Description
A forum for interaction about Workcover South Australia and the experiences of Injured Workers.
My Links
»
»
»
»
»
|
Workcover Action Group
The WorkCover Action Group is a loose collective of injured workers who are concerned about the impact of gross wrongdoing and/ or illegal conduct within the WorkCover system. It is not a support service and does not offer legal advice. It’s sole objective is to gather and collate factual and corroborative information which can be presented to appropriate Parliamentary Committees and/ or media outlets which can scrutinise or highlight these acts.
|
Posted: 12:16 PM, 29/11/2007 |
Add Comment |
WORKCOVER ACTION GROUP (WAG) QUESTIONNAIRE
WORKCOVER ACTION GROUP (WAG) QUESTIONNAIRE
The WorkCover Action Group is a loose collective of injured workers who are concerned about the impact of gross wrongdoing and/ or illegal conduct within the WorkCover system. It is not a support service and does not offer legal advice. Its sole objective is to gather and collate factual and corroborative information which can be presented to appropriate Parliamentary Committees and/ or media outlets which can scrutinise or highlight these acts.
This questionnaire aims to ascertain peoples general experiences with and within the WorkCover system. We are asking people to only complete this questionnaire if they wish to have any aspects of their claim scrutinised more closely at some future date and are, therefore, willing to share their personal information with us for use in appropriate forums where WorkCovers conduct and management of claims can be properly and lawfully examined. We are asking people who complete this questionnaire to be included in a mailing list for progress updates.
Please return all questionnaires to: matthew4758@hotmail.com
Personal Contact Details:
Name:
Email:
Address:
Telephone:
Mobile:
Are you willing to speak with media about your experiences? YES or NO
Are you willing to make formal submissions to any Parliamentary inquiry into WorkCover?
YES or NO
.
1. Have you ever been or are you on WorkCover? YES or NO
2. When you first lodged your claim were you confident that you would be treated fairly and promptly? YES or NO
3. Please explain your level of satisfaction with the system
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
4. If you experienced problems, please describe at what point these took affect? Who was responsible, what and when did the problems occur?
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
5. Do you know someone who has been affected by WorkCover? YES or NO
6. Briefly, what injuries have you claimed for?
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
7. Did you find WorkCover helpful? YES or NO
8. If no, briefly, what problems did you experience?
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
9. Were you offered prompt Rehabilitation (within 4 weeks)?
10. Were you provided prompt income payments (within 4 weeks)?
11. Were you ever a Union member? YES or NO
12. Did your Union help/ represent you? Please explain.
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
13. Did you have any problems with the Worker Compensation Tribunal? YES or NO
14. If so, briefly, what problems did you experience?
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
15. Did you require a lawyer to handle your WorkCover matter? YES or NO
16. If so did you have any problems with the lawyer? YES or NO
17. Did you have any difficulties with your Case Manager YES or NO
18. If so, briefly, what problems did you experience?
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
19. Were you placed under surveillance by WorkCover or any of its agents? YES or NO
20. Did you experience any difficulty or problems with surveillance, investigations or Fraud officers?
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
21. Do you have any POSITIVE suggestion on how to make WorkCover improvements?
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
|
Posted by Webmaster at 12:33 PM, 29/11/2007 |
Link |
|
Can it be trusted
I have had numerous case meetings with case managers, rehabilitation consultants and the like.
I am unsure how the Law works but I started to secretly tape these meetings without the knowledge of the people present. Firstly, am I allowed to do this and secondly can I submit it to the legislation committee?
The reason I started to tape these meetings is that the reports of these meetings were inconsistant with what was actually said.
|
Posted by Information at 10:46 AM, 6/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Tapes might be admissible
While the listening devices act would probably cover this why not test the waters.
Workcover collect lots of information illegally and then say well its up to the courts to decide whether its admissible or not..
I suggest its about time people started putting workcover to the test instead. |
Posted by Reader at 5:56 PM, 6/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Taping meetings
| 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 7:32 PM, 6/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Doctor on Fullarton Road
I know the doctor on Fullarton Road.
He does keep tape recordings of his comments and then has them typed up into reports.
Dr Meegan has appeared in many workers comp hearings and I am not sure that he has much credibility.
He is well known as a Workcover doctor and his rooms are well set up for the surveillance operators to park in the car park across the road opposite his rooms. It is from there that they film the injured workers that have been set up to go to their appointments with him.
Just a word of advice. Its best to use the back or side entrance not the front. |
Posted by Stalked by Workcover at 5:08 PM, 7/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Doctor on Fullarton Rd
I have also been to see Dr Meegan, he also taped my examination. My first impressions was that his rooms were only used part time, not a typicle Doctors surgery. It became clear to me that it seemed he doesnt see general patients. I think his main role is for legal reasons. I cant understand if he is not treating patients how can one still be registered?
Has anybody had an examination from a Dr Samuall? |
Posted by Patient at 6:22 PM, 7/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Workcover and EML
Does anyone know what the issue is with the current contract with EML that was raised in parliament.
Is it the case that the deal was stitched up without any transparecncy?
There are massive problems in Workcover and the sooner this government realises that the only way to fix the problem is to do away with the whole of Workcover and start again the better.
Only that way will they get rid of the real problems and the employees and lawyers that think and treat injured workers as cash cows.
One of the biggest problems also is that most case managers get paid less than most injured workers. This causes problems from the start with a jealousy of those injured workers who earn more and are not having to work every day.
|
Posted by Reader at 8:45 AM, 10/12/2007 |
Link |
|
case managers salary
I have experienced a case manager stating that I was on a good wage and I should stop claiming for all my entitlements. I wrote a letter to WorkCover to tell them i felt i was discriminated against and a new case manager was assinged to me.
I was a qualified professional before i was injured and had to work very hard to reach a level of pay I was entitled to.
I have noticed a current job application for case managers and it seems there is little training required compared to the studies I had to experience. As most of WorkCover personel and lawyers who read this blog, I am sure they would understand you just dont fall into a well paid job. Oh and by the way, John Cooke a former WorkCover employee on WorkCover seems to understand. |
Posted by case managers at 9:36 AM, 10/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Redemptions and Commitee
I was going to put in a submission to the Parliamentary Committee. But it does not seem to fit in with what the review is about. Can anyone help me out.
I applied for a redemption and the lawyer for Workcover ( Tracey Kerrigan ) refused to turn up at the conciliation conference.
Since that time Workcover have spent a fortune on my claim and it seems to be going nowhere.
Shouldnt there be some accountability for the lawyers, What stops these lawyers from leading injured workers along to boost up their workloads?
Why do they put in a redemption clause in the act if lawyers can simply not turn up to the conferences?
It is apparent to me that lots of lawyers could be doing this to get more work out of Workcover.
They treat Workcover like a cash cow that it is.
Pity Workcover do not realise the social cost to injured workers and their families of their inability to control its external service proviers in a more accountable way. |
Posted by Confused at 10:03 PM, 10/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Lawyers
| thats "SA GREAT" for you |
Posted by In whose eyes at 8:31 AM, 11/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Beattie Fights Corruption
Beattie fights corruption
By HendrikGout
Former Queensland Labor Premier Peter Beattie says an independent anti-corruption fighter is essential in SA.
"For politicians, these independent bodies are a political nightmare, but for public administration, they act like a truth serum," Mr Beattie said in nationally-published opin-
ion.
"The Queensland Crime and Misconduct Commission caused me, as premier, enormous political pain and, more than any other organisation, put my government at risk on several occasions," Mr Beattie wrote.
"CMC investigations or inquiries caused me to lose a deputy premier and two members of state parliament, while one former minister went to jail, another is facing court
and a couple of other ministers lost their portfolios.
"So, why am I consistently on the public record as one of the CMC's strongest supporters, and why did
I, as premier, refer many of the matters to the CMC that subsequently caused me such pain? The answer
is simple. Queensland needed, and indeed all states need, a watchdog beyond government control to maintain honesty and integrity in public administration."
NSW Premier Morris lemma has already insisted that SA is "crazy" not to have an independent commission against crime and corruption.
SA is one of only two mainland states without such a corruption fighting body "The public must be empowered
to take allegations to an independent body to have their concerns fairly and properly investigated without the dead hand of political intervention from executive government to protect politicians, police or local government from the
consequences of their misdeeds,"
Mr Beattie argues. "The CMC has had a therapeutic
effect on politicians and police alike because they know their behaviour can be the subject of an independ-
ent investigation. Queensland is a better and more honest place."SA attorney-general Michael Atkinson again ruled out such a body "There is no need to set up a separate body," Mr Atkinson's spokesman said. "There's no sug-
gestion that there's any corruption in South Australia. No corruption has been uncovered."
He said SA had sufficient existing bodies to investigate allegations of corruption, including police, the police complaints authority, and the auditor-general.
"The public interest is better served by the anti-corruption
functions not being monopolised,"
Mr Atkinson said. "If a local complainant is not satisfied with one agency's response, he can hawk it to another."
But Mr Beattie believes the Queensland corruption experience proves the value of a single independent anti-corruption fighter.
"History has shown that a cosy link between politicians and corrupt police leads to corruption. Police power needs checks and balances.
Internal police processes are not enough. There has to be external review, with the protection of the parliament," Mr Beattie believes.
Meanwhile, SA still has to implement a register of lobbyists, almost nine months after the Government
said it believed a register may have merit.
Last week, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd released the new federal government's ministerial code of conduct under which lobbyists will be on a public register before
accessing ministers. The list of lobbyists will be updated every six months.
"It will be clear-cut from that list which lobbyists are working with the Federal Government and on behalf of which companies," Mr Rudd said. Victoria may introduce its own ministerial code of conduct in line with the federal code. Victorian Premier John Brumby said a national lobbyist register would tighten controls on lobbyists and
enforce accountability "I've always said that lobbyists do
work across state borders. I think it's very likely that you'll see us joining with the Commonwealth in what will be a national code," Mr Brumby said.
Mr Atkinson could not say when SA would have a register of lobbyists. "Earlier in the year I asked the legislation and legal policy section of the Attorney-General' department to study regulation of lobbyists in other States and countries," Mr Atkinson told The Independent Weekly. "(This) section is nearing completion of that investigation.
"It is not possible to definitively place a time-frame on the measure; until we have seen the implementation of these proposals at a federal level and see how they work in
practice."
Before becoming Queenslands Premier, Peter Beattie was a solicitor at the Fitzgerald inquiry He also chaired the parliamentary committee which overseas the Criminal
Justice Commission. "It is worth remembering what
this fiercely independent body has prevented since it came into operation," Mr Beattie emphasised.
"The way to do that is to look at the outcomes of the Fitzgerald inquiry, where former police comnmissioner Terry Lewis was jailed in August 1991 for 14 years for corruption; Geraldo Bellino was jailed in 1991 for seven years for corruption; Vittorio Conte was jailed in 1991 for
seven years; Warren Armstrong was jailed in 1989 for five years for corruption; Hector Hapeta was jailed in 1989 for heroin trafficking and in June 1990 for corruption;
Ann Marie Tilley was jailed in 1990 for five years for corruption; former police officer Alien Bulger was jailed in 1990 for 12 years for corruption; former National Party
minister Russ Hinze died In 1991 while on bribery charges; former premier Bjelke-Petersen beat perjury charges when the jury could not reach a verdict; former National
Party ministers Don Lane, Brian Austin, Leisha Harvey and Geoff Muntz also served jail sentences; and Jack Herbert, a former corrupt police officer and bagman who gave
evidence to the inquiry after being given immunity from prosecution, has regularly given evidence in a range of trials."
|
Posted by Reader at 4:50 PM, 15/12/2007 |
Link |
|
See Nothing hear nothing
I refer to the comment in the independent weekly above.
What a Typical response form the SA government attorney General. They have not uncovered any corruption here.
Well I wonder who would uncover it?
Perhaps the auditor general who has nothing to do with Workcover and who has no power over them?
Perhaps the "hands off Minister Wright" who lets workcover investigate and respond to the complaints made about its management.
Perhaps the Ombudsman who complains of limited resources and who will do everything in its power not to investigate Workcover and its corrupt ways - I doubt anyone will really get much satisfaction there.
Those who have been elected to be in charge of this state do nothing because these things are better left alone.
Out of mind out of sight is this governments motto.
The time is fast approaching when we will have an independent watchdog.
We now need lobbyists to start the pressure mounting on the current government to legislate for an anti corruption fighter.
Its the right of the persons in this state to know that their government is being overseen.
Maybe they are scared they will follow the lead of Queensland with many in important places getting caught out and imprisoned..
Id like to see that!!!!!!!!!!!! |
Posted by Sergeant Schultz at 5:02 PM, 15/12/2007 |
Link |
|
board games for christmas
The grapevine must be in full bloom this time of the year.
the latest is that are a few insurance companies were not happy on how the tendering procedure was handled with EML winning the contract and may take further action. |
Posted by Cooke.J at 10:49 AM, 19/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Christmas Party
I can not afford christmas presents or christmas lunch for my family this year. I was wondering if anyone can tell me if injured workers are welcome at the workcover or EML staff parties?
Do I have to put my name down so my kids can receive a present from Santa?
Otherwise can someone tell me where I can get some assistance for christmas so my family do not miss out..
|
Posted by looking for a party at 2:24 PM, 19/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Presents
| The only presents you will receive at chrsitmas would be a section 38 review, and maybe a lost pay slip. Trust me, it has happened to me and they wonder why i hate their guts. |
Posted by psychotic at 5:03 PM, 19/12/2007 |
Link |
|
The bastards stopped his pay without no good reason
I found this case searching google.
They stopped his pay without issuing a proper notice.
Workcover and the claims agent should have their contracts terminated for such heavy handed behaviour.
Nothing but ruthless bastards who do not give a hoot about injured workers.
www.industrialcourt.sa.gov.au/download.cfm?downloadfile=E4A878C7-E7F2-2F96-3B32296B91CB0FE6 |
Posted by Action Jackson at 6:08 PM, 19/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Another monster
| Looks like WorkCover have again used heavy handed tactics in creating another montser. How many monsters are they going to create before they realise that they are the ones who abuse their rights by picking on the innocent and using them as examples. |
Posted by pepe.Z at 8:59 AM, 20/12/2007 |
Link |
|
show me the money $600million
| WorkCover stated they had $600 million dollars in 2003, same year as the "new" board. where is the money now? |
Posted by Paul Roberts at 5:16 PM, 22/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Crunch looms on WorkCover's future
Some State Government backbenchers have warned against WorkCover reforms that would disadvantage employees.
A review of the WorkCover scheme in South Australia is due for completion in late November.
The Government is keen to reduce the scheme's growing unfunded liability, currently more than $700 million.
Some Labor MPs fear that could mean cutting workers' benefits.
There is also a push from the business community to make WorkCover more competitive with interstate systems by cutting employer levies.
Some MPs have warned of Labor Party trouble if the SA Government takes that path, saying part of the ALP's ideology is to protect society's most vulnerable, including injured workers.
But some backbenchers argue employers should pay more, to help improve the compensation scheme's position.
|
Posted by Giulio Saggin at 7:24 PM, 26/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Blog site
This blog site seems to be very popular, I hope the bugs get ironed out.
I hope the readers from EML and Co havent tried to sabotage the site as it does seem that some labor members are keeping an eye on these comments are are quite concerned. |
Posted by Impressed at 7:52 AM, 28/12/2007 |
Link |
|
Take away corruption SA would fall apart.
I want to voice my opinion about all of the posts about getting an anti corruption commission here in South Australia.
If they did take away the corruption everything would fall apart. Everyone must know that this state thrives on corruption. Its just such a common practice that people think nothing of it.
To take away the corruption in this state would be impossible as so many public servants have lived with it so long they would not know how to do their job honestly.
Most likely many would have to be retrained.. |
Posted by Blind Freddy at 2:47 AM, 7/1/2008 |
Link |
|
hear no evil see no evil
SA is the only state in Australia that has not had a royal commission into police corruption. Why? This conservative state does not want to look at the ugly bits in life. We know that as we get kicked around the system until we are battered into uglyness. What is workcover really for if it is not to look after injuried workers. I doubt I will ever recover and have lately been getting worse, how will the new ammendments to the Act treat me next. http://www.blognow.com.au/WCPTSD/82978/WorkCover_increases_PTSD_or_how_to_reduce_redemptions.html
|
Posted by wcPTSD at 11:47 PM, 14/2/2008 |
Link |
|
Workcover board
I am at a loss to see how any effective management of Workcover can occur when the Workcover board consists of people like Sandra Du Poi whose company is in receipt of lucrative payments from Workcover and has exclusive access to cases allocated by EML. Conflict of interest? You Bet! What about the head of the SA Employers Group whose stated objective is to demolish Workcover. Both a Board Member and his organisation is a recipient of contracts from Workcover which do not go out to tender. Conflict of Interest? You Bet!
Where is the ICAC when you need it - oh sorry SA doesnt need an ICAC |
Posted by Anonymous at 12:28 PM, 27/2/2008 |
Link |
|
Untitled Comment
wrkers are to blame for a top heavy insurer
that sounds about right |
Posted by Anonymous at 9:25 AM, 7/6/2008 |
Link |
|
WorkCover Board
| All of the politicans know very well about sandra de pois conflicts of interest and the fact she is making millions from rehabilitation by getting EML to send business to the company whichshe is the managing director off. Sandra comes from a very powerful family, her father was very antiworker and so is she. she also gives very large donations to both the state labor and liberal party - which is why they are turning a blind eye to her conflicts of interest - it is also why mike rann & Co. refuse to implement an ICAC in SA, they know full well major government corruption and conflicts of interest especially that inside workcover will be revealed. |
Posted by Queen Sandra at 3:25 PM, 23/6/2008 |
Link |
|
re: Rehabilitation officers
| I was just reading through a couple of these posts and am disgusted that EMPLOYERS allow their employees to be treated in such a manner. I am a serving police officer and am currently off work suffering from PTSD. Whilst i had never experienced the workers comp sytem, I had high hopes that I would be supported. WRONG! I was assigned a Rehab officer who I had to meet with once a week. She was horrible. If I asked to speak to her on the phone rather than drive to her office she would ring my boss and tell him I was not being complient. She was contacting my private Doctors and stating that it was in my best interests that she attends my appointments with me. I then had a meeting with my boss and she was there... She divulged confidential information to my boss which was discussed with my Doctor. She also said that shes a miracle worker with Doctors and she can get them to change certificates and get injured workers back to the workplace. She also said that the only reason I was off work was because of what I was telling my Doctor...YOU MEAN THE TRUTH. I am currently being frigged around by the insurance company whilst they determine liability and whilst all this is happening, I am not getting paid. |
Posted by Anonymous at 5:36 PM, 15/8/2008 |
Link |
|
so called indpendant specialists
| i was sent to dr megan on fullaton rd for a section 43 report and when it came back it was 20% now i have a major back injury and my lawyer sent me to dr g .morrison and his roport said 45 % damage and eml said we will send you to an independant dr guess who? dr megan again i said no way and at the time i was seeing dr wright and so i said what about letting him do it and lo and behold his report came back with a % of 43% so you tell me who is working for who and now there trying the same tatics again they just keep wearing us down playing acard game with a fixed deck ! |
Posted by Anonymous at 10:23 AM, 9/9/2008 |
Link |
|
ring in dr reports
| i have just had an assessment done and apparently my back injury is in my head , even though my super payed out my tpi claim against them $80k no, work cover sent me to one of 'there' doctors and even though my section 43 claim went through reasonably easily[45%] now there claiming that the event that caused my injury is no longer causing the pain x- rays dont lie do they ? How much longer do we have to put up with these blatent un truths why havent the media gotten envolved how far up the ladder does the corruption go maybe mr rann is the top dog i actually voted for him he should be strung up by his balls for letting workcover get away with this injustice against us injured workers |
Posted by Anonymous at 11:49 AM, 9/9/2008 |
Link |
|
|
Useful Links
SA Unions worker survey
Have your say
WCT Recent Decisions
Workcover Forum
workcover victims
Media Mikes Privatisation agreement
Federal Return to work Monitor report
Austlii Legislation and Case law
Claim Assist
Investigation Standards
State Ombudsman. Last resort but unlikely to assist
Courts Home Page
Liberal Party Media Page
WCT and other Forms
Workcover gone bad
alternative workcover forum
adelaide talkback-workcover
Voice of industrial death
|
