries mean she will never be able to work as a carer again, but she says she is willing to do anything - make cups of tea, even talk to elderly residents.
Her doctor has approved those type of light duties, though her employer, Masonic Homes, has told her it has no suitable work.
Stateline spoke to Masonic Homes. Its CEO said it regrets the situation but was within its legal rights.
DONNA CUNNINGHAM: I thought I would always have a position, and I was led to believe I had a position with Masonic, but that has not happened. So that's deeply upset me. I can't sleep. I am on antidepressants again, and I have lost seven kilos in weight, and I just can't get over the fact that I am basically not wanted any more.
ANGELIQUE JOHNSON: In WorkCover's own language its vision is best possible recovery, faster return to work.
The Australian Manufacturing Workers Union argues the reality is far from that. It says the Cunningham case is typical - because after four years and thousands of dollars of rehabilitation, she is not back at work.
Derek Thomas is an organiser with the AMWU, and says many workers have ended up with further psychological injuries because of their experiences on WorkCover.
DEREK THOMAS: The claims agent's doing one thing, or thinking one thing, and the rehabilitation providers are doing another, the employee doesn't know who to contact, the worker is then on a treadmill, or a merry-go-round, trying to find out what their rights are, who they can speak to about individual issues.
ANGELIQUE JOHNSON: The union says one of WorkCover's fundamental flaws is too few businesses are in it.
About 40 per cent of companies in South Australia are self-insured, including the State Government. They fund WorkCover claims themselves, and don't pay WorkCover levies.
The union says the key is to cut the number of employers outside of WorkCover.
DEREK THOMAS: Well basically they are a law unto themselves. I deal with exempt employees all the time, and they send out a letter to a worker saying we are allowed to do this under the WorkCover system, they don't provide the clause or the section of the WorkCover Act that allows them to do that.
DAVID FRITH: The world "exempt" is frequently used. They are not exempt from anything. In fact the self insurers meet higher standards if possible than indeed what are known as the registered employers.
ANGELIQUE JOHNSON: David Frith from Business SA says business isn't to blame for WorkCover's woes. It is the worst performing scheme in the nation. it has the highest rate of workers receiving weekly payments, the highest average cost per compensation claim, the highest ratio of injured workers who do not return to work in the first six months of their claim, and the highest WorkCover levy cost for business.
Business SA has outlined its concerns and other criticisms in its submission to the WorkCover review.
The lobby group and even WorkCover's own board are calling for changes, including capping and cutting some worker benefits. The review was commissioned by the State Government in March. It is expected to be completed by the end of November.
JULIA DAVISON: The absolutely critical thing for us to do in this scheme is to turn return to work rates around. We are confident that we can do that with the combination of the management efforts we've put in place, with Employers Mutual and with legislative reform.
ANGELIQUE JOHNSON: WorkCover's unfunded liability has escalated, up from $56 million at the end of the 2001 financial year to $843 million last financial year.
Independent MP Nick Xenophon is worried that the State Government will punish workers for what he says has been mismanagement of the system.
He says two years ago the Auditor-General rang alarm bells about WorkCover.
NICK XENOPHON: The fact that there was a lack of financial oversight, that the Auditor-General couldn't look at WorkCover's books, and he drew some parallels with the financial oversight that applied years ago in relation to the State Bank leading up the State Bank disaster.
ANGELIQUE JOHNSON: It is also argued that another recent change is contributing to WorkCover's woes.
Last July it was announced that the insurer Employers Mutual Limited, or EML, would take over as the sole manager of all worker claims. Stateline has been told the change hasn't been a success because there is now a lack of competition.
It is claimed EML doesn't properly understand the State's WorkCover legislation because it is from interstate, and that it is struggling to handle the workload by itself.
EML declined to comment.
JULIA DAVISON: We have absolute confidence in Employers Mutual. We undertook an extensive process in selecting them. They are by far the best performer in New South Wales. What we have seen in terms of what they have done to date, we have been very pleased with.
ANGELIQUE JOHNSON: For Donna Cunningham, who is at the pointy end of workers compensation, the debate over WorkCover's woes is clear cut.
She believes there is too much politics, too much talk and not enough action for injured employees.
DONNA CUNNINGHAM: To me it is all black and white. If a person is injured they get help, they get support.
DAVID FRITH: We are extremely disappointed that the Government has hidden behind a review - a review which is due in mid-November - and we can only assume it is of political timing because it will be after the federal election.
We have wasted a year in which reform should have taken place.
COLDPLAY SONG: And I will try to fix you ...
IAN HENSCHKE: The Industrial Relations Minister Michael Wright declined to comment.
EDITOR'S NOTE: This story was amended on November the 26th 2007, to clarify that there were more than 36,000 South Australians who claimed WorkCover last year. WorkCover had previously advised the ABC that there were more than 36,000 South Australians who were receiving WorkCover payments. |
Posted by Reader at 8:41 PM, 28/11/2007 |
Link |
|
can anyone help me
| i know why they are in so much debt. you only have to look at how much money they have wasted on me. I made a complaint to workcover in august about my case manager it took 6 weeks for them to pay me back pay on my wages after the tribunal ordered them to pay me. so in return i was sent off for doctors reports and a rehab consultant even though im still off work till feb 08 i must have upset someone. then when all this is happening my lawyer files for a 42 in august. we had a tribunal hearing in october about issues with a rejected claim. emls lawyer said were not paying for this and that so i showed them they had already been paying for these things so why were we there? then he said well you should file for a 42 then if you think you know what ur doing. So i told him that i already had and that he had only about 4 weeks left of the 90 days. he then procceded to tell me to get a final assesment done by the next tribunal hearing which was in november and that he would ensure that an offer would be on the table. 2 days before the tribunal hearing i rang my case manager and asked her why we were going to the tribunal and she said it was for my pay so i new they had no idea about a 42. so we go to the tribunal and emls lawyer says they had not looked at it yet. so why were we there again??? My lawyer put in an offer that was not what i wanted but emls lawyer could'nt ring them fast enough with the offer but they rejected it cause they have not looked at my case yet. so they only had 2 days before there 90 days were up so they have chose to go to the tribunal again in december. EML have no reality on whats going im still being harrassed by rehab consultants im still off work for at least another 3 months my employer dont want me back so why are they wasting money on rehab. bearing in mind that i have had coaching from someone on the inside yet they still waste money for no result im sure that when we go back in december there will be no outcome again so lets just keep wasting money im home all day i got nothing better to do !!!!!!!! |
Posted by Anonymous at 12:03 PM, 29/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Sit back and relax
Sit back and relax. This is how the Workcover system works. You are now in the process line of Workcover. the process could now take years to resolve.
By the way if your employer does not want you back. You go on to the Workcover books. If you remain partially incapacitated because of your physical injury, or if you develop some psychological injury Workcover will keep paying you.
Please ensure you do not make any complaints or anything as otehrwise they will target you, put you under surveillance, harrass you and generally give you a hard time.
Play it cool, say hello to the guy who always sits out the front watching you, or if they are being sneaky they can sometimes hide at the end of your street watching around the corner, or in your neighbours back yard or in the next door neighbours tree.
But remeber always take him a cool drink on hot days etc..he is the guy who workcover have got watching you..so keep him sweet and he will treat you right..
Oh and by the waykeep all of your documents in a folder, every day a letter comes or you make a phone call, record it and put it in a folder.
If you are on Workcover for a few years you will need a few of these and possibly a room of your house set aside to handle all of the paperwork.
|
Posted by Reader at 12:31 PM, 29/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Business SA
I read with interest the Business SA submission for workCover reforms. here are some statements I found to be unfounded.
It has clearly stated the reason for the scheme started to fail as there has been a steady increase over the past five years in the number of the long term claims:
Any coincidence this is the same period the "new" board was appointed.
The structure of generous benefits compared to other states:
Maybe the other states have a better common law component which should be introduced here so the Business owner is more accountable.
The lure and the likelyhood of a redemption payment:
This surley must be a mis-leading statement as redemption payments have decreased significantly since the new board was appointed. The desperate Injured workers are the only ones who are taking redemption payments without full knowledge of the sacrifices they have made.
As a result, even a minor injury has the potential to create a significan liability:
If case managers were not given the "reject" rubber stamp in the first place, minor injuries would have only been minor settlements.
This submission is very similar to the WorkCovers submission, no wonder if they have the CEO on the board.
If the reviewers see this submission as fact, i would feel it is mis-leading to benefit ones status. I agree Business SA should be protecting the small businessses in reducing the levy, but not at the fault of the innocent workers.
|
Posted by Anonymous at 1:01 PM, 30/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Business SA
Just to continue. It is also stated
"clearly, there needs to be a strong focus on rehabilitation and return to work in order to reduce continuance rates".
This is one statement that i totally agree with, instead of using tactics like the Functional Capacity Evaluations to decrease a workers income, they can rehabilitate, but if they are calling for time constraints how can this be possible.
I would like to know what the AMA Australia (medical) point of view in these submisions as they clearly indicate treating Doctors are falsifying workers diagnoses.
|
Posted by Anonymous at 1:10 PM, 30/11/2007 |
Link |
|
vocational vs rehabilitation
| I have been appointed a new vocational company to service my rehabilitation, what amuses me is when i checked their web site it says they do section 38s. there title doesnt even include rehabilitation Me thinks sec 38 is there only intention, how ironic when WorkCover partners are screaming for REHABILITATION and return to works plans. anyway congratulations on your award, you must have deserved it. |
Posted by scared at 2:31 PM, 30/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Section 38 reviews and Rehabilitation
There are plenty of companies that do section 38 reviews.
De Poi is one of them believe it or not.
Just consider this.
If Workcover was serious about rehabilitation why are there so many claimants that have been on Workcover for 5 sometimes 10 and even some 15 years and still waiting for redemptions.
I know myself it took me 5 years of hard pushing to eventually get my section 43 payment. Now talk about keeping within the objects of the act.
It cost them over $200,000 in wages to fight a $23000 section 43 claim.
How ridiculous and then they gave me $50,000 as a section 42.
Now I did not finish high school and was never real good at maths but I myself could not understand why they paid me for 5 years and then would only give me 14 moths wages as a redemption.
Seems to me that someone was propping themselves up in business. |
Posted by Section 38s at 10:35 PM, 30/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Sec 43
| Well the thing with me is that I have sought a section 43 payment, they tried using the AMA guides in which my injury isnt even classified in there. When I questioned their Doctors, they even admitted it but were told to set a figure. No surprise as i am still waiting for a section 43. I have asked again again and just get told my condition has not settled, but settled enough to do a section 38 ???? |
Posted by dazed and confused at 7:02 AM, 1/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Dear Ministers
A PROMISE by the incoming federal Labor Government to change the "culture of concealment" is increasing pressure on Premier Mike Rann to reform the state's Freedom of Information laws.
|
Posted by Advertiser at 7:13 AM, 1/12/2007 |
Link |
|
welcome
| Well I think I may have over stepped the mark in someway at EML. I can be quite assured I had an investigator follow me to my rehabilitation training last week, fortunately I have some very aware (nosey)neighbours who informed me of a car sitting near my house and as I left that car also left some 30 seconds after. The thing is I actually appreciate being Investigated for some unknown reason, maybe it is just the thrill of it all. |
Posted by DavidR at 1:14 PM, 1/12/2007 |
Link |
|
FOI Pressure grows on Rann
I found this post on the advertiser website.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/comments/0,,22849127-5006301,00.html
Readers' Comments
Pressure grows on Rann
MICHAEL OWEN
November 30, 2007 12:30am
A PROMISE by the incoming federal Labor Government to change the "culture of concealment" is increasing pressure on Premier Mike Rann to reform the state's Freedom of Information laws.
Pledging to provide greater access and more accountability, Prime Minister-elect Kevin Rudd has vowed to embark on major reforms of laws covering Freedom of Information, journalists' privilege, whistleblower protection and privacy.
Comments:
have had personal experiences under FOI namely with the Workcover corporation. I can sum it up in a few words. It is seriously flawed legislation. In my case documents were not produced on an assertion that documents held by external service providers were not able to be accessed. The reason being there was no direct right of access to the documents. After years of battling with the restrictively under resourced Ombudsman many documents that were withheld by Workcoverwere eventually produced after determinations were made that the documents were to be made available and that they were documents of the Agency. Disappointingly many of the documents requested took some three years to come into my possession after the FOI requests were first made. I am still waiting for others. Unfortunately some documents I requested were destroyed after the FOI applications were made and after I commenced proceedings in the District Court to have the documents produced. If all the dealings in Government departments including Workcover are above board in this State please tell us Mr MInister why documents are not freely available to the Public and for what reason are they withheld. While the Act specifies a legally enforceable right. There seems to be no penalties for the abuse of the position of power of these agencies, the delaying tactics employed, the non-disclosure of documents to enable them to be reviewed, and the destruction of the documents by service providers after they are requested under FOI.
Posted by: Jeff Thompson of Adelaide 9:14am today |
Posted by Renato C. at 6:20 PM, 1/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Fact
The current focus on its unfunded liability has produced a misleading picture of WorkCovers financial position.
And just to think, they were trying to blame injured workers. Next would be to blame the case managers who take the instructions.
Stone the crows...... |
Posted by Andrew.S at 8:05 PM, 1/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Stone the crows...
Here we are, even the minister doesnt see it as a problem.... so why change?
Minister survives no-confidence motion over WorkCover
Posted Thu Mar 29, 2007 8:00pm AEST
The Minister responsible for South Australia's workers compensation scheme has survived a no-confidence motion in State Parliament.
The motion was the Opposition's response to news that WorkCover's unfunded liability will pass $1 billion by 2009.
Last year it rose to $723 million - up $27 million.
Enterprises Minister Michael Wright has announced an independent review of WorkCover aimed a halting growth in its unfunded liabilities.
"I don't describe it as a crisis, but do say that the unfunded liability and the average levy rate is too high," he said.
Opposition Leader Iain Evans wants Mr Wright sacked.
"There are a billion reasons why Michael Wright should be sacked today and the billion reasons is the unfunded liability with WorkCover," he said.
Mr Wright says he will wait for the review before confirming if workers' entitlements will have to be cut to help improve WorkCover's performance.
Premier Mike Rann responded by saying Mr Evans should worry about other figures - those showing the Opposition Leader well behind in an opinion poll.
"[I have] absolute confidence in my Minister but you ... you do not have in your Leader of the Opposition and you only have to hear what you say to journalists on an almost daily basis," he said.
|
Posted by Andrew.S at 8:08 PM, 1/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Dear Mr Minister, WorkCover vs Safework SA
| Why is it that Safework SA receives large amounts of revenue through fines each year from the negligence of an employer but is never passed on to WorkCover who has to manage the injury. Is it the case that Safework SA are not allowed to hand over any monies to WorkCover and therefore WorkCover using its debt as bait. Are Safework SA figures shown in WorkCovers annual report? |
Posted by Mr Cartier at 7:14 AM, 2/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Former WorkCover Employees
| Would there be any former WorkCover, Insurance and Rehabilitation providers who would like to submit to the Parliamentary Committee Enquiery on the operation of the WorkCover system? |
Posted by Pepe.Z at 10:36 AM, 3/12/2007 |
Link |
|
anyone you know?
The Adelaide Magistrates Court has heard that a former WorkCover employee used his knowledge of the organisation to create a false business and make several false claims.
Rocco Reginald Musolino, 38, of Salisbury North has pleaded guilty to more than 80 charges.
The prosecutor Michael Roder told the court today that in late 2000, Musolino created a false business with false, inflated wages for at least three bogus employees who agreed to make WorkCover claims.
Musolino would pay them in return for a substantial cut of their claims.
The court heard that Musolino masterminded the scheme.
When it was uncovered, he tried to put off WorkCover investigators by threatening to go to the media.
Mr Roder also told the court that although Musolino has vowed to pay some of the tens of thousands of dollars back, WorkCover is yet to receive a cent.
|
Posted by reader at 6:20 PM, 3/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Corruption and Crime Commission
“…it is clear there are many quite influential public officers who wouldn’t recognise a conflict of interest if it walked up and kicked them in the backside.”
That quote comes from the outgoing head of WA’s Corruption and Crime Commission, Kevin Hammond. And recent events uncovered by the CCC and Queensland’s Crime and Misconduct Commission have provided ample evidence to show the truth behind those words. So why is it that only three states – WA, Queensland and NSW – have independent anti-corruption watchdogs able to investigate the public sector and in particular politicians?
Victoria has only the Office of Police Integrity, which is limited to investigating police misconduct and corruption, and a traditional Ombudsman for handling complaints against state and local governments. The Bracks Government, which reluctantly agreed to establishing the OPI in 2004, stopped short of establishing opting for a corruption watchdog with broad-ranging powers to also investigate the public sector.
South Australia and Tasmania have no independent corruption watchdogs for either the police or public sector.
Surely its time that all states had independent corruption watchdogs able to target both police and public sector misconduct.
Kevin Hammond gave his uncharacteristically blunt views on the continuing problems of public sector misconduct and the mistrust it has sparked in a parting speech. In it he referred to a recent survey showing fewer than 24% of respondents trusted the government to do the right thing.
“Corruption by public officers has a corrosive effect on our community,” he said. Nothing erodes that trust faster than allegations of corruption.
“People today have little tolerance of public officers who improperly use their position to benefit themselves, their family, friends or business interests.
“Unfortunately, there still appear to be people holding public office whose practices have not kept up with the changing and I believe, increasing expectations of our community.
“A government’s election is based on the trust of the electorate. Unfortunately, the public is mistrustful of government, of politicians, of the institutions that serve them, and of business.”
|
Posted by The Australian at 6:40 PM, 3/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Workcover inside Job
I wonder if it just an isolated case.
|
Posted by Wondering at 9:37 PM, 3/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Accountability
The problem with WorkCover is that the Board and its political leaders believe "accountability" refers to an inherent ability to apply numbers to fingers in the right order.
|
Posted by Doh at 10:54 PM, 3/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Wondering
It may well be an isolated case because WorkCover have never really Advertised that he worked for workcover whilst he was charged.
Just to continue, reading a recent WorkCover report on fraud staed there was 250 odd investigations for that year, in that there was 17 workers, 10 employers and two providers who was found out for fraud. If one does there sums and convert these into percantages I think the numbers would be turned around.
And just to think Business SA are calling for a levy reduction? |
Posted by me again at 7:32 AM, 4/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Fraud and corruption
Wondering, just to continue....
I can only assume you are an employee of WorkCover, EML or a provider, but the 06/07 annual report states that EML had one employee receive a warning, and two employees dismissed due to breaches. WorkCover had one employee receive a first and final warning and another employee have their contract ended and not renewed. And these are the ones who got caught. |
Posted by me again at 12:42 PM, 4/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Kym Bruggeman
| I am absolutely ashamed of how far WorkCover went with this case, finally for the sake of the family of the late Kym Bruggeman lets hope it is all over and they can continue on with their lives. |
Posted by Ashamed to be human at 4:48 PM, 4/12/2007 |
Link |
|
SA denies compo 'blunder' claim
SA denies compo 'blunder' claim
03 Dec 2007 | The Australian Financial Review | John Breusch
The Rann government in South Australia has been accused of squandering almost $850 million by refusing to accept an offer from QBE Insurance to take over the long-term claims liabilities of the state's beleaguered workers compensation scheme.
|
Posted by The Australian Financial Review at 8:38 PM, 4/12/2007 |
Link |
|
We are not alone
Media Release
15 October, 2007
Government should come clean on Workcover Review
A peak legal body has used its national conference in Hobart to call upon the
Lennon government to come clean and release a report into the current state
of Workcover in Tasmania.
Australian Lawyers Alliance Tasmanian President, Sandra Taglieri, today said
the Lennon Government needed to release the Clayton Review, as well as Mr
Alan Clayton’s recommendations.
“Back when the election was held in 2006, the Government announced it
would undertake a review of workers compensation scheme when it faced
considerable pressure from workers, various unions and the Lawyers
Alliance,” Ms Tagliari said.
“The review took submission from the public, and although Mr Clayton has
completed the review, the Government appears to be unwilling to make public
the report.
“The Lawyers Alliance has written to the Workcover Board and the Attorney
General, Steve Kons, as well as making a Freedom of Information Request in
an attempt to ascertain Mr Clayton’s findings, especially in relation to the
harsh 30 per cent WPI threshold.
“The government has advised the release of the report is a decision for
cabinet and clam exemptions apply to permit non-disclosure of the report.
“At the end of the day, this appears to truly be a “Clayton’s” review and it looks
like the Lennon government only had this review to avoid political backlash at
the last election,” Ms Taglieri said.
|
Posted by reader at 9:11 PM, 4/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Thats litigation Doctors for you!!!
A LEADING British pediatrician was struck off the medical register today after wrongly accusing an Adelaide woman of her son's murder.
The General Medical Council (GMC) found Dr David Southall, who was regarded as one of the UK's leading child protection experts, guilty of serious professional misconduct.
|
Posted by Anonymous at 8:53 AM, 5/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Magistrate Bill Ackland
"The courts have the power to silence the media for a time but it's beyond the power of the courts to silence discussion, speculation, gossip or the internet," Mr Ackland told Adelaide Magistrates Court.
"If there is to be discussion, speculation or gossip, it is better that it be based on fact rather than upon the imaginary.
"Sunshine is the best disinfectant."
|
Posted by Blog blog blog at 1:57 PM, 5/12/2007 |
Link |
|
EML vs QBE
It seems the blunder by the government seems to have been created on how much these insurance companies can make out of the unfortunate. It is now clearer that all the statements in the annual reports is not about the service that the providers can offer, but more about how much money they can make.
So here we have a "component" of the scheme that is not peforming and now a "Liquidator" type action wants to cut the workers off at the knees.
|
Posted by The observer at 10:41 AM, 6/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Recording devises
| These tape recording devices are pretty cheap, a wonderful tool to remember what was said at meetings, i am fazed why rehab and case managers dont use them instead of busily having their head down writing notes that you can not even read. It gets pretty frustrating in a case meeting where it seems more important to write down what was said than to actually address the issues. I know one WorkCover Doctor on Fullarton Rd uses a tape recorder. |
Posted by Information at 7:33 PM, 6/12/2007 |
Link |
|
compo 101
Why would you go through that much trouble for a couple of years wages, when there are better ways such as getting someone to bash you and run off so that for a couple of weeks physical pain and you would receive a hell of a lot more from Victims of Crime without the emotional trauma that workcover puts you through. You could even walk behind a courier van reversing in town, hit the van hard with your shoulder and fall over that will get you at least 5 years income.
I am sorry, but there is a lot of brain washing occuring with case managers, rehabilitation providers and Doctors in that "ALL" injured workers are to be seen as fraud. It is not an easy life having a workplace injury and having to deal with providers who are paid on a bonus system.
Can I add the legal fraternity in that class as well. A recent case has been finalised where a worker died due to his workplace injuries, the unfortunate family had to go through "The System" just to prove their loved one was worth fighting for. believe you me, the amount of compensation available when someone has died is minumal compared to the legal bill.
I am still waiting for the day when WorkCover are going to argue that the worker didnt die, and the death was fabricated.
Merry Xmas to all, and to all injured workers it would just be another depressing day.
|
Posted by Shameful at 8:49 AM, 7/12/2007 |
Link |
|
reimbursements / case manager
I have written a number of comments on this blog site on issues that I believe have made a negative impact on myself and my family.
But to be fair I put in my claim for reimbursements early this week and I was paid within 5 days. At a time when money is very tight I am grateful that my case manager took it upon herself to be sensible in her approach to this system. It is unfortunate I cannot name my case manager as i am unsure if she would be herald a villian or a hero from her peers. |
Posted by me again at 9:14 AM, 7/12/2007 |
Link |
|
reimbursements / case manager
I had reimbursements outstanding around Christmas when I had Garth Daniels as a case manager at Allianz.
One year I had over a $1000 owing to me over the Christmas period. Garth went on holidays and did not process it. I asked some of the other staff if they could do it but they refused to process it.
Unforutnatley it was my family that missed out that Christmas.
I guess some case managers do not care much about injured workers and how their claims are managed.
Obviously me again you actually have a case manager who actually cares about you and your claim and ensures that it is being managed properly. Full credit to your case manager.
I also noticed when I Garth as case manager that my weekly income maintenance would often not be paid on time.
As far as I am concerned he was very unreliable as a case manager, I have no idea why he ever got promoted.
He never even kept records of redemptions or anything.
One would have thought that case managers should keep notes of communications when there are amounts around $100,000 being offered to workers and being negotiated about.
|
Posted by Jeff Thompson at 5:15 PM, 7/12/2007 |
Link |
|
reimbursements / case manager
Trust me, I have had some horrific experiences about trying to recoup monies. Due to my high amount of medication, I sometimes have to wait until my reimbursements come through before I can purchase more medication. There has been numerous times when I have missed taking my medication and it has aggrevated my condition. At one stage I asked if my Chemist would set up an account, but they refused quite rightly as they also experienced undue delay in payments. And while i am at it, my treating specialist has also found delays in payments, again I started to pay for the consultations myself just so my name and reputation wouldnt be effected. one positive is that they soon realised how i was being treated.
But I did have to put in the above comment simply because i thought it was appropriate, its just ashame i cannot name the case manager as it may cause retributions against her. |
Posted by me again at 6:32 PM, 7/12/2007 |
Link |
|
EML and Influence
The meaning of Influence.
Influence is skill required in a current Job description for case managers at EML.
Sound negotiation and influencing skills;
1)Influence is a term that refers to the ability to indirectly control, shape or affect the actions, beliefs and attitudes of other people or things through your behavior, words or presence. The meaning of influence therefore depends on who or what is being affected, and to what end.
2)To control or move by power, physical or moral; to affect by gentle action; to exert an influence upon; to modify, bias, or sway; to move; to persuade; to induce.You will have the opportunity to utilise your allied health experience and medical knowledge to influence key stakeholders and drive successful outcomes.
|
Posted by Job Application at 2:55 PM, 8/12/2007 |
Link |
|
choo choo
| If you think the tram extension down King William St caused a fracas, you can just imagine the magnitude when the gravy train hits Waymouth Street. |
Posted by I can hear clearly now at 7:40 PM, 10/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Employers
| Anyone notice the daily cause list (11/12/07). WorkCover Corperation was up against a few employers. Maybe someone should tell Business SA's - Peter Vaughan. he has been blaming injured workers for the liability and the high levy, maybe he should attack the employers instead. |
Posted by hello Minister at 5:22 PM, 11/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Influence/Bad Faith
Influence:
n. the amount of pressure which one uses to force someone to execute in a particular way.
Bad Faith:
n. Intentional dishonest act by not fulfilling legal or contractual obligations, misleading another, entering into an agreement without the intention or means to fulfill it, or violating basic standards of honesty in dealing with others. |
Posted by me at 9:03 AM, 12/12/2007 |
Link |
|
ICACC
Workcover states that for every Dollar spent on fraud they gain $4.
Could this also be the same theory here but the Labor government keeps insisting an INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CRIME AND CORRUPTION AUTHORITY would only make lawyers richer and its not needed?
Sandra Kanck - Speeches and Questions: INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CRIME AND CORRUPTION BILL
on Friday, November 23, 2007 - 12:42 PM
The Hon. SANDRA KANCK: As the Hon. Mark Parnell has said, it prevents corruption. The government is claiming expense as an excuse for not supporting ICACC, but there would be savings in the removal of other bodies, such as the Police Complaints Authority. Michael Kelledy, a partner in the local law firm Wallmans Lawyers, pointed out in an Advertiser opinion piece of 4 September this year that the Anti-corruption Branch reports to the state government not the parliament, so it is not independent.
The Anti-corruption Branch is another body that could go if an ICACC were to be established. So, it is not as if we have to keep all these other bodies going as well as the ICACC. What is important is the 'independent' in that title 'Independent Commission Against Crime and Corruption'. The public is always suspicious, for instance, of the police investigating the police and when the Anti-corruption Branch reports to government it is very clear that it is not independent.
|
Posted by Anti- at 10:21 AM, 12/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Complaints
When people compain to Minster Wright about the actions of Workcover. All he does is send the correpsondence to Workcover to be answered.
How can a minister oversee Workcover in a proper capacity if those who are being complained about are in charge of investigating and answering their own complaints?
Seems like a corporation that does not have to answer to any authority..
Perhaps out of control in a big way.
Certainly the deficit shows the spending has been a little on the easy come easy go side.
If only the employers had some say in how their money was dribbled by Workcover and the claims agents on lawyers and meaningless and pointless rehabilitation.
|
Posted by Curious at 10:20 PM, 12/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Workcover's unfunded Liability
Anyone that has been on the system long term(and lets face it these are the people all the bad press is aimed at) would be aware of where the debt is really coming from! It's not injured workers but rather the socalled rehabilitation providers and specialist doctors, who service every single person who has been on the system for more than a few weeks. Some of these doctors charge upwards of $800-$900 for a consultation and the thats just the start, next come the physio people and so on down the line. The return to work rehab providers are paid around $900 every 3months that you're on the system, and yet frustrate return to work efforts with unsafe proposals or by ignoring retraining recomendations made by their own doctors thereby keeping the long term, truely long term and a sustained source of income for those companies that do little but place barriers in front of you in order to protect their own interests at the public's expense.
Now do the math, if there are 10,000 people long term on Workcover and each of these are being services by doctors and rehab consultants plus the many other flavours of the day. I'll take a wild guess and say that's on average $6000 -$8000 a year per person x 10,000 people = $80,000,000 per year, in needless costs every year, and remember thats only for the people who are kept on the system to ensure that these providers have a sustainable wealthy income, think about it! |
Posted by Anonymous at 6:31 AM, 14/12/2007 |
Link |
|
rehabilitation costs
I have been injured since 2001, I am still having ongoing treatment. Ok, lets take the treatment component away as its a nessisity. My rehabilitation provider charges has averaged over this time to be $5350 per annum, I have had 19 Independant medical reports (unsure of the charges have been told around $850 each) there is also EML's charges (unknown) Insurers legal opinions (unknown). Can anyone tell me how much does it cost to run WorkCover and The Industrial Tribunal and where does these monies come from. You will find the debt is a lot larger if these costs were not fudged.
|
Posted by done the figures at 7:46 AM, 14/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Irrational litigant abused judge
Article from: The Advertiser
SEAN FEWSTER, COURT REPORTER
December 13, 2007 10:30pm
A FOUL-MOUTHED litigant who shouted obscenities at a retiring Supreme Court judge has been found guilty of contempt of court.
Markham Moore-McQuillan verbally abused Justice John Perry - who has since died - during a civil hearing in February.
He called Justice Perry "stupid" and "an arsehole", among other vulgar names, and accused him of being "prejudicial".
The 47-year-old, of Morphett Vale, has been litigating over a WorkCover claim for 10 years.
In her judgement today, Justice Margaret Nyland said psychiatrists had linked Moore-McQuillan's outburst to his health problems.
"(He has) now lost all rational perspective with regard to the inappropriateness of his behaviour in court and does not see how his behaviour had severely undermined his credibility and legal cause," she said.
"(There is) a high probability that he will continue to lose his temper in court and become obnoxious and abusive."
She said he had apologised in a letter to the court, saying he did "like the person I become when I am suffering stress and attending courts".
Nevertheless, Justice Nyland said she was satisified his actions were "an insult of the worst kind".
"The statements were deliberately made by the defendant with the intention to insult, ridicule and to defy the authority of the court simply because the defendant had received a judgment which was not in his favour," she said.
A decision on penalty will be made later. |
Posted by Anonymous at 2:36 PM, 16/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Irrational
I think any person would be irrational and out of their mind after being involved in litigation for 10 years with Workcover.
The sad thing is that he must have originally been injured at work.
This is a clear case of Workcover rehabilitating injured workers back to work and back into society.
I wonder why Workcover did not simply give him a token redemption instead of spending millions of dollars litigating against him on every avenue they could.
Here is another case of a injured worker who has found himself in a worse off position because of his injury.
|
Posted by Reader at 2:39 PM, 16/12/2007 |
Link |
|
I am sure the above worker would not stoop any lower than what WorkCover did to the families of these people.
Here we have two families effected, one had to prove the loved one was working and two, the corpse was goods and materials?
Judicial Determination - Deceased was involved in the funeral business and was conducting that business for another - Deceased’s widow seeks compensation on account of his death - Deceased’s work activities involved driving a vehicle for reward - Whether deceased was a deemed worker for the purposes of reg 5(1)(e) of the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation (Claims and Registration) Regulations 1999 - Whether a corpse is “goods or materials” - Whether the vehicle involved was a commercial vehicle - Whether the deceased operated another vehicle for work purposes - Held that the deceased was not a deemed worker - Whether the deceased was working as an employee or independent contractor - Relevant indicia for and against discussed and considered - Held that the deceased was an employee - Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1986.
If you skipped this part, here it is again.
Whether a corpse is “goods or materials”
|
Posted by reader at 4:53 PM, 16/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Workcover issues????
1.1 On Monday 8 March 1999 a car was noticed in the vicinity of a dam near the Kersbrook-One Tree Hill Road. Mr. Trevor Eime investigated, and saw a black hose connected from the exhaust pipe to the rear passenger window. He then saw a male figure inside the car and he called the police.
1.2 Constables Stephen and Frick attended at about 6.40p.m. Ambulance Officers were already on the scene. They told the police that the person in the car was deceased. The body was conveyed to the Gumeracha Hospital and, at 9.05p.m., Dr. M.A. Lang formally pronounced life extinct (Exhibit C.2a).
1.3 The body was later identified as that of Christopher John Felstead, date of birth 7 October 1965. The identification was performed by Mrs. C.A. Russell, sister of the deceased.
1.4 Detectives Gillan and Whitaker from Elizabeth Criminal Investigation Branch attended at the scene, and their investigations revealed that there were no suspicious circumstances surrounding the death of Mr. Felstead (Exhibit C.7a, p5). It is clear that he died as a result of his own act.
2. Cause of death
2.1 A post mortem examination was carried out on the body of the deceased by
Dr. R.A. James, Forensic Pathologist, on 10 March 1999. Dr. James concluded that Mr. Felstead died as a result of carbon monoxide poisoning consistent with the inhalation of car exhaust fumes (Exhibit C.3a, p1).
2.2 A toxicological analysis performed by Ms. H.E. Felgate, Forensic Scientist, revealed that Mr. Felstead’s blood contained:-
• 74% of the haemoglobin was in the form of carboxyhaemoglobin, which is a lethal level;
• 0.13mg/L oxazepam (subtherapeutic level);
• nil alcohol.
(see Exhibit C.4a).
3. Background
3.1 Mr. Felstead had a long history of mental health problems. Although it is not clear from the record, it appears that he had an initial admission to the Lyell McEwin Health Service ("LMHS") in the late 1980’s.
3.2 Mr. Felstead was admitted to the LMHS on 4 March 1996. A past history of major depression was noted. An entry in the casenotes reveals that he would have been detained if he had attempted to leave hospital in the early phases of his admission, but that did not become necessary. Mr. Felstead’s condition improved, and the final diagnosis was of an "Adjustment Disorder with depressed mood".
3.3 Mr. Felstead was again admitted to LMHS on 29 November 1998 following suicidal behaviour. The record makes reference to marital discord and problems with WorkCover. Mr. Felstead was detained pursuant to the Mental Health Act by the Accident and Emergency staff. On 30 November 1998 this detention was revoked by Dr. Watson, a psychiatrist, and Mr. Felstead was discharged on 2 December. The Discharge Summary records that Mr. Felstead had been admitted following a mixed drug overdose, including Diazepam, Prozac, Aropax, Zoloft and Neurofen "in attempt at suicide". The Summary continues:-
"The psychiatric unit felt Mr. Felstead would benefit from some time as an inpatient in 1G under their care but unfortunately there were no beds available ...".
(Exhibit C.11).
3.4 Mr. Felstead was next admitted to LMHS on 7 December 1998. The Discharge Summary records:-
"GMU (General Medical Unit) admission for respite and assessment of mental status following overdose with multiple drugs last week".
A diagnosis of "Adjustment Disorder with depressed mood and suicidal ideations" was made, and he was discharged on 9 December on the basis that:-
"Presents with understandable depression due to unresolved WorkCover issues and recent break-up of relationship with his wife ... His mood has improved during this short stay in ward and he is able to guarantee his safety now and is keen to go home".
|
Posted by mourning at 9:01 AM, 17/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Coroner
| It seems the coroner in its findings in the above comment found that WorkCover was patially the cause of this worker killing himself. I have just read the transcript and the coroner failed to conclude if any further action or how WorkCover should improve its operations so this does not happen again. |
Posted by Reader at 12:18 PM, 17/12/2007 |
Link |
|
show me the money $600million
IAN HENSCHKE: WorkCover's Paul Roberts says the court ruling will not be challenged, and it won't put WorkCover under financial pressure, as it has has more than $600 million available for payouts.
|
Posted by Paul Roberts at 5:18 PM, 22/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Untitled Comment
| http://www.davidridgway.com.au/CorruptionWatch.asp |
Posted by Anonymous at 2:11 PM, 23/12/2007 |
Link |
|
workplace stess
| Workplace stress is a common injury and unfortunately it can lead to death. |
Posted by PamZam at 1:47 PM, 29/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Workers compo cuts 180208
Comments
Never fear workers St Kevin and his disciple Media Mike will save us. The labor party is all for "working familys" so they tell us or doesn't that apply if you get hurt at work and cannot work?
Posted by: grumpy of north of gepps cross 11:58am today
Comment 56 of 56
thomas the tank - "prevention is the key u morons!" 'Tis indeed a great shame someone didn't give your mother that advice before it was too late!
Posted by: A small brown dog of dubious pedigree 11:27am today
Comment 55 of 56
Having been injured at work a number of years ago and been the recipient of the so called generous Workcover payments I can tell you I am currently approaching $400,000 worse of. I was told by my then employer that they would "Look after me" so I didn't take legal action that was then available. As soon as the act was changed I was whisked off the Workcover system with a pittance and placed on Government benifits. So, until I found suitable work that would not exacerbate my injury, the long suffering taxpayers of Australia were forced to pay for the dereliction of duty my employer was responsible for. Workcover was supposed to be a no fault scheme that replaced the costly litigation of the previous mode of addressing work place injury. Instead a self serving bueacracy has grown up feeding on the plight of the injured workers. Stop workplace accidents and fraudelent claims and improve the effeciency of the system and there would be no need to reduce the compensation payments (THEY ARE NOT BENEFIT PAYMENTS! THERE IS NO BENEFIT IN BEING INJURED)
Posted by: Workcover Victim of 10:36am today
Comment 54 of 56
Some of the blame for huge costs HAS to fall back on the doctors - who as soon as you say "its a workcover claim" their fees almost double - for NO EXTRA consultation!!
Posted by: Heidi of adelaide 10:31am today
Comment 53 of 56
To Whatever of SA, you can find the figures on the WorkCover website http://www.blognow.com.au/workcover/ And it shows the pattern on how the and when the WorkCover Board and the Industrial Minister created this mess. A mess which indicates there is a debt but also an overseas investment portfolio of $1.5 Billion. Employers should also note they have also been mis-lead and should unite with workers to identify these problems and its origins.
Posted by: Peter Hanna of Panorama 10:27am today
Comment 52 of 56
If people think this is workers v employers, then they are complete fools and playing the game the Board wants played out... Wake Up! Small businesses are getting screwed and so are injured workers - to equal measure. If you are an employer whose been shafted, it's too easy to blame the worker even if they have been dishonest. If you are a worker who's been scuttled it's easy to beleive the employer that has been in league with WorkCover is the evil-doer.... The truth opponents of WorkCover want it sunk and sunk fast. Is not Business SA's Board rep working hard to see its collapse? If not, it's a bloody terrible and unfortunate accident - NOT!... Enough other Board members have significant fiscal interests in staying on the gravy train. The only difference is how many small businesses are so expendable as to justify the means the Board is using? The Union Reps have remained obligingly quiet... no so much as a peep from them.... WHY? Yep, GRAVY TRAIN! Without WorkCover's $ how many would really survive? If wars keep economies going, this train is about to go over a cliff very soon... Now what would happen if employers and injured workers joined forces???? Wouldn't that see some serious heads roll?
Posted by: Matthew G of 10:20am today
Comment 51 of 56
its about time the employers who do not provide safe and reasonable workplaces take on the cost of the injured workers for life then we may see them change their poor attitude to workplace health and safety.
Posted by: graham hall of s.a 10:18am today
Comment 50 of 56
It sucks to be injured at work and go through rehabilitation. I know because my wife has gone through the process. However, there is no denying that SA has the most generous schemes in Australia and most of the liability problems with our Workcover scheme are about long term income maintenance, not rehab costs. Why does SA need a substantially more income maintenance than other States. Queensland has the least generous schemes of all Australia and it doesn't seem to be a big issue for employees up there. Or is SA just a socialist paradise?
Posted by: Andrew of Adelaide 10:10am today
Comment 49 of 56
If work cover didnt waste so much money and time doing nothing it wouldnt of reached this state.I have been on work cover for over a year.When I tried to look for work I was told I could by the job network groups no because I was on compensation.When I was cleared for duty work cover gave me a rehab officer,but because I had not been release from work they couldnt find me a job.that took over 14 months.When i asked if I could do a retraining course the said it would cost to much ($600) dollars at the time.(I would of gladly taken a cut in my payout if they would of paid it).I was told it wouldnt get cleared by workcover.Instead they sent me to a psychologist to see what i was capable of doing.(he cost over $800) this meeting lasted just over an hour.So before you people start complaining about the bludgers out there make sure its not them bludging, but because the red tape and crap they have to go through.Work cover are making bludgers because of their lack of action.
Posted by: gezza of 10:10am today
Comment 48 of 56
Having in the past been on the work cover system I had found it the most degrading event, it is the continual visits to medical professionals, and therapists, and the re-habilitation officers that take the bulk of the money.....prevention though is the best saving.
Posted by: Shirley of Port Adelaide 10:09am today
Comment 47 of 56
once again the innocent workers who are at not fault for their injuries are going to get screwed over. In our case, my partner was able to return to work approximately 12 months ago, but not to his original position yet his workplace has only just managed to find him position (in january), which we were told he wasnt able to be placed in originally as the position is only for those with physical injuries not psychological injuries, in that time he has had his pay cut, made to feel like a criminal (even though there was nothing he could have done to avoid the accident - everyone involved have continously pointed that out to us). We now understand why one of his doctors said the process for the claim is worse then the initial injury.
Posted by: mary of 10:03am today
Comment 46 of 56
It will only take one successful legal suit against an employer to pull that house of cards down. Clearly if compensation is to be cut, employers are going to be underinsured and therefore personally liable for the remained. Common law was abolished, but only with the presumption that compensation would always be adequate to properly care for the injured party. We know it has not done so in decades. A test case will certainly have many employers up in arms, as it should since their own representatives are pushing for it.
Posted by: Matthew G of 10:03am today
Comment 45 of 56
Hey Whatever, i think u r way off the mark. My old man is on workcover and will never work again due to being assaulted by a patient at the RAH. What appeared to be a collapsed disc into the spinal cord has now become a heart condition and intense pain for the majority of the day. Workcover have repeatedly tried to force him to work when they know full well he cant and have had doctors provide evidence but yet they continue to try and find ways to save money and cause the people they r meant to support more pain emotionally. Not all people on Workcover r bludgers Whatever.
Posted by: Pricey of Para Hills West 9:58am today
Comment 44 of 56
Having a look at the the cause (court) list each day and you will find there are more disputes in Consiliation and Arbitration than the other courts all put together. 98% are in the the workers favor. This tells me that this has never been a system it was intended for but an "insurance" environement. The current system was ok until the Administrators took control. Blame the workers and I assure you thre will be rolling strikes as this will effect not only current workers but most of you reading this comment.
Posted by: Jim Bennett of Croydon 9:49am today
Comment 43 of 56
it is little wonder that the WorkCover SA has a liability. The management and board have opted for high risk get rich investments and having 1.5 billion dollars invested in the high risk areas like sub-prime USA markets, only holds a gun to the heads of all South Australians when it fails. The fact is that WorkCover is a private company which has a charter to administer a SA govt Act. thus they have the benefits of a private company and public company. The board have said to the govt we need to make money for our shareholder and if you do not do as we have asked we will do nothing and yes that is the manipulation that WorkCover has done to all South Australain to the tune of 884 million (soon to be 1 billion dollars) . If it was a private company it would have failed and be placed in bankruptcy but as it has a hold on a public company these rules have been waived. The one main thing that is at the centre of this is that the WorkCover corp have not complied with the rules and regulation set by govt and now wants the govt to reward them for their failure. But the injured worker is the true victim as no matter what the govt or workcover do the injured are still injured suffering and being left to defend for themselves while the system that is there to assist them is more interested in making money and profits than to perform the job they were given the charter to administer. a fair go for all but the workcover system is in need of commonsense and less lawyers managers and corporate hopefuls.
Posted by: mark moore-mcquillan of 9:44am today
Comment 42 of 56
Excuse me Whatever of SA, do actually have any facts to back up your claim, or do you just enjoy coming to a public forum and shooting off your mouth,which makes you look like you a complete loser.
Posted by: Forum Troll of Right Here Right Now 9:38am today
Comment 41 of 56
Sack the board Rann, or are you in bed with them
Posted by: Steve of Roxby 9:36am today
Comment 40 of 56
Work cover needs reform, but as usual the worker gets blamed for the majority of the blow out in the costs, what should be look at and changed is the extremely high legal fees being charged on both sides The delay tactic of the work cover lawyers to drag the case out and the exorbitant fees charge by all the so called consultants who advise , how many injured people on work cover do you see driving an Mercedes or BMW car, yet nearly all the lawyers and consultants do.
Posted by: Warren Savage of 9:33am today
Comment 39 of 56
prevention is the key u morons!
Posted by: thomas the tank of tidmouth station 9:33am today
Comment 38 of 56
It's a bludgers paradise and the people who are genuine as per usual get the raw deal ! I wonder how much the labor mob sucks out of it ?
Posted by: Drecked of Nappy Valley 9:28am today
Comment 37 of 56
WorkCover Payouts story The Advertiser 18/02/2008 Outsourcing has failed - that¿s easy to understand, administration costs blown out by $75 million ¿ can¿t be difficult to see why, high turn over of claims managers ¿ that should be easy to figure out, ¿conspicuous deterioration in the corporation¿s financial performance and level of service to injured workers¿ ¿ was it greed or stupidity that made them chase poor or high risk investments with SA employers levies, ultimately leading to reduced services to injured workers. ¿Injured workers not returning to work soon enough¿ clearly all the injured workers in the State are liars and cheats and all the health care professionals that treat them are either liars and cheats or just plain gullible. Even though ¿claims have fallen by 13,000 between 1995 and 2007¿ the WorkCover system in this State can¿t make a go of it when other States can. It¿s clear, the answer to this problem is easy and simple ¿ cut injured workers benefits. I¿ve an idea to reduce WorkCover¿s financial problems, close it down and wind it up. Move injured workers to the Social Security system. That¿s where a lot end up after a considerable fight for their rights, along the way they lose their friends, family, self respect and physical and mental health. I¿m sorry, I forgot, we can¿t close WorkCover down, who is going to employ all the lawyers, court staff, Claims Agents, WorkCover bureaucrats, private detectives, job search consultants, psychologists, psychiatrists, GP¿s and physiotherapists. Added to the list on the edges are the luxury car dealers, restaurants, high end house renovators etc etc, and lets not forget a Minister will lose a portfolio. If reducing injured workers benefits is the only way that the people in charge can see to resolve the problems, then surely their state of mental health is in need of assessment, or is there too much money being made on the back of injured workers.
Posted by: Ian Trinne of Semaphore 9:27am today
Comment 36 of 56
The first thing to do is get rid of Workcover, it has to be cheaper for the bosses to pay sick workers then to pay the wages of the Workcover bosses and Government who have thier noses in the trough at Workcover. Why is the injured worker being penalised, the quicker we get rid of Rann and the Labor party the better, thought Labor was for the worker, guess I was wrong and where is the Unions in this, come on Unions, call a state strike on this.
Posted by: george of # 9:11am today
Comment 35 of 56
There are not enough rehabilitation opportunities within the State Public Service. I have work related injuries that prevent me from doing my regular position properly. I asked for rehabilitation, training and assistance to find a more suitable position within the state public service only to be told that these things dont exist. As per the article the reality is a high turnover of claims managers and "conspicuous deterioration" the level of service to injured workers.
Posted by: State Pubic Servant of Adelaide 9:01am today
Comment 34 of 56
And the "working families" will be the ones who suffer......
Posted by: TheMan of The Office 9:00am today
Comment 33 of 56
If, as the article suggests, Mr Rann sat on this all last year because of the federal election, shouldn't he be investigated for corruption? To avoid reducing WorkCover's losses for politcal purposes isdidgy isn't it? Or is that just what we expect from him.
Posted by: Warren Driver of Elizabeth 9:00am today
Comment 32 of 56
Will our business still have to pay 8.3% levy even though we never made a claim?
Posted by: Karen of Adelaide 9:00am today
Comment 31 of 56
I wonder if 'Tired of Political Correctness' has any appreciation of the physical and psychological pain people who suffer serious injuries at work endure. Narrow minded comments such as theirs do not help. Perhaps 'TOPC' would like to walk in another person's shoes for a day, imagine suffering a serious back injury, in constant chronic pain, reliant on the srongest pain killers available to get through day and observe their world crumbling around them - career, family, independence, self esteem, friends, being driven into depressed isolation.... A major issue facing injured workers is that of feeling like second class citizens, dependent upon income maintenance - it is a demeaning process. Labelling them as 'bludgers' will only serve to drive genuine claimants into hiding, making it all the more difficult for them to return to work for fear of being criticised and labelled in this manner. For injured workers to reconnect with communities and reintegrate into a work environment they require support, understanding and encouragement. Don't forget they also need money to live and support their families in the process, rent, mortgages, bills and food don't magically disappear just because of injury. It is a sad fact of life that there are people who will rort any system thay can gain benefit from, whether that be worker's compensation or otherwise - the key is in learning to recognise those who do so without placing an unfair disadvantage upon those who are genuine.
Posted by: Stephen Carter of 8:59am today
Comment 30 of 56
If you work for DECS do not have a workcover claim. I suffered a broken ankle after some on ground staff shifted planter boxes into a walkway. Firstly the intimidation to use sickleave, the pressure placed by the principal including being told it will reflect in my references for the next school. Also not being allowed to return to work on crutches "for OH&S reasons",The paperwork and the medical expenses are huge. The orthopedic surgeon said it was simply a case of placing the fee at a level that will compensate for 12 months to be paid and only a 70% chance of that. The biggest cost is the lack of honesty and the inefficiency.
Posted by: adam of greenwith 8:58am today
Comment 29 of 56
Whatever of SA, yes there are bludgers, but as someone who works in the system I can tell you a hell of alot of those cases are genuine, and they are treated like criminals by WorkCover and some of thei employers who seem to have little sympathy for work injuries.
Posted by: Tom Michaels of West Lakes 8:57am today
Comment 28 of 56
Having been on Workcover for a while, all I can say is don't pick on the innocent workers, why not attack the higher consult charges that the specialists in "The Boys Club" charge Workcover, the referals to their "mates" ........ it's the medical profession who are pillaging Workcover NOT the worker, curb these expenses and you won't have to add extra stress and suffering to the already injured workers. But we know it's easier to go after the weaker of the two, typical gutless government.
Posted by: Peter of She'll be right. 8:42am today
Comment 27 of 56
I think out of 100 cases, only 2 or 3 would be genuine - the bludgers have caused this.
Posted by: Whatever of SA 8:39am today
Comment 26 of 56
I think is time Workcover looked into employers who don't pay the correct levy. My working career (often as a temp) has seen many instances of this.
Posted by: frannie of Fullarton 8:36am today
Comment 25 of 56
The blame game. Why are injured workers losing their entitlements because South Australia has the only underperforming Workers Compensation scheme in the Country? If this was the private sector the razor gang would be cutting costs from the top down not the bottom up. I wonder how an injured worker and his family is supposed to survive for years on end while they wait for their wages disputes to be resolved quoting "ceasing maintenance until disputes were resolved with any arrears paid to the worker " clearly the injured workers will not have any financial resources to fight back if the board has its way. They will simply join the ranks of the oppressed majority. By the way has anyone looked at replacing the board and the management?
Posted by: Jeff Thompson of Adelaide 8:25am today
Comment 24 of 56
This is sad news for the genuine cases. It's about time the government started looking at some of the doctors who making the judgements on workcover cases. You know what they say "In for a penny in for a pound"
Posted by: Adelaide of Adelaide 8:11am today
Comment 23 of 56
Welcome to third world conditions.This is the price the average mug has to pay for being led up the garden path by government and trade unions.Remember the smarties who wanted to negotiate their own wages and conditions?What now?The average person in South Australia lives in fear of losing his job and more of falling out with the coterie of cronies who dominate each workplace.All this while our government fritters away taxpayers funds on huge defence contracts and tries their best with ongoing sporting events to keep the public entertained.
Posted by: Fred of Flinders Ranges 8:10am today
Comment 22 of 56
...or maybe the Compo bludgers could just go back to work?
Posted by: Tired of Political Correctness 7:42am today
Comment 21 of 56
So those who are genuinely injured at work are going to have to suffer. No payments after 2 years. Too bad about the family and the mortgage. I thought the Labor govt looked after the workers. It stinks. Prevent injuries happening in the first place and weed out the bludgers.
Posted by: john of unley 7:41am today
Comment 20 of 56
Andrew - an awful lot of sense in what you say mate. It's no use pulling people out of the water at the end of the river - we need to be saving them from falling in in the first place. But you know something - the philosophy in this article is the same as in the health service. Crazy stuff.
Posted by: stevie of brighton 7:39am today
Comment 19 of 56
well i wish id voted liberal now. I still think a better solution would be to cut the politicians pay packets. as long as the workers are looked after and are given every opportunity to get back to work faster than thats fair. but i couldnt think of anything worse that working your butt off and giving your time to a company only to get injured while making money for your bosses than to get nothing back when you are down. i think looking after the workers are the main priority.
Posted by: JODIE of 7:38am today
Comment 18 of 56
I remember the politician who tried to ride | | | |