Case Study Analysis on Worker Compensation in Western Australia

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Workers Compensation Eligibility Factors
The Obligation of Key Stakeholders
Establishment of Potential for Workers Compensation Claims
Process of Managing Injury
Conclusion
References

In every working environment, employees are quite likely to encounter injuries that may impact their health and result in the need for medical attention, and this translates to the need for compensation. However, compensation is based on existing laws in different countries and the policies developed by each company. In Western Australia, The Workers Compensation Act of 1981 is instrumental in guiding the mode and procedure of employee compensation as well as the process to be followed when either of the stakeholders falls short of the Acts requirement. Workers’ compensation is defined as the financial support provided to workers who become injured or sick due to their work. Compensation usually covers a variety of financial impacts which include: medical expenses, loss of earnings, rehabilitation program expenses as well as financial support for the permanent impairment (Piechowski, 2013). In Western Australia, the WorkCover WA is responsible for ensuring the smooth implementation of workers’ compensation schemes by ensuring that all stakeholders adhere to the Workers compensation and injury Management Act of 1981 (WorkCover WA, 2021).

According to the Workers compensation and injury Management Act 1981, employers should always have an insurance cover to cater for financial impacts due to injuries of workers at the workplace (Oliphant & Wagner, 2012). Additionally, the act ensures that workers remain protected by ensuring that during the injuries, they receive compensation for the incurred expenses or lost wages while they are unable to perform their duties. It is therefore mandatory for Western Australia employers to have an insurance cover that covers all their employees as well as a documented injury management system (Floyd et al., 2017; Willis et al., 2019). The importance of the employer having the insurance cover is that it protects the employer and the workers from the associated financial impact that occurs when an employee encounters a work-related injury.

This paper analyses a case study that requires employee compensation after an injury during a road accident while at work and gives detailed data about the worker’s eligibility for compensation. Additionally, the paper state the obligations of key stakeholders in the case study and establishes the likelihood of the employee’s claim being approved. Lastly, the paper discusses the necessary steps required to manage the worker’s injury by utilization of a return-to-work program.

Workers Compensation Eligibility Factors

There are several factors in the case study that indicate the eligibility of the worker for compensation of injury. To start with, the patient got the injury while driving a light vehicle, recommended as the primary mode of transport by the company, as he was traveling from the work premise to the residential area. This means that he was still within working hours and was following employer policies. Despite the laboratory operator driving with dipped lights at a corner, he was driving at the acceptable speed of 80 kilometers per hour which is even below the recommended speed of 90 kilometers per hour. This is an indicator that the patient did not break the law by any means. Additionally, the worker did not cause the accident by himself since he did not see the cow due to the height of vegetation on the road. Dipping the lights was only a measure to prevent impairing the vision of oncoming traffic and it was a precautionary measure of the worker to try and prevent the occurrence of an accident. Another factor that promotes the worker’s eligibility is the fact that he had attended the defensive driver training some years ago. This indicates that the driver had relevant knowledge and skills to evade any accidents (Floyd et al., 2017). This is further strengthened by the fact that he applied brakes and hit the cow at a speed of around 60 kilometers per hour as he tried to prevent the worsening of the accident. Furthermore, he packed the car on the side of the road thus preventing more accidents with the oncoming traffic.

The worker’s compensation and injury Management Act of 1981 indicates that a person is eligible for compensation if they are classified as a worker of that organization and if they sustained injuries during the course of work (Evans, 2019; Oliphant & Wagner, 2012). According to the Act, a worker is anybody on full-time or part-time employment, a person on commission, s person doing a piece of work and in a few scenarios a contractor, sub-contractor, or an active director of an organization (Evans, 2019). The scenario demonstrates the injured as a FIFO worker working as a laboratory operator. This is further strengthened by the fact that he used light cars recommended by the organization and lives in the organization’s residential area. It is therefore clear that the patient is entitled to compensation by law.

The Obligation of Key Stakeholders

The Obligation of the employer is to ensure that the insurance cover of all employees is active and able to ensure compensation as per Western Australian Law. Additionally, the employer should maintain regular training of employees for hazardous encounters that may occur in the workplace (Floyd et al., 2017). This helps reduce the likelihood of injury during the incidences and if they occur the extent is minimal. Employers need to train employees about the compensation procedure to allow them to understand the process and know the compliance of the company with the law. In cases of injuries, the employer should provide the worker with Worker compensation Claim forms and assist the worker in filling them (while filling the employer section of the form). The employer can only approve the form and send it to the insurer after validating the worker’s certificate of capacity from the worker’s physician. Sending of the document should be within 5 working days of receiving the forms from the injured worker (WorkCover WA, 2021).

The obligation of the worker is to ensure they regularly attend training provided by the company to prevent harm. Additionally, they need to continuously advocate for good working environments. In cases of injury, the worker is required to first report to a healthcare practitioner and seek medical treatment and ensure that the health provider gives them the First Certificate of Capacity. Additionally, the patient is required to report the incident following the company’s incident reporting policy and protocols. The worker is responsible for acquiring the worker compensation form from the employer or online and collaborating with the employer to fill it and ensure it is sent to the insurer (alongside the First Certificate of Capacity). The worker is responsible for taking care of the costs as they await the assessment of the insurer for compensation (WorkCover WA, 2021).

The insurer is responsible for ensuring that the employer continuously pays the required premiums to cover all its employees. Additionally, the insurer is responsible for the assessment of the incident and eligibility/ compensation schemes after receiving the compensation forms and the First Certificate of Capacity from the employer. On confirming the liability, the insurer is responsible for reimbursing the worker and continuing payments as stated by law with the exclusion of any identified gaps. The insurer is responsible for the creation of a claim number and using this reference to continuously communicate with the employer and worker regarding the status of the claim. This should be done in not more than 14 days and if this period is exceeded the employer and the worker are required to take the matter to WorkCover WA for liability determination (WorkCover WA, 2021).

Establishment of Potential for Workers Compensation Claims

The first requirement for the establishment of compensation is the identification of the person injured as a worker and eligible by law for compensation. The WorkCover WA uses the Workers’ Compensation and Injury Management Act 1984 to identify the eligibility of an employee for compensation. The law states that employees eligible for compensation must be full-time workers, part-time workers, workers on commission, and in some instances, contractors and subcontractors or working directors. Any person who falls off these categories is not considered eligible (WorkCover WA, 2021). The assessment conducted by the insurer takes into consideration this law before further processing the documents.

The Workers’ Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981-part III, Division 1 section 19.1 (c) indicates that a worker who suffers injury by accident in the course of work will only be compensated if the place he/she is attending is for the purpose of payment of compensation that he/she is entitled according to this Act. In this scenario, the worker is entitled to a house allowance and is also allowed to use light vehicles recommended by the company to commute. To the desired region. The law in the same division (part III, Division 1 section 19.2 (a) (ii)) indicates that a worker will not be compensated if the injury occurs between the place of residence and the employee’s place of work (Oliphant & Wagner, 2012). However, this is masked by the first section since the worker utilized the means recommended by the company and also was traveling to the destination where he received housing benefits as per the company.

The insurer must make sure that the company’s policy is active before initiation of any compensation claims. This is followed by the acceptance of required documents including the first certificate of capacity duly filled by the attending practitioner and the worker compensation claim form from the employer. This gives room for assessment of the injury to make sure that it is in line with both compensation and traffic laws requirements (Oliphant & Wagner, 2012). The case study indicates that the worker got the injury while at work or while following organizational policies. Additionally, he attended all the training that the company offered to evade injury. None of the driving laws were broken by the worker and the injury can be blamed on the organizational policies. These policies include the recommendation of the use of light vehicles which put the lives of workers at risk in case of major accidents. The cars tend to have low-security measures as indicated in the case study where the airbag failed resulting in the neck injury of the worker. The second policy was the change of residency to a far located region meaning the patients who drove themselves during the day-to-night change hours were at risk of being involved in an accident. Other than the policies, the worker followed the required procedure of seeking treatment and providing the First Certificate of Capacity from his care practitioner. This is evidence that there is a need for compensation for the worker with consideration of the medical expenses incurred and the 2 days that he will be away from work recovering.

Process of Managing Injury

The patient was identified to have a neck injury as a result of the impact of the crash and the failure of the airbags. The care practitioner who examined the patient reported in the First Certificate of Capacity that the patient had soft tissue injury to the C-spine with very restricted ROM in the neck but no neurological symptoms. The actual diagnosis was a neck strain which was consistent with a whiplash injury and was the reason for the stiff neck presented by the patient. The practitioner recommends 2 days’ leave from work to help in the recovery process. The capacity to work form indicates that the patient should not be subjected to lifting any object but can sit and stand for a maximum of 30 minutes and walk for only 10 minutes. The recommended medications are only analgesics, but he is required to come for a check-up at the end of the second day of rest for further examination. This data indicates that the patient cannot be instantly initiated into a return-to-work program until they get the second report from the practitioner. This is because of the little time the patient can manage to walk, sit or stand and as a result, he won’t be able to handle the majority of the tasks even on consenting. However, the employer, the practitioner, and the worker should sit down and agree as well as formulate a return-to-work program as will be advised by the care practitioner. Another recommendation would be having the patient undergo therapy that reduces the stiffness of the neck e.g., massage therapy and physiotherapy with a qualified practitioner. This can also be done in the facility after the doctor recommends the ability of the worker to return to work. Additionally, the organization can also ensure that the patient is well supplemented by pain killers and other medication based on the practitioner’s advice to prevent the persistence of pain.

Conclusion

Work-related injuries are inevitable but can be minimized through organizational programs that train employees on how to reduce or evade their occurrence. However, governments have developed laws that ensure that the occurrence of work-related injuries results in the compensation for the workers. One example is the Workers compensation and injury Management 1981 Act of Western Australia. However, compensation requires that the insurer assess the injury and ensure that the injury is in line with the laws and the worker did his/her best to try and prevent the likelihood of the injury. The employer should always be at the forefront of ensuring that the worker does not experience a financial burden due to the injury. Furthermore, the employer should ensure that the worker’s return to work program is developed when the time is due.

References

Evans, P. (2019). Workers Compensation: The Defence of Reasonable Administrative Action. Int’l Trade & Bus. L. Rev., 22, 205.

Floyd, L., Steenson, W., Coulthard, A., Williams, D., & Pickering, A. C. (2017). Employment, Labour and Industrial Law in Australia. Cambridge University Press.

Oliphant, K., & Wagner, G. (2012). Employers’ Liability and Workers’ Compensation. Walter de Gruyter.

Piechowski, L. D. (2013). Disability and worker’s compensation.

Willis, E., Reynolds, L., & Rudge, T. (2019). Understanding the Australian Health Care System. Elsevier Health Sciences.

WorkCover WA. (2021). WorkCover WA: Workers’ Compensation & Injury Management: A Guide for Workers.

Click Here To Order Now!