comparative performance monitoring report · comparative performance monitoring report ......

Comparative Performance Monitoring Report

Comparison of work health and safety and workers’

compensation schemes in Australia and New Zealand

12th Edition

WORKPLACE RELATIONS MINISTERS’ COUNCIL

Comparative PerformanceMonitoring Report

Comparison of work health and safety and workers’ compensation schemes

in Australia and New Zealand

Twelfth Edition December 2010

© Commonwealth of Australia (Safe Work Australia) 2010.

ISBN No. 978-0-642-32951-6 (Print) 978-0-642-32949-3 (PDF)

978-0-642-32950-9 [RTF]

This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Attorney General’s department, Robert Garran offices, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600 or posted at ag.gov.au/cca

An electronic copy of this report is available at: deewr.gov.au/WorkplaceRelations/WRMC/Pages/Reports.aspx

Safe Work AustraliaGPO Box 641Canberra ACT 2601Telephone: (02) 6121 9109

DISCLAIMERThe information provided in this document can only assist you in the most general way. This document does not replace any statutory requirements under any relevant State and Territory legislation. Safe Work Australia accepts no liability arising from the use of or reliance on the material contained on this document, which is provided on the basis that Safe Work Australia is not thereby engaged in rendering professional advice. Before relying on the material, users should carefully make their own assessment as to its accuracy, currency, completeness and relevance for their purposes, and should obtain any appropriate professional advice relevant to their particular circumstances. To the extent that the material in this document includes views or recommendations of third parties, such views or recommendations do not necessarily reflect the views of Safe Work Australia nor do they indicate a commitment to a particular course of action.

Important NoticeSafe Work Australia provides the information given in this document to improve public access to information about work health and safety information generally. The vision of Safe Work Australia is Australian workplaces free from injury and disease. Its mission is to lead and coordinate national efforts to prevent workplace death, injury and disease in Australia.

Comparative Performance Monitoring 2008–09 iii

ForewordThe Labour Ministers’ Council, now known as the Workplace Relations Ministers’ Council (WRMC), released the first Comparative Performance Monitoring (CPM) report in December 1998. The CPM reports provide trend analysis on the work health and safety and workers’ compensation schemes operating in Australia and New Zealand. Information in the report is designed to help gauge the success of different approaches undertaken by the various workers’ compensation and work health and safety authorities to reduce the incidence of work-related injury and disease. This is the twelfth annual report of the CPM project.

The CPM is complemented by the Compendium of Workers’ Compensation Statistics, which provides more detailed analysis of national workers’ compensation data using key variables such as occupation, industry, age and gender with supporting information on the circumstances surrounding work-related injury and disease occurrences. The Compendium series can be found at safeworkaustralia.gov.au.

Statement of purposeProvide measurable information to support policy making and program development by governments on work health and safety and workers’ compensation, to meet the goal of Australian and New Zealand workplaces free from injury and disease and to enable durable return to work and rehabilitation for injured and ill workers. The information should provide:

(a) measurement of progress against national strategies

(b) identification of factors contributing to improved work health and safety and workers’ compensation performance (which includes consideration of resources), and

(c) measurement of changes in work health and safety and workers’ compensation over time, including benchmarking where appropriate.

iv Workplace Relations Ministers’ Council

DataData used in this report were most recently supplied by jurisdictions for the 2008–09 financial year plus updates back to 2003–04. Readers should be aware that data presented here may differ from jurisdictional annual reports due to the use of different definitions and the application of adjustment factors to aid the comparability of data. Explanatory commentary on the data items are contained within each chapter with additional information included in Appendix 1 - Explanatory Notes, at the end of this publication. Data for this report are collected from:

• the various workers’ compensation schemes and work health and safety authorities as follows:

- New South Wales — WorkCover New South Wales- Victoria — WorkSafe Victoria- Queensland — Workplace Health and Safety Queensland, Department of

Justice and Attorney General, Q-COMP and WorkCover Queensland- Western Australia — WorkCover Western Australia and WorkSafe Division,

Department of Commerce- South Australia — WorkCover Corporation South Australia and SafeWork SA- Tasmania — Workplace Standards Tasmania and WorkCover Tasmania- Northern Territory — NT WorkSafe and Department of Justice- Australian Capital Territory — WorkSafe ACT and the Office of Regulatory

Services within the Department of Justice and Community Services- Australian Government — Comcare- Seacare — Seacare Authority (Seafarers Safety, Rehabilitation and

Compensation Authority), and- New Zealand — Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance

Corporation and New Zealand Department of Labour

• the Australian Heads of Workers’ Compensation Authorities’ Return to Work Monitor, the full results of which can be accessed at hwca.org.au/reports_rtw.php and,

• the Australian Bureau of Statistics, which provides denominator data, based on the Labour Force Survey, the Survey of Employment and Earnings and the Survey of Employment, Earnings and Hours.

CoordinationThis report has been compiled and coordinated by Safe Work Australia with assistance from representatives of all work health and safety and workers’ compensation authorities in Australia and New Zealand.

Through a partnership of governments, employers and employees, Safe Work Australia drives national policy development on work health and safety and workers’ compensation matters and specifically to:

• achieve significant and continual reductions in the incidence of death, injury and disease in the workplace

• achieve national uniformity of the work health and safety legislative framework complemented by a nationally consistent approach to compliance policy and enforcement policy, and

• improve national workers’ compensation arrangements.

Comparative Performance Monitoring 2008–09 v

Contents

Foreword ...................................................................................... III

Summary of findings ....................................................................VII

Chapter 1 – Progress against the National OHS Strategy .............1Injury and musculoskeletal target .............................................................................. 2Jurisdictional progress ............................................................................................... 2Fatalities target ...........................................................................................................3International comparison ............................................................................................ 4

Chapter 2 – Work health and safety performance ......................... 6Serious claims ............................................................................................................6Long term claims .......................................................................................................8Duration of absence ...................................................................................................9Compensated fatalities .............................................................................................10Notified fatalities ....................................................................................................... 12Work-related traumatic injury fatalities .....................................................................13Claims by mechanism of injury/disease ................................................................... 14Claims by size of business .......................................................................................15

Chapter 3 – Work health and safety compliance and enforcement activities .......................................................................................17

Chapter 4 – Workers’ compensation premiums and entitlements . 22Standardised average premium rates.....................................................................................22Entitlements under workers’ compensation .............................................................. 24

Chapter 5 – Workers’ compensation scheme performance ......... 28Assets to liabilities ratio ............................................................................................28Scheme expenditure ................................................................................................ 31Durable return to work .............................................................................................. 35Disputation rate ........................................................................................................36Dispute resolution .....................................................................................................38

Chapter 6 – Industry information ................................................. 40Claims by industry ....................................................................................................40Premium rates by industry ........................................................................................40

Appendix 1 – Explanatory notes .................................................. 43

Appendix 2 – Key features of Australian Workers’ Compensation Schemes ................................................................ 54

Appendix 3 – Jurisdictional contact information .......................... 56

Comparative Performance Monitoring 2008–09 vii

Summary of findingsPerformance against the National OHS Strategy 2002–2012The reduction in the incidence rate of injury and musculoskeletal claims between the base period (2000–01 to 2002–03) and 2008–09 was 22%, which is below the rate required to meet the National OHS Strategy 2002–2012 long term target of a 40% improvement by 2012. The rate of decline in the incidence of claims will need to accelerate in future years if the target is to be achieved. Only two jurisdictions met the required rate of improvement: South Australia with 37% improvement and New South Wales with 28% improvement. The Australian Capital Territory was the only jurisdiction to record an increase in the incidence of serious injury and musculoskeletal claims from the base period.

The number of compensated fatalities recorded for 2008–09 is lower than in previous years, increasing the percentage improvement from the base period. The incidence of compensated fatalities from injury and musculoskeletal disorders decreased by 25% from the base period to 2008–09. The national incidence rate is ‘on target’ to meet the 20% reduction required by 2011–12, however there is a considerable amount of volatility in this measure and consistent improvement is required.

The National OHS Strategy also includes an aspirational target for Australia to have the lowest work-related traumatic fatality rate in the world by 2009. Analysis of international data indicates that in 2006–08, Australia recorded the seventh lowest injury fatality rate. Australia’s work-related fatality rate decreased from 2000–02 to 2004–06, and has increased slightly during 2005–07 to 2006–08, whereas many of the best performing countries in the world have experienced greater fluctuations in the rate of work-related fatality. It is unlikely that Australia will meet the aspirational goal unless substantial improvements are recorded in the next year.

Work health and safety performance There has been a fall of 14% in the rate of serious injury and disease claims over the past four years from 16.0 claims per 1000 employees reported in 2004–05 to 13.8 claims per 1000 employees reported in 2007–08. The preliminary workers’ compensation claims data for Australia indicate that in 2008–09 the incidence of serious injury and disease claims was 13.0 claims per 1000 employees. It is expected that this rate will increase by around 2% when the liability on all the claims submitted in 2008–09 is determined.

There have been 223 compensated fatalities recorded so far for Australia for 2008–09, of which 172 were from injury and musculoskeletal disorders and 51 were from other diseases. It is expected that this number will rise slightly when all claims are processed. The number of compensated fatalities has increased from 275 recorded in 2004–05 to 286 recorded in 2007–08.

The preliminary workers’ compensation claims data for New Zealand indicate that in 2008–09 the incidence of serious injury and disease claims was 12.9 claims per 1000 employees. New Zealand recorded a 1% decrease in incidence rates from 2004–05 to 2007–08.

There were 80 compensated fatalities in New Zealand in 2008–09. This represents a 15% decrease from 2007–08 and is the lowest level recorded for New Zealand in the past five years.

Body stressing continued to be the mechanism of injury/disease which accounted for the greatest proportion of claims (41%). Claim numbers for this group have decreased by 13% since 2004–05. This mechanism is receiving attention under the National OHS Strategy. Claims for Sound & pressure recorded the largest percentage increase of all mechanism groups: 20% over the period from 2004–05 to 2008–09. These claims

viii Workplace Relations Ministers’ Council

Summary of findings

represented 4% of all serious claims in 2008–09.

The highest incidence rates were recorded in the Agriculture, forestry & fishing industry (25.2 claims per 1000 employees) followed by the Transport & storage industry (25.0), the Manufacturing industry (23.4) and the Construction industry (21.8). These industries together with the Health & community services industry are receiving attention under the National OHS Strategy.

In 2008–09 over 114 000 workplace interventions were undertaken by work health and safety authorities around Australia. Australian jurisdictions issued 56 000 notices, 463 legal proceedings against businesses were finalised and $18 million in fines were handed out by the courts.

Workers’ compensation scheme performanceAustralia’s standardised average premium rate fell 30% from 2.15% of payroll in 2004–05 to 1.52% of payroll in 2008–09. All Australian jurisdictions recorded falls over this period. The Australian Government scheme recorded the lowest premium rate of all jurisdictions at 0.95% of payroll in 2008–09, while the Seacare scheme recorded the highest premium rate at 3.86% of payroll.

The New Zealand standardised average premium rate was 0.9% of payroll in 2008–09, a 1% decrease from the previous year. The New Zealand rate remains lower than Australia’s rate. One reason for the lower rate in New Zealand is that it does not provide the same level of coverage for mental disorders as the Australian schemes provide.

In 2008–09 the Australian average funding ratio for centrally funded schemes dropped to 106% from 124% in 2007–08. This decrease was mainly the result of poorer investment returns resulting from the global economic crisis. The Australian average funding ratio for privately underwritten schemes has risen to 122% from 120% in 2007– 08. Western Australia recorded a decrease from 139% to 128% during this period.

In 2008–09, Australian workers’ compensation schemes spent $6 936 million, of which 55% was paid direct to the injured worker in compensation for their injury or illness and 23% was spent on medical and other services costs. Insurance operations expenses made up 18% of the total expenditure by schemes, down from 29% in 2004–05. Regulation costs made up 1.8% of total scheme expenditure, while dispute resolution expenses accounted for 1.2% and other administration expenses accounted for 2.0%.

The 2008–09 durable return to work rates are the lowest on record. The durable return to work rate decreased from last year with 72% of workers returning to work in 2008– 09 following a work-related injury or disease. This is lower than the peak of 80% in 2005–06. The Northern Territory recorded the most substantial increase in the durable return to work rate (13 percentage point increase); improvements were also recorded in South Australia, Comcare and Tasmania. Seacare recorded the largest drop in the durable return to work rate (15 percentage point decrease).

The rate of disputation on claims rose slightly to 7.5% of all claims lodged in 2008–09 from 7.4% in 2007–08. Despite this slight increase, the disputation rate for 2008–09 remains lower than that recorded during 2004–05 to 2006–07. Seacare and Tasmania recorded the largest percentage falls in disputation rates since 2004–05. South Australia recorded the largest percentage increase, which is attributed predominantly to legislative changes to access to redemptions. While the percentage of disputes resolved within 3, 6 and 9 months has remained stable during the past five years, there has been a 23% decrease in the proportion of disputes resolved within one month.

Comparative Performance Monitoring 2008–09 1

Chapter 1 – Progress against the National OHS StrategyThe National OHS Strategy provides the framework for collective efforts to improve Australia’s work health and safety performance. The National OHS Strategy set national targets to reduce the incidence of work-related injury fatalities by at least 20% and reduce the incidence of workplace injury (including musculoskeletal disorders) by at least 40% by 30 June 2012.

A standard definition of ‘serious claims due to injury or musculoskeletal disorders’ has been used for analysis to enable greater comparability between jurisdictions. Serious claims include all fatalities, all permanent incapacity claims (as defined by the jurisdictions) and temporary claims for which one or more weeks of compensation has been recorded. This definition takes into account the different employer excesses that exist in the various schemes.

Achievements against the national targets for injury and fatality are measured using the National Data Set for Compensation-based Statistics (NDS). The baseline for the national targets is taken from the data for the three-year period 2000–01 to 2002–03. This move was motivated by the desire to publish jurisdictional level data where one year of data may not be typical. A three-year base period smooths much of this volatility, resulting in a more typical starting point at which to measure progress against the targets. While the base period data are considered stable, revisions are likely for the more recent years. To ensure a more accurate measure of improvement is calculated, the most recent year of data have been projected forward to indicate the likely incidence rate once updated data are received.

Since its adoption in May 2002, the National OHS Strategy has informed the work and strategic plans of all Australian work health and safety authorities as well as driving the work of Safe Work Australia in the area of work health and safety. Safe Work Australia is working to achieve the goals of the National OHS Strategy through a variety of means including driving national harmonisation of work health and safety legislation, developing a compliance and enforcement policy to ensure nationally consistent regulatory approaches across all jurisdictions, encouraging excellence in work health and safety through the National Safe Work Australia Awards and improving the collection and analysis of work health and safety data and research to inform the development or evaluation of work health and safety policies and programs.

National compliance and intervention campaigns initiated by the Heads of Workplace Safety Authorities (HWSA) demonstrate the continuation of coordinated national programs relating to the priority injury risks and industries under the National OHS Strategy. National campaigns undertaken in recent years covered a range of areas such as new and young workers in hospitality, large mobile plant, manual handling in Manufacturing, labour hire in the food processing industry, manual handling and slips and trips in hospitals, prevention of falls in Construction and guarding of machinery in Manufacturing. Campaigns currently being implemented by HWSA are targeted to increase the level of scaffold compliance within the Construction industry, reduce the incidence of manual tasks related injuries in the Retail, Wholesale and Transport & storage industries and managing aggressive behaviour in the Healthcare & community services sector.

All parties to the National OHS Strategy are committed to achieving a steady improvement in work health and safety practices and performance and a corresponding decline in both incidence and severity of work-related injuries.

2 Workplace Relations Ministers’ Council

Progress against the National OHS Strategy

Injury and musculoskeletal targetIndicator 1 shows there was a 21% decrease in the incidence rate of injury and musculoskeletal claims between the base period (2000–01 to 2002–03) and the projected 2008–09 data, which is below the rate of 28% improvement required to meet the long term target of a 40% improvement by 2012. The rate of decline in the incidence of claims will need to accelerate in future years if the target is to be achieved.Indicator 1 – Incidence rate of serious* compensated injury and musculoskeletal claims, Australia, base period (2000–01 to 2002–03) to 2008–09

* Includes accepted workers’ compensation claims for temporary incapacity involving one or more weeks compensation plus all claims for fatality and permanent incapacity.

Jurisdictional progressIndicator 2 shows how the jurisdictions are progressing towards the injury target. To be ‘on target’, jurisdictions would need to have recorded a 28% improvement from the base period. Only South Australia and New South Wales exceeded the required rate of improvement to meet the target. All other jurisdictions with the exception of the Australian Capital Territory recorded decreases in incidence rates since the introduction of the National OHS Strategy. Substantial improvements are required if these jurisdictions are to reach the target of a 40% reduction in the incidence rate of serious compensated injury and musculoskeletal claims by 2012.

Changes to scheme operations since the base period can affect the percentage improvements shown in this indicator. Achievement of the target may be more difficult in the Australian Capital Territory Private Scheme due to reforms introduced during the base period that resulted in a higher level of reporting of claims since 2001–02.

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

baseperiod

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

Cla

ims

per 1

000

empl

oyee

s

Actual Reduction required to meet target ProjectionActual 14.78 14.39 14.16 13.80 12.85 12.33 11.99 11.25


Indicator 2 – Incidence rates (claims per 1000 employees) and percentage improvement of serious* compensated injury and musculoskeletal claims by jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction Base period 2005–06 2006–07 2007–08 2008–09

preliminary2008–09 projected

Percentage improvement

(%)**

South Australia 18.3 16.3 14.6 12.4 10.9 11.6 36.5

New South Wales 17.1 13.3 12.5 12.5 12.0 12.3 28.1

Victoria 11.3 9.8 9.3 8.8 8.3 8.5 24.7

Australian Government 8.8 7.8 6.9 5.4 6.2 6.8 22.7

Seacare 36.3 32.1 27.9 23.9 26.0 29.9 17.7

Northern Territory 12.4 12.5 11.4 12.1 10.5 10.6 14.7

Queensland 16.6 15.7 15.9 16.3 14.8 14.8 10.7

Western Australia 12.5 12.3 12.2 12.2 11.1 11.5 8.1

Tasmania 16.2 15.9 15.7 14.6 14.4 14.9 8.0

Australian Capital Territory 11.4 12.4 11.6 11.5 11.7 12.3 -7.6

Australia 14.8 12.9 12.3 12.0 11.3 11.6 21.8

* Includes accepted workers’ compensation claims for temporary incapacity involving one or more weeks compensation plus all claims for fatality and permanent incapacity.

** Percentage improvement from base period (2000–01 to 2002–03) to 2008–09 projected.

Fatalities targetIndicator 3 shows progress towards the fatalities target. These data show that the incidence rate of compensated fatalities from injuries and musculoskeletal disorders decreased 25% from the base period. This is greater than the required result of a 14% reduction for 2008–09, indicating that Australia is on track to meet the target of a 20% reduction by 2011–12. However, as Indicator 3 shows, the volatility in this measure means that consistent improvement is still required to ensure the target is achieved. The most recent data update resulted in an increase in the number of fatalities recorded for 2007–08, resulting in a higher incidence rate than that published in the 11th edition of the CPM report. The fatality incidence rate for 2008–09 should be interpreted with caution.Note that a table of jurisdictional improvements in fatalities has not been included due to the volatility of these data. Information on the number of fatalities recorded by each jurisdiction can be found in Indicator 10. Indicator 3 – Incidence rates of compensated injury & musculoskeletal fatalities, Australia, base period (2000–01 to 2002–03) to 2008–09

1.40

1.60

1.80

2.00

2.20

2.40

2.60

2.80

baseperiod

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

Cla

ims

per 1

00 0

00 e

mpl

oyee

s

Actual Reduction required to meet target ProjectionActual 2.44 2.30 2.09 2.08 2.12 2.05 2.14 1.74


Progress against the National OHS Strategy

International comparison Following the first triennial review of the National OHS Strategy, WRMC adopted an additional aspirational goal of having the lowest rate of traumatic fatalities in the world by 2009. Analysis of injury fatality data using information published on the International Labor Office (ILO) website at laborsta.ilo.org was undertaken in 2004. The results of this analysis were published in a report titled Fatal Occupational Injuries — How does Australia compare internationally?, which can be accessed at safeworkaustralia.gov.au/swa/AboutUs/Publications/.

The aim of this report was to obtain a measure of the gap in performance between Australia and the best performing countries. Countries were included in this analysis if they had a lower incidence rate of fatalities than Australia as reported to the ILO. This resulted in most of the countries included in this comparison being European. The analysis undertaken in the report only used fatalities from injuries, making adjustments where possible for differences in scope and coverage. The data were then standardised against Australia to take account of different industry mixes and finally a three-year average was calculated to remove some of the volatility that results from working with small numbers.

This methodology has been used to calculate fatality incidence rates for indicator 4. As in the previous edition of the CPM report, Traumatic Injury Fatalities data, which are comparable with the data sources used in other countries have been used. Australia’s work-related fatality rate decreased from 2000–02 to 2004–06 and has increased slightly from 2005–07 to 2006–08. In comparison to Australia, the best performing countries in the world have experienced greater fluctuations in the rate of work-related fatality. While the gap between Australia and the better performing countries has reduced, Australia remains in seventh place and it is unlikely that we will meet this aspirational goal.

Other countries with similar economic profile to Australia are not included in this indicator due to their higher incidence rate of fatality. For example, the unstandardised fatality rate for Canada is above 6 deaths per 100 000 employees, while the unstandardised fatality rate for the United States of America is close to 4 deaths per 100 000 employees.

It should be noted that due to differences in scope and methodology, comparisons of occupational injury fatalities data between countries have many limitations. The areas of concern lie in the coverage of self-employed workers, the lack of data relating to road traffic fatalities and the incomplete coverage within the data of the working population. The adopted methodology has attempted to address these concerns but some issues have not been fully resolved and may impact on the final results.


Indicator 4 – Comparison of Australia’s work-related injury fatality rate with the best per-forming countries

1.001.201.401.601.802.002.202.402.602.803.003.203.403.603.804.00

2000-2002 2001-2003 2002-2004 2003-2005 2004-2006 2005-2007 2006-2008

Fata

litie

s pe

r 100

000

wor

kers

Australia Sweden UK DenmarkFinland Norway Switzerland New Zealand


Chapter 2 – Work health and safety performance The data used in this chapter are mainly accepted workers’ compensation claims lodged in each financial year. Workers’ compensation data are currently the most comprehensive source of information for measuring work health and safety performance. While there are some limitations, most notably that the data reflect the injury experience of employees only and under-report the incidence of disease, workers’ compensation data still provide a good indication of work health and safety trends. For fatalities, these data are supplemented with the data from the Notified Fatalities dataset and the National Coroners Information System.

Serious claims As there are different employer excesses across the various schemes, a standard reporting definition of a ‘serious claim’ has been adopted for analysis. Serious claims include all fatalities, all permanent incapacity claims (as defined by the jurisdictions) and temporary incapacity claims for which one or more weeks of compensation has been recorded. Refer to page 43 of Appendix 1 - Explanatory notes for further information.

Due to the different number of employees in each jurisdiction, rates have been calculated to assist with comparisons. Incidence rates compare jurisdictions on a ‘per employee’ basis and frequency rates allow a comparison on a ‘per hour worked’ basis.

Indicator 5 shows the Australian incidence rate for serious claims has steadily declined over the past three years, decreasing 14% from 16.0 to 13.8 claims per 1000 employees between 2004–05 and 2007–08. Preliminary data for 2008–09 indicates an incidence rate of 13.0 claims per 1000 employees. While it is expected that this rate will rise when updated data are available, the preliminary rate for 2008–09 indicates a continuing improvement in incidence rates.

Substantial falls in incidence rates from 2004–05 to 2007–08 were recorded by the Australian Government (down 41%), South Australia (down 28%), New South Wales (down 18%), Victoria (down 13%), Western Australia (down10%) and Tasmania (down 8%). Seacare recorded the highest incidence rate for 2007–08 at 27.3 claims per 1000 employees with the Australian Government recording the lowest rate at 6.6 claims per 1000 employees.

For the Seacare scheme, 2008–09 was a disappointing year with a 12% increase in the incidence rates of serious claims. The increase in the incidence of serious claims represents a significant challenge for the industry and the authority in the coming year.

These data are higher than those shown in Chapter 1 as they include all injury and all disease claims. The National OHS Strategy measurement only includes injury and musculoskeletal disease claims, however these two indicators show similar levels of improvement.

Over the period 2004–05 to 2007–08, New Zealand recorded a 1% decrease in incidence rates, dropping from 14.5 to 14.3 claims per 1000 employees. The preliminary data show a further 10% decrease to 12.9 claims per 1000 employees. This drop in New Zealand incidence rates was due to the decrease in compensated claims resulting from new government focus on controlling costs. Also, the methodology used in estimating the number of employees and hours worked was recently improved resulting in an increase in the number of employees.


Indicator 5 – Incidence rates of serious* injury and disease claims by jurisdiction

* Includes all accepted workers’ compensation claims involving temporary incapacity of one or more weeks compensation plus all claims for fatality and permanent incapacity.

Indicator 6 shows that in the 2008–09 preliminary data, the Australian frequency rate was 7.8 claims per one million hours worked. While the frequency rate data show a similar level of improvement for Australia, there are differences in the order of the jurisdictions: Tasmania recorded the highest frequency rate of 10.5 claims per one million hours worked but only the third highest incidence rate. Seacare also changed position due to the 24-hour basis on which their frequency rates are calculated. Refer to page 44 of Appendix 1 - Explanatory notes for further information.

Indicator 6 – Frequency rates of serious* injury and disease claims by jurisdiction


0

5

10

15

20

25

Cla

ims

per 1

000

empl

oyee

s

2004-05 29.2 18.0 18.1 17.8 20.5 13.9 14.9 14.0 12.1 11.2 16.0 14.5

2005-06 36.5 17.8 18.1 15.4 18.9 13.8 13.6 14.4 11.8 10.0 14.9 14.6

2006-07 30.8 17.9 17.6 14.6 17.0 12.8 13.3 12.7 11.1 8.7 14.2 14.9

2007-08 27.3 18.2 16.6 14.6 14.7 12.6 13.4 13.5 10.5 6.6 13.8 14.3

2008-09p 30.5 16.7 16.5 14.2 12.8 12.7 12.1 11.7 9.9 7.3 13.0 12.9

2008-09p Aus Av 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0

S'care Qld Tas NSW SA ACT WA NT Vic Aus Gov

Aus Total NZ

0

3

6

9

12

15

Cla

ims

per m

illio

n ho

urs

wor

ked

2004-05 11.2 10.6 10.2 8.5 12.3 8.7 6.7 7.8 7.2 6.4 9.4 7.9

2005-06 11.5 10.7 9.0 8.6 11.4 7.9 8.4 8.2 7.1 5.6 8.8 8.1

2006-07 11.0 10.7 8.6 7.8 10.3 7.8 6.6 7.0 6.7 4.9 8.4 8.2

2007-08 10.4 10.9 8.5 8.0 9.0 7.7 5.9 7.5 6.4 3.7 8.2 7.9

2008-09p 10.5 10.1 8.4 8.0 7.9 7.0 6.8 6.5 6.1 4.1 7.8 7.2

2008-09p Aus Av 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

Tas Qld NSW ACT SA WA S'care NT Vic Aus Gov

Aus Total NZ


Work health and safety performance

Long term claims - twelve or more weeks of compensationIndicator 7 shows the incidence rate for long term injury and disease claims in Australia decreased by 8% from 4.0 claims per 1000 employees in 2004–05 to 3.6 claims per 1000 employees in 2007–08. While the 2008–09 data show a continuing decrease these data should be treated with caution due to the shorter development time these claims have had compared to claims from previous years. On average, 26% of serious claims result in twelve or more weeks of compensation.Indicator 7 – Incidence rates of long term (12 weeks or more compensation) injury and disease claims by jurisdiction

Tasmania, Queensland, Northern Territory and Seacare were the only Australian jurisdictions to record increases in the incidence rate of long term claims over the period 2004–05 to 2007–08. New Zealand recorded a 11% increase over this period, though its rate remains lower than that of Australia. Indicator 8 – Frequency rates of long term (12 weeks or more compensation) injury and disease claims by jurisdiction

The frequency rates of long term claims in Indicator 8 show a similar pattern to the incidence rates. There are no differences in order between the jurisdictions.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Cla

ims

per 1

000

empl

oyee

s

2004-05 13.3 4.0 4.8 5.4 3.4 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.1 3.2 4.0 2.8

2005-06 17.2 4.0 4.4 5.3 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.6 3.3 3.0 3.8 3.0

2006-07 13.8 4.2 3.6 5.2 3.7 3.6 3.4 3.4 2.8 2.5 3.7 3.2

2007-08 13.4 4.2 3.7 4.3 3.8 3.8 3.5 3.3 3.2 1.7 3.6 3.1

2008-09p 14.3 3.9 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.3 3.1 2.9 2.3 1.5 3.2 2.7

2008-09p Aus Av 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2

S'care Qld ACT SA Tas WA NSW Vic NT Aus Gov

Aus Total NZ

0

1

2

3

4

Cla

ims

per m

illion

hou

rs w

orke

d

2004-05 3.1 2.4 2.9 2.1 3.3 2.2 2.2 2.3 1.7 1.8 2.3 1.5

2005-06 4.0 2.4 2.8 2.3 3.2 2.1 2.0 2.2 1.9 1.7 2.2 1.7

2006-07 3.0 2.5 2.2 2.3 3.1 2.1 2.0 2.1 1.6 1.4 2.2 1.8

2007-08 2.9 2.5 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.0 2.1 1.7

2008-09p 3.2 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.3 0.9 1.9 1.5

2008-09p Aus Av 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9

S'care Qld ACT Tas SA WA NSW Vic NT Aus Gov

Aus Total NZ


Duration of absence The duration of absence for claims provides one indicator of the severity of injuries occurring in Australia. Indicator 9 shows the variation across the jurisdictions in the percentage of claims involving selected periods of compensation. These data are based on claims lodged in 2006–07, which is the most recent year that reliable data are available for this indicator.

Indicator 9 – Serious* claims: Percentage involving selected periods of compensation, 2006–07

Jurisdiction Less than 6 weeks

6 weeks or more

12 weeks or more

26 weeks or more

52 weeks or more

% % % % %New South Wales 63 37 24 14 8

Victoria 54 46 31 18 11

Queensland 61 39 23 11 4

Western Australia 58 42 27 16 9

South Australia 57 43 30 20 14

Tasmania 62 38 21 10 6

Northern Territory 60 40 22 11 5

Australian Capital Territory 57 43 28 16 8

Australian Government 55 45 28 15 8

Seacare 32 68 45 22 7

Australian Average 60 40 26 15 8

New Zealand 85 15 13 7 7


These data show that 60% of claims in Australia resulted in less than six weeks of compensation. The jurisdictional rates were similar except for Seacare, which recorded 32% of claims being resolved in this time. Injured workers in the Seacare scheme face unique problems in attempting to return to work, which need to be considered when interpreting the Seacare results in this indicator. Refer to page 51 of Appendix 1 - Explanatory notes for further information.

South Australia had the highest percentage of claims continuing past 52 weeks of compensation (14% of claims) followed by Victoria (11%). Western Australia had 9% of claims continuing beyond 52 weeks. Queensland had only 4% of claims continuing past 52 weeks of compensation, partly due to the nature of the Queensland scheme. The Northern Territory recorded only 5% of claims continuing past 52 weeks.

The New Zealand scheme finalised a higher proportion of claims within six weeks than did Australia.



Compensated fatalities Indicator 10 shows that in 2008–09 in Australia there were 223 accepted compensated claims for a work-related fatality, of which 172 fatalities were due to injury and musculoskeletal disorders and 51 due to other diseases. The number of fatalities is expected to rise as more claims lodged in 2008–09 are accepted. There was a 4% increase in the number of compensated fatalities in Australia from 2004–05 to 2007– 08.

New Zealand recorded 80 compensated fatalities in 2008–09. This is the lowest number recorded for New Zealand during the past five years. Over the period from 2004–05 to 2007–08 New Zealand recorded a 17% drop in the number of compensated fatalities.

Fatalities are recorded in the NDS against the date of lodgement of the claim, not the date of death. Data revisions from previous years can occur where a claim is lodged in one year but not accepted until after the data are collected for that year or for an injury or disease in one year where the employee dies from that injury or disease in a subsequent year. This is particularly the case with disease fatalities, where considerable time could elapse between diagnosis resulting in a claim being lodged and death.

Workers’ compensation data are known to understate the true number of fatalities from work-related causes, particularly deaths from occupational diseases such as asbestosis and mesothelioma where compensation is often sought through separate mechanisms including common law.

Safe Work Australia is currently reporting annually on mesothelioma using data from the National Cancer Statistics Clearing House. The most recent of these publications Mesothelioma in Australia: Incidence 1982 to 2006, Mortality 1997 to 2007 is available from safeworkaustralia.gov.au.

Deaths in the agricultural and construction sectors are also likely to be understated in the NDS data due to the higher proportion of self-employed workers in these industries who are not covered by workers’ compensation. A more accurate representation of injury fatalities is available in the Work-Related Traumatic Injury Fatalities, Australia 2007–08 report, which in addition to workers’ compensation data uses coronial information and notified fatalities data to provide a more accurate estimate of the number of fatalities from work-related injuries. The report is available from safeworkaustralia.gov.au.

As compensation may be sought through the Compulsory Third Party insurance scheme for motor vehicles, work-related deaths from road traffic accidents may also be understated. Note that fatalities occurring from a journey to or from work are not included in these statistics.

Detailed information on the causes and other characteristics of fatalities reported through the NDS is contained in the Compendium of Workers’ Compensation Statistics, which can be found at safeworkaustralia.gov.au.


Indicator 10 – Compensated Fatalities by jurisdiction

Jurisdiction 2004–05 2005–06 2006–07 2007–08 2008–09p 5yr Average

Injury and musculoskeletal disordersNew South Wales 56 62 47 45 44 51

Victoria 52 46 59 45 29 46

Queensland 40 46 43 68 55 50

Western Australia 16 16 25 19 21 19

South Australia 8 13 7 8 8 9

Tasmania 4 6 4 6 5 5

Northern Territory 3 3 2 9 6 5

Australian Capital Territory 3 0 1 3 2 2

Australian Government 3 2 7 6 2 4

Seacare 0 0 0 0 0 0

Australian Total 185 194 195 209 172 191

New Zealand 58 62 65 57 55 59

Other diseasesNew South Wales 8 13 7 14 15 11

Victoria 16 12 11 9 5 11

Queensland* 53 47 55 34 23 42

Western Australia 4 5 1 2 3 3

South Australia 1 2 3 1 0 1

Tasmania 0 1 0 2 0 2

Northern Territory 0 1 0 1 0 1

Australian Capital Territory 1 2 0 0 1 1

Australian Government 7 9 7 14 4 8

Seacare 0 0 0 0 0 0

Australian Total 90 92 84 77 51 79

New Zealand 55 54 69 37 25 48

Total Australia 275 286 279 286 223 270

New Zealand 113 116 134 94 80 107* The majority of compensated fatalities in Queensland are due to mesothelioma or asbestosis. Queensland compensates more of these fatalities through their scheme than is the case in other jurisdictions where compensation is more often sought through separate mechanisms including common law.



Notified fatalitiesWhile workers’ compensation data are currently the most extensive source of information for measuring work health and safety performance, there are some limitations. Other data sources can be used to supplement workers’ compensation data and provide a more complete picture of work-related fatalities. One alternative data source is the Notified Fatalities dataset.

These data are collated from the work-related traumatic fatalities that are notified to jurisdictional work health and safety authorities under their legislation. The use of these data addresses some of the limitations of the compensated data by capturing fatalities occurring in categories of workers not covered for workers’ compensation, such as the self-employed. This data source was established in July 2003. More information about the Notified Fatalities collection can be found at safeworkaustralia.gov.au.

Indicator 11a shows that the number of notified fatalities increased by 18% for workers and more than doubled for bystanders between 2004–05 and 2008–09. Indicator 11a – Notified work-related traumatic fatalities, Australia

2004–05 2005–06 2006–07 2007–08 2008–09

Worker 128 144 149 132 151

Bystander 12 9 17 19 26

Total 140 153 166 151 177

Note that Indicator 11a under reports work-related road traffic fatalities as these fatalities are not notifiable in all jurisdictions, whereas Indicator 10 does not include deaths of persons who are not classed as employees, such as self-employed workers and bystanders. While the NDS and Notified Fatalities datasets cannot be directly compared, the compensation data indicates a decrease in fatalities for employees in 2008–09, whereas the reverse trend is evident in the Notified Fatalities dataset. However, the NDS data for 2008–09 is preliminary and likely to increase as more claims are accepted, while the Notified Fatalities data are not likely to increase. It is important to note that Indicator 11a is a volatile measure and can change from year to year.


Work-related traumatic injury fatalities There is currently no single national data collection system that identifies all work- related injury fatalities. This means that the exact number of people who die as a result of work-related activities in Australia is difficult to accurately establish. The Traumatic Injury Fatalities dataset provides the best estimate of work-related injury deaths in Australia.

The Traumatic Injury Fatalities dataset incorporates information from three datasets that contain information on work-related injury fatalities to determine an estimate of the number of workers and bystanders killed each year from work-related injury. These datasets are the NDS, the Notified Fatalities dataset and the National Coroners Information System (NCIS). Information from media articles is also used to identify additional deaths which may be work-related. These deaths tend to come from incidents investigated by Commonwealth agencies i.e. plane and rail crashes and incidents involving the maritime industry. All such cases are matched with information in the NCIS to determine work-relatedness. This data source was established in 2003. Further information on the Traumatic Injury Fatalities collection along with annual reports can be found at safeworkaustralia.gov.au.

Indicator 11b shows between 2003–04 and 2007–08 there was a 10% increase in the number of workers killed while working. Between 2003–04 and 2007–08, there was a 4% increase in non-road crash fatalities and a 24% increase in fatalities as a result of a road crash. Indicator 11b – Number of worker fatalities, Australia

2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 2006–07 2007–08

Non-road crash 187 161 197 192 195

Road crash 76 90 89 105 94

Total 263 251 286 297 289



Claims by mechanism of injury/disease Claim patterns can be analysed using the Type of Occurrence Classification System (TOOCS) which is a series of codes providing information on the cause of the incident and the type of injury or disease sustained. One part of this system is the Mechanism of injury/disease which is intended to identify the action, exposure or event which was the direct cause of the most serious injury or disease. More information on the TOOCS can be found on the Safe Work Australia website at safeworkaustralia.gov.au.

Indicator 12 shows the number of serious claims by Mechanism of injury or disease over the past five years. Under the National OHS Strategy the following are priority mechanisms: Body stressing; Falls, trips & slips of a person; Being hit by moving objects; and Hitting objects with a part of the body are receiving national focus. The serious claims data indicate that the priority mechanisms account for 83% of claims. In particular, Body stressing remains the most common cause of claims, accounting for 41% of the 128 734 serious claims in 2008–09. Excluding the preliminary 2008–09 data, the largest decreases in claims over the four years from 2004–05 to 2007–08 were recorded for the mechanisms of Mental stress (down 18%), Chemical & other substances (down 18%) and Other & unspecified mechanisms (down 16%). However, these categories accounted for only 5%, 1% and 6% of all serious claims respectively in 2007–08. Claims due to the mechanism of Sound & pressure increased 8%, however this category accounted for 3% of all claims in 2007–08. More information on the progress of these priority mechanisms against the National OHS Strategy targets can be found at safeworkaustralia.gov.au.

More detailed information on claims by Mechanism of injury or disease can be found in the Compendium of Workers’ Compensation Statistics, which can be found at safeworkaustralia.gov.au.Indicator 12 – Mechanism of injury or disease: number of serious* claims by year, Australia


** Includes vehicle accidents.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Biological factors

Chemicals & other substances

Heat, radiation & electricity

Sound & pressure

Mental stress

**Other & unspecified mechanisms of injury

Hitting objects with a part of the body

Being hit by moving objects

Falls, trips & slips of a person

Body stressing

Number of Claims ('000)

2004-052005-062006-072007-082008-09p


Claims by size of business

Indicator 13 compares the incidence of serious compensated claims by size of business for 2004–05 and 2008–09. Eight Australian jurisdictions and New Zealand collect compensation data by size of business; however there are differences in the methodologies used by schemes to collect this information and caution should be exercised when making jurisdictional comparisons. This indicator reports on the private sector only as it excludes those industry sectors which are wholly or substantially public sector industries i.e. Government, Administration and Defence, Health and Community Services, Education and Finance and Insurance.

In 2004–05, the lowest incidence rates were recorded for businesses with 500+ employees for all jurisdictions with the exception of Tasmania and Seacare, where the lowest incidence rates were recorded for businesses with 1–4 and 100–499 employees respectively. In 2008–09, for all jurisdictions except Seacare, businesses with 500+ employees had the lowest incidence rates of compensated claims. Furthermore, with the exception of the Northern Territory, all jurisdictions recorded a decrease in the incidence rate of claims for this size of business during this period. For all size of business groups in New Zealand, the incidence rate of claims remained stable between 2004–05 and 2008–09.Indicator 13 – Size of business: incidence rates (claims per 1000 employees) of serious* claims by jurisdiction**

1–4 employees

5–19 employees

20–99 employees

100–499 employees

500 or more employees

2004–05New South Wales 24.1 20.5 24.7 25.9 7.6

Victoria 10.1 10.3 17.4 24.3 8.5

Western Australia 22.6 15.3 18.9 27.3 1.8

South Australia 22.4 20.1 31.7 34.4 11.1

Tasmania 10.9 18.0 22.8 32.1 11.9

Northern Territory 27.7 31.9 22.5 17.5 1.3

Aus Capital Territory 8.2 13.7 25.5 26.1 6.2

Seacare n.p n.p 35.0 34.3 42.2

Australia*** 18.7 16.4 22.2 26.4 7.5

New Zealand 17.6 13.3 16.0 14.9 17.1

2008–09pNew South Wales 20.6 16.7 20.6 21.6 6.9

Victoria 8.4 8.6 14.8 20.8 7.3

Western Australia 15.2 13.0 17.5 27.1 1.6

South Australia 14.0 14.0 22.4 27.7 8.3

Tasmania 10.7 17.0 23.0 27.1 10.1

Northern Territory 22.4 27.6 20.2 10.9 1.3

Aus Capital Territory 9.2 12.7 24.7 23.3 5.1

Seacare n.p n.p 8.6 37.4 18.6

Australia*** 15.1 13.5 18.7 23.0 6.4

New Zealand 16.0 13.1 15.0 13.3 17.6* Includes all accepted workers’ compensation claims involving temporary incapacity of one or more weeks compensation plus all claims for fatality and permanent incapacity in the private sector.

** This indicator shows patterns at two points in time. Selecting different points may show a different pattern.*** Consists only of Australian jurisdictions listed above.


Chapter 3 – Work health and safety compliance and enforcement activities Jurisdictions encourage work health and safety compliance using a variety of mechanisms ranging from education, advice and information through to prosecution. Inspectors appointed under legislation may visit workplaces for the purpose of providing advice, investigating accidents or dangerous occurrences and ensuring compliance with the work health and safety legislation. Where breaches are detected the inspector, based on risk, may issue notices or escalate the action to formal procedures, which are addressed through the courts for serious contravention of the legislation. Indicator 14 provides details on specific work health and safety compliance and enforcement activity undertaken by jurisdictions for each year from 2004–05 to 2008–09.

In 2008–09 there were over 114 000 workplace interventions undertaken around Australia. Australian jurisdictions issued 56 000 notices, 463 legal proceedings against businesses were finalised and $18 million in fines were handed out by the courts.

Total workplace interventions consist of the sum of all proactive and reactive workplace interventions. Most interventions in the mining sector are not included in these data because mining inspectors in most jurisdictions use their own reporting mechanisms.

Proactive interventions are defined as all workplace visits that have not resulted from a complaint or workplace incident. They include all planned interventions, routine workplace visits, inspections/audits and industry forums/presentations (where an inspector delivers educational advice or information as well as field inspection).

Reactive interventions are defined as attendances at work sites following notifiable work injuries, dangerous occurrences or issuing of notices where comprehensive investigation summaries (briefs of evidence) are completed. Not all requests for investigations or incidents result in a formal investigation. A range of enquiries may be made in order to inform a decision on whether an investigation is warranted.

Repeat visits and the number of inspectors in attendance are counted separately for both proactive and reactive workplace interventions. However, in Western Australia inspectors in attendance are not counted separately. Please refer to page 46 of Appendix 1 - Explanatory notes for more details.

Indicator 14 shows that the total number of workplace interventions has declined after reaching a peak in 2005–06.

In 2008–09, the commencement of the Workplace Health and Safety Act in the Northern Territory presented a significant change for regulators and stakeholders. The drop in workplace interventions is an indicator of the resources directed toward staff training in light of the new provisions. The focus of regulatory activity during 2008–09 was on education and information about changed obligations under the new Act.

In 2008–09, there was a sharp rise in proactive interventions in Tasmania due to greater emphasis on state and national programs. There were a number of programs designed to get inspectors out in the field, for example the Expect the Inspector program and an audit component of national projects.

The changes in Comcare’s proactive and reactive interventions between 2007–08 and 2008–09 were due to an increase in inspectors and to a greater focus on worksite attendance as opposed to intervention activities being undertaken from the office.


Work health and safety compliance and enforcement activities

The New South Wales approach to compliance and enforcement includes a variety of advisory and enforcement activities that all aim to ensure compliance with legislative obligations, and improve the capability of businesses to manage work health and safety.

In Queensland, the number of proactive visits has declined because there is now an emphasis on activities like workshops, presentations, seminars and forums that reach a greater number of duty holders than one on one site visits. While there was a reduction in reactive interventions in 2008–09, reactive interventions for serious events has remained stable. A more strategic approach has been adopted of only responding to the most serious or contentious of complaints with a site visit. A stronger emphasis on more serious events resulted in an increase in the number of legal proceedings undertaken in 2008–09 compared with 2007–08. The changes to the inspectorate service delivery model have also affected the number of notices issued in 2008–09.

Where interventions by an inspector identify a breach under Work Health and Safety legislation, a notice may be issued. In 2008–09, the total number of notices issued by the Australian jurisdictions reached the lowest level in the past five years. The use of infringement notices, sometimes referred to as on-the-spot fines is the least used of the three notice types. In 2008–09, 1197 of this type of notice were handed out around Australia compared to 5489 prohibition notices and 49 534 improvement notices.

Data for notices cannot be directly compared across jurisdictions as notices are defined by legislation in each jurisdiction. In some instances a single notice may be issued for multiple breaches of the legislation while in other instances multiple notices are issued for each breach identified.

In the Northern Territory, on reviewing the use and effectiveness of enforcement tools a strategic decision was made to focus on capacity building and education through improvement and advisory notices rather than infringement notices. This strategy has been effective in lifting knowledge and compliance in a co-operative way.

In 2008–09, 20 543 workplace interventions were carried out in New Zealand and 765 notices were issued, a slight increase from 2007–08 where 611 notices were issued to employers.

The number of field active inspectors employed around Australia has remained relatively stable between 2005–06 and 2008–09. Field active inspectors are defined as gazetted inspectors whose role is to spend the majority of their time enforcing provisions of the Work Health and Safety legislation directly with workplaces as well as, in some jurisdictions, engaging in other activities to improve work health and safety capabilities of businesses and workplaces i.e. a compliance field role. They include managers of the inspectorate regardless of whether they are undertaking a field active role. Current vacancies are included in these numbers and mines inspectors have been excluded from the data due to different legislation operating across jurisdictions. Due to this definition it is possible that the number of field active inspectors shown in this report may differ to inspectorate numbers shown in jurisdictional reports.

A conviction, order or agreement is defined (with or without penalty) once it has been recorded against a company or individual, in the judicial system. All legal proceedings recorded in the reference year are counted regardless of when the initial legal action commenced. Data for Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory is limited to the number of successful prosecutions resulting in a conviction, fine or both. Queensland legislation does not allow for agreements, while Western Australian legislation does not provide for orders or agreements.


In New South Wales, substantial decreases in the number of legal proceedings and the total amount of fines awarded by the courts were recorded in 2008–09. This trend is an outcome of an integrated prevention and compliance approach where WorkCover works cooperatively with industry to prevent injury and illness, and sanctions are only applied where necessary.

As a result of the decreases in New South Wales, the national number of legal proceedings finalised and legal proceedings resulting in a conviction, order or agreement reached the lowest point during the past five years.

The total amount of fines awarded by the courts in 2008–09 reached $18 million, a 6% increase from last year. Information on penalty provisions can be found in the publication Comparison of OHS Arrangements in Australia and New Zealand available on the web at deewr.gov.au/WorkplaceRelations/WRMC/Pages/Reports.aspx. In some instances the courts declare that penalty amounts are to remain confidential. Therefore the data recorded in Indicator 14 are only those amounts known publicly.


Work health and safety compliance and enforcement activities

Indi

cato

r 14

– W

ork

heal

th a

nd s

afet

y co

mpl

ianc

e an

d en

forc

emen

t act

ivity

by

juris

dict

ion

NSW

Vic

Qld

WA

SATa

sN

TA

CT

Aus

Gov

aSe

acar

eTo

tal A

usN

ZTo

tal

wor

kpla

ce

inte

rven

tions

2004

–05

n/a

41 8

4225

175

14 5

2121

841

6 96

44

384

2 47

620

327

8c 1

17 6

8420

203

2005

–06

n/a

41 1

6330

780

15 2

5618

907

6 50

65

522

3 96

018

920

6c 1

22 4

8920

126

2006

–07

n/a

42 9

2430

191

12 9

6919

893

3 53

75

566

2 00

826

423

9c 1

17 5

9116

703

2007

–08

n/a

38 5

7633

277

12 1

6817

752

3 84

1d 4

437

1 46

3b 5

7321

1c 1

12 2

9819

689

2008

–09

n/a

42 8

1424

770

11 3

2923

339

6 04

23

517

1 50

0b 8

7422

2c 1

14 4

0720

543

Num

ber o

f pr

oact

ive

wor

kpla

ce

inte

rven

tions

2004

–05

n/a

e 33

601

e 19

133

f 8 8

2310

081

h 2 8

573

597

n/a

f 133

275

c 78

500

8 96

2

2005

–06

n/a

e 27

834

e 26

294

f 8 8

419

075

h 2 9

534

623

n/a

f 113

201

c 79

934

10 0

47

2006

–07

n/a

e 27

103

e 25

536

f 6 7

14g 6

075

2 37

84

624

n/a

f 93

228

c 72

751

6 85

4

2007

–08

n/a

e 23

836

e 29

252

f 5 9

835

745

2 37

53

641

n/a

f,b14

218

7c 7

1 16

18

852

2008

–09

n/a

e 25

370

e 21

938

f 6 4

907

468

4 51

82

966

n/a

f,b10

721

0c 6

9 06

79

274

Num

ber o

f re

activ

e w

orkp

lace

in

terv

entio

ns

2004

–05

n/a

8 24

16

042

f 5 6

9811

760

h 4 1

0778

7n/

af 7

03

c 36

708

11 2

41

2005

–06

n/a

13 3

294

486

f 6 4

159

832

h 3 5

5389

9n/

af 7

65

c 38

595

10 0

79

2006

–07

n/a

15 8

214

655

f 6 2

55g 1

3 81

81

159

942

n/a

f 171

11c 4

2 83

29

849

2007

–08

n/a

14 6

264

025

f 6 1

8512

007

1 46

679

6n/

af,b

431

23c 3

9 55

910

837

2008

–09

n/a

16 8

142

832

f 4 8

3915

871

1 52

455

1n/

af,b

767

12c 4

3 21

011

269

Num

ber o

f in

fring

emen

t no

tices

issu

ed

2004

–05

1 65

2i n

/a46

7i n

/ai n

/an/

a7

8i n

/a1

2 13

532

2005

–06

1 19

5i n

/a49

9i n

/ai n

/an/

a47

28i n

/a0

1 76

920

2006

–07

726

i n/a

614

i n/a

i n/a

n/a

173

8i n

/a0

1 52

123

2007

–08

620

i n/a

639

i n/a

i n/a

3720

113

i n/a

01

510

9

2008

–09

686

i n/a

452

i n/a

i n/a

490

10i n

/a0

1 19

75

Num

ber o

f im

prov

emen

t no

tices

issu

ed

2004

–05

18 2

1312

117

13 3

4812

379

4 68

842

317

163

126

61 3

6610

691

2005

–06

14 8

3211

168

16 4

4511

679

3 57

329

749

427

1219

58 5

011

743

2006

–07

13 2

4312

040

14 5

8310

249

3 25

818

830

137

3717

53 7

821

345

2007

–08

13 1

0910

279

14 2

089

724

2 32

816

113

612

918

1650

108

356

2008

–09

10 8

3218

363

7 58

49

834

2 39

616

920

999

3117

49 5

3457

6

Num

ber o

f pr

ohib

ition

no

tices

issu

ed

2004

–05

1 42

12

308

1 78

896

489

926

614

6620

97

755

745

2005

–06

1 21

21

876

2 22

070

862

312

554

6810

66

902

417

2006

–07

1 12

71

538

2 40

662

973

210

565

576

46

669

549

2007

–08

994

1 04

32

703

676

588

113

6194

193

6 29

424

6

2008

–09

767

1 07

81

991

721

630

112

6910

116

45

489

184


Indi

cato

r 14

– W

ork

heal

th a

nd s

afet

y co

mpl

ianc

e an

d en

forc

emen

t act

ivity

by

juris

dict

ion continued

NSW

Vic

Qld

WA

SATa

sN

TA

CT

Aus

Gov

Seac

are

Tota

l Aus

NZ

Num

ber o

f fie

ld a

ctiv

e in

spec

tors

2004

–05

301

236

j n/a

9593

2712

1216

379

516

6

2005

–06

301

227

229

9793

2912

1222

31

025

157

2006

–07

313

225

225

9993

3012

645

31

051

178

2007

–08

314

212

217

9993

2912

1447

31

040

189

2008

–09

314

218

235

9993

3112

1160

31

076

189

Num

ber o

f fie

ld a

ctiv

e in

spec

tors

pe

r 10

000

empl

oyee

s

2004

–05

1.1

1.1

n/a

1.1

1.4

1.4

1.3

0.9

0.6

8.7

0.9

1.0

2005

–06

1.0

1.0

1.4

1.1

1.4

1.5

1.3

0.9

0.8

8.2

1.1

0.9

2006

–07

1.1

1.0

1.3

1.1

1.4

1.5

1.2

0.4

1.4

8.5

1.1

1.0

2007

–08

1.0

0.9

1.2

1.0

1.3

1.4

1.2

1.0

1.3

7.5

1.1

1.1

2008

–09

1.1

0.9

1.3

1.0

1.3

1.5

1.1

0.9

1.7

6.4

1.1

1.1

Num

ber

of le

gal

proc

eedi

ngs

final

ised

2004

–05

k 317

188

190

5130

90

m14

0m1

800

89

2005

–06

l 348

136

174

4753

130

m19

1m2

793

49

2006

–07

l 303

107

126

3060

232

m6

1m0

658

59

2007

–08

l 185

125

102

2657

2410

m2

0m0

531

41

2008

–09

l 98

119

133

2166

135

m3

2m3

463

64

Num

ber

of le

gal

proc

eedi

ngs

resu

lting

in

a co

nvic

tion,

or

der o

r ag

reem

ent

2004

–05

l 302

158

156

4831

70

110

171

411

9

2005

–06

l 340

121

143

4148

130

50

071

179

2006

–07

l 300

8710

229

5616

22

10

595

80

2007

–08

l 182

107

8323

5118

104

01

479

73

2008

–09

l 96

107

102

1862

65

32

140

269

Tota

l am

ount

of

fine

s aw

arde

d by

th

e co

urts

($

’000

)

2004

–05

$11

500

$3 2

94$3

344

$457

$439

$74

$0$3

2$0

$0$1

9 14

1N

Z$1

859

2005

–06

$13

878

$3 5

32$3

823

$383

$1 0

42$1

73$0

$134

$0$0

$22

965

NZ$

1 92

9

2006

–07

$11

086

$1 7

16$2

953

$457

$1 2

99$2

36$2

3$1

35$1

98$0

$18

103

NZ$

1 75

1

2007

–08

$8 6

00$3

239

$2 6

86$6

85$1

176

$188

$179

$177

$0$0

$16

929

NZ$

1 55

3

2008

–09

$4 6

02$6

796

$3 2

47$4

70$1

365

$81

$693

$165

$375

$100

$17

894

NZ$

1 92

7

a Fo

r the

yea

rs p

rior t

o 20

07–0

8, A

ustra

lian

Gov

ernm

ent d

ata

cann

ot b

e co

mpa

red

dire

ctly

with

the

othe

r jur

isdi

ctio

ns. F

or m

ore

info

rmat

ion

plea

se s

ee p

age

46 o

f App

endi

x 1.

b The

cha

nge

in th

e re

porte

d nu

mbe

rs o

f pro

activ

e an

d re

activ

e in

terv

entio

ns in

200

7–08

and

200

8–09

refle

cts

the

impl

emen

tatio

n of

repo

rting

spe

cific

atio

ns in

line

with

CP

M c

riter

ia. c T

otal

s ex

clud

e N

ew S

outh

Wal

es

data

. d The

dec

reas

e is

due

to N

orth

ern

Terr

itory

Wor

kSaf

e ta

king

resp

onsi

bilit

y fo

r min

es in

200

7–08

the

data

for w

hich

is n

ot in

clud

ed. e D

oes

not i

nclu

de in

dust

ry fo

rum

s/ p

rese

ntat

ions

whe

re

an in

spec

tion

also

occ

urs.

f The

num

ber o

f ins

pect

ors

in a

ttend

ance

are

not

cou

nted

sep

arat

ely.

g Sou

th A

ustra

lia im

plem

ente

d a

chan

ge in

the

clas

sific

atio

n of

pro

activ

e an

d re

activ

e in

terv

entio

ns

mor

e in

line

with

CP

M d

efini

tions

. hTh

e da

ta fo

r 200

4–05

and

200

5–06

are

not

com

para

ble

with

that

for r

ecen

t yea

rs a

s w

orks

ite v

isits

sol

ely

for e

duca

tiona

l pur

pose

s an

d in

terv

entio

ns in

min

eral

s pr

oces

sing

pla

nts

are

incl

uded

. i The

re is

no

legi

slat

ive

requ

irem

ent f

or in

fring

emen

t not

ices

in W

este

rn A

ustra

lia, V

icto

ria, S

outh

Aus

tralia

and

the

Aus

tralia

n G

over

nmen

t. j Q

ueen

slan

d is

not

abl

e to

pr

ovid

e da

ta re

trosp

ectiv

ely

for 2

004–

05 b

ecau

se o

f a b

reak

in ti

me

serie

s du

e to

a c

hang

e in

HR

sys

tem

s. k N

ew S

outh

Wal

es p

revi

ousl

y re

porte

d th

e nu

mbe

r of b

reac

hes

rath

er th

an th

e nu

mbe

r of

com

pani

es b

eing

pro

secu

ted.

l The

num

ber o

f def

enda

nts

is p

rovi

ded.

mD

ata

are

for l

egal

pro

ceed

ings

com

men

ced.


Chapter4–Workers’compensationpremiumsandentitlements

StandardisedaveragepremiumratesTheratesinthischapterareforpoliciesthatprovidedcoverageduringthereferencefinancialyears.Thepremiumratesreportedare‘earnedpremium’,exceptforWesternAustraliawhichsuppliespremiumsdataonawrittenbasis.Earnedpremiumisdefinedastheamountallocatedforcoverinafinancialyearfrompremiumscollectedduringthepreviousandcurrentfinancialyears,whilewrittenpremiumisdefinedastheamountofpremiumrecordedforapolicyatthetimeitisissued.Thepremiumsreportedareallocatedfordefinedperiodsofrisk,irrespectiveofwhentheywereactuallypaid,enablingratestobecomparedforeachfinancialyear.GSTchargedonpremiumsisnotincludedinthereportedratesasmostAustralianemployersrecouppart,orall,ofthistaxthroughinputtaxcredits.

Indicator15showsthatin2008–09thestandardisedAustralianaveragepremiumratewas1.52%ofpayroll,a6%decreaseonlastyear’srateof1.61%.Thisdecreasereflectsfallsinalljurisdictions.

TheSeacareschemerecordedthelargestpercentagedecrease(19%)fromthepreviousfinancialyearfollowedbyWesternAustraliawitha15%decrease.

Seacarerecordedthehighestpremiumratein2008–09at3.86%ofpayrollduetothehighrisknatureofthisindustry.However,thisisstillasubstantialdropof44%fromthe2004–05premiumrateof6.87%.

TheAustralianGovernmentschemerecordedthelowestpremiumrateofalljurisdictionsat0.95%ofpayroll.TheAustralianGovernmentschemeasawholecomprisesadiverserangeofoccupationsandindustriesincludingpolice,customsservices,communications,freightservices,engineeringandtransport,includingsomeself-insurers.DatafortheAustralianGovernmentdoesnotincludetheAustralianCapitalTerritoryPublicService.

Queenslandrecordedthesecondlowestpremiumrateofalljurisdictionsat1.07%ofpayroll.Theloweradministrativecostsalongwithstrongfinancialandclaimsmanagement,andbusinessefficienciesallowsforlowerpremiums.

Comparative Performance Monitoring 2008 –09 23

Indicator 15 – Standardised average premium rates (including insured and self-insured sectors) by jurisdiction

TobeconsistentwiththeAustralianjurisdictions,theNewZealandpremiuminformationincludesthelevyonemployerstofundtheworkers’compensationportionofthe‘ResidualClaimsAccount’.Thisaccountrelatestoworkers’compensationclaimsincurredpriorto1July1999butexcludestheliabilityforpre-1992non-workinjuriesforearners.In2008–09,43%ofallemployercontributionswereleviestofundtheResidualClaimsAccount.ThischangehasseentheNewZealandstandardisedaveragepremiumratefallto0.9%ofpayroll.ThisratecontinuestobemuchlowerthantheraterecordedforAustralia.OnereasonforthelowerrateinNewZealandisthatitsschemedoesnotprovidethesamelevelofcoverageformentaldisorders,astheAustralianschemes.

Notethatthesedatawillbedifferenttopremiumratespublisheddirectlybythejurisdictionsduetotheadjustmentsmadetothedatatoenablemoreaccuratejurisdictionalcomparisons.Theprincipalregulatorydifferencesthataffectcomparabilityandforwhichadjustmentshavebeenappliedinthisindicatorare:theexclusionofprovisionforcoverageofjourneyclaims;theinclusionofself-insurers;theinclusionofsuperannuationaspartofremuneration;andthestandardisationofnon-compensableexcessesimposedbyeachscheme.TheeffectofeachoftheseadjustmentsisshowninAppendixTable4onpage49intheExplanatoryNotes.InformationonpublishedratescanbefoundintheComparison of Workers’ Compensation Arrangementspublicationatsafeworkaustralia.gov.au.

0

1

2

3

4

% o

f pay

roll

2004-05 6.87 2.94 3.07 2.59 2.29 2.10 1.98 1.75 1.47 1.33 2.15 0.89

2005-06 6.00 2.88 2.94 2.52 2.03 1.90 1.77 1.67 1.34 1.20 2.01 0.88

2006-07 5.46 2.84 2.65 2.16 1.81 1.77 1.60 1.63 1.13 1.15 1.79 0.93

2007-08 4.76 2.84 2.29 1.93 1.81 1.49 1.46 1.35 1.09 1.03 1.61 0.91

2008-09 3.86 2.82 2.13 1.83 1.74 1.38 1.38 1.14 1.07 0.95 1.52 0.90

2008-09 Aus av 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52

S'care SA ACT Private NSW NT Tas Vic WA Qld Aus Gov Aust NZ


Workers’ compensation premiums and entitlements

Entitlementsunderworkers’compensationPremiumratesaresetataleveltoensuresufficientfundsareavailabletocovertheentitlementspayableunderworkers’compensationintheeventanemployeeisinjuredordevelopsawork-relateddisease.Differententitlementlevelsacrossthejurisdictionscanexplainsomeofthedifferencesinpremiumrates.Dataprovidedinotherchaptersofthisreportshouldalsobeconsideredwhencomparingentitlementsprovidedunderthevariousworkers’compensationschemes.

Thefollowingexampleshavebeenincludedtoprovideindicativeentitlementspayableineachjurisdiction.AbriefsummaryonhowentitlementsarecalculatediscontainedinAppendix2:Table8.MoredetailedinformationcanbefoundintheComparison of Workers’ Compensation Arrangementspublicationatsafeworkaustralia.gov.au.Theseentitlementsarebasedonlegislationcurrentasat1January2009.

TemporaryimpairmentThisexampledetailshowjurisdictionscompensatelow,middleandhighincomeemployeesduringselectedperiodsoftemporaryimpairment.Entitlementsforaninjuredemployeeareshowninthefollowingtableusingpre-injuryearningsof$600grossperweek(awardwage),$1000grossperweek(non-awardwage)and$2000grossperweek(non-awardwage).Theseprofileshavebeenchosentohighlightthestatutorymaximumentitlementspayableaswellasjurisdictionaldifferencesinentitlementstoworkersemployedunderanaward.

ScenarioTheemployeeremainsunabletoworkforaperiodoftimebeforereturningtotheirpreviousdutiesonafull-timebasis.Theemployeehasadependentspouseandtwochildren(aged7and8).Theemployeeinjuredtheirbackandhaslowerbackstrainasaresult.

Indicator 16 – Percentage of pre-injury earnings for selected periods of impairment, as at 1 January 2009Level of pre-injury income NSW Vic Qld WA SA Tas NT ACT Aus

Gov NZ

13weeksofimpairmentLowincome 100 95 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 80

Middleincome 80 95 85 100 100 100 100 100 100 80

Highincome 80 63 85 95 100 100 100 100 100 80


Middleincome 80 85 85 93 95 93 100 100 100 80

Highincome 80 63 85 90 95 93 100 100 100 80


Middleincome 72 80 80 89 88 89 90 83 97 80

Highincome 56 64 80 88 88 89 88 83 97 80


Middleincome 68 78 78 87 84 87 85 74 86 80

Highincome 44 64 78 86(a) 84 87 81 74 86 80

(a) In Western Australia there is a cap on weekly earnings set at twice the annual Average Weekly Earnings (WA) as published by the ABS each year. The weekly cap as at 30 June 2009 was $1 904.40 and applied to all income levels. In addition, for a high income earner (eg $2000 per week), the prescribed amount for weekly benefit ($168 499) would be exhausted during the 98th week of compensation. After this time, if there were exceptional circumstances a further amount of $126 374 could be approved ; this example assumes there were no exceptional circumstances.


Forlowincomeearners,NewSouthWales,QueenslandandWesternAustraliaprovidedthehighestpercentageofpre-injuryearningsfor104weeksofimpairment,providing100%ofpre-injuryearningsincompensation.Thisisbecausethesejurisdictionsprovidefullcoverageofearningsforemployeesworkingunderawards.Reductionsincompensationpaymentswouldhaveoccurredfornon-awardemployees.TheAustralianGovernmentprovidedthesecondhighestpercentage:97%ofpre-injuryearningsincompensation.Victoriaprovidedthelowestpercentageofpre-injuryearningsfor104weeksofimpairment(78%)dueinparttothestep-downinbenefitsto75%ofpre-injuryearningsafter13weeksofcompensation(seeAppendix2:Table8formoredetails).

Formiddleincomeearnerswith104weeksofimpairment,WesternAustraliaandTasmaniaprovidedthehighestpercentageofpre-injuryearnings(87%),followedbytheAustralianGovernment(86%),theNorthernTerritory(85%)andSouthAustralia(84%).NewSouthWalesprovidedthelowestpercentageofpre-injuryearningsforthefullperiodofimpairment(68%)duetothelowerpaymentsfromthefirstdayofinjuryfornon-awardworkersandtherestrictionsappliedafter26weeks.IntheNewSouthWalessystem,once26weeksofcompensationhavebeenpaid,theinjuredworkerisentitledtothelesserof90%oftheiraverageweeklyearningsortheindexedstatutoryrate,plusextraentitlementsfordependants(seeAppendix2:Table8formoredetails).

Incontrasttothelowincomescenario,whereeightofthenineAustralianjurisdictionsprovidedfullincomeprotectionforthefirst13weeks,thehighincomescenarioshowsthatonlyfivejurisdictionsprovidedfullincomeprotectionforhighincomeearnersforthisperiodofimpairment.

PermanentimpairmentThisscenarioshowstheentitlementspayableforadegreeofpermanentimpairmentcausedbyaworkplaceinjury.Eachjurisdictionhasapredeterminedstatutorymaximumlumpsumpaymentforinjuriescausingpermanentimpairment.Maximumamountsarepayableincasesoffullandpermanentimpairment.AppendixTable8listsentitlementsunderworkers’compensationschemesforeachjurisdiction.Thefollowingscenarioisindicativeonlyforthesetypesofpayments.

ScenarioAsaresultoftheworkplaceincident,theemployeewasdiagnosedwithcompletetetraplegiabelowthe6thcervicalneurologicalsegment.Thisresultedinparalysisofhishands,impairedupperbodymovementandparalysisofthetrunkandlowerlimbs.Helostalllowerbodyfunctionandwaswheelchair-bound.Impairmentwastotalandpermanentandtherewasnorealprospectofreturningtowork.

Theemployee’spre-injuryearningswere$1000grossperweek.Theemployeeis35yearsofageandhasadependentspouseandtwochildrenaged7and8–theyoungerchildenteredtheworkforceat16andtheolderchildremainedinfull-timeeducationuntilage25.Theemployeecontributedtoasuperannuationfund.Therewasnocontributorynegligenceonhispart,howevertherewasnegligenceonthepartoftheemployer.


Workers’ compensation premiums and entitlements

Indicator17detailstheentitlementspayabletotheinjuredemployee.Thestatutorycomponentincludestheweeklybenefitspayablefortheremainderoftheemployee’sworkinglife(30yearsinthisinstance)andalllumpsumpaymentsforpermanentimpairment.Thecommonlawcomponentisanestimateoftheadditionalpaymentavailableunderacommonlawsettlement,whereapplicable.Allfiguresexcludemedicalandlikeservicessuchasattendantcare.AppendixTable7identifiesthejurisdictionsthathaveaccesstocommonlaw.IntheAustralianCapitalTerritory,ifcommonlawdamagesareawarded,statutorybenefitspaidwillbedeductedinordertoensurethattheprincipleofnocompensationbenefitpaidtwiceismaintained.Similarly,workersfortheAustralianGovernmentaremorelikelytoacceptthestatutorylumpsumpaymentthantopursueacommonlawsettlement.

Totalentitlementsrangedfrom$1.2millionintheAustralianCapitalTerritoryto$5.1millioninNewSouthWales.

InWesternAustralia,NewSouthWales,Queensland,TasmaniaandtheAustralianCapitalTerritorythereisnoupperlimitoncompensationthatcouldbeexpectedfromacommonlawclaimunderthisscenario.WesternAustraliaprovidedafigureforthisscenarioof$1037781,whichisbasedonestimatesfromapprovedinsurerswithintheWesternAustralianworkers’compensationscheme.Afigureof$4millionwasprovidedbyNewSouthWalesandisconsideredtobeentitlementspayableundercommonlawforsimilarscenarios.Queenslandprovidedafigureof$983000,whichisbasedonanexamplesimilartothisscenario.Tasmaniaprovidedafigureof$1066813.Statutorybenefitsarerepaidbytheworkertocompensationschemesifcommonlawdamagesareawarded.CommonlawaccessisreadilyavailabletoinjuredworkersinWesternAustralia,whilstaccessinNewSouthWalesisrestricted.

TheentitlementsprovidedbytheNewZealandschemeinthisscenarioarecomparabletothoseprovidedbytheAustralianjurisdictions.However,thereisnoaccesstocommonlawundertheNewZealandscheme.

WorkplacefatalityThisexampleexaminestheentitlementspayabletodependantsofanemployeewhodiedfollowingaworkplaceincident.Entitlementstodependantsarepaidbywayofalumpsumand/orweeklybenefits,dependingontheemployee’scircumstancesandschemedesign.Thedateofdeathforthisexamplewas1January2009.

Pecuniaryentitlementsmaybeaffectedbycommonlawpaymentsinjurisdictionswherethereisaccesstocommonlawredress.SouthAustraliaandtheNorthernTerritoryhavenoaccesstocommonlaw,whiletheAustralianGovernment haslimitedaccesstocommonlaw.InVictoriatheremaybeaccesstoanadditionallumpsumundertheWrongsAct.

ScenarioThedeceasedemployeeandfamilycircumstancesinthisscenarioarethesameasinthepreviousexamplebutinthiscasetheworkplaceincidentresultedindeath.Thespousedidnotre-entertheworkforceorre-marryfortenyears.


Indicator17showsthatanumberofjurisdictionsprovidedsimilarbenefitsinthecaseofafatality.SouthAustraliaprovidedthehighestentitlementpayabletodependantsinAustraliafollowingaworkplaceincidentresultinginafatalityat$720000,followedbyQueenslandat$604000andtheAustralianGovernmentat$565000.ThelowestentitlementsforfatalitywereprovidedintheAustralianCapitalTerritory($269000)andWesternAustralian($282000).Appendix2providesmoredetailsonhowtheseentitlementsarecalculated.

InSouthAustralia,changestolegislationenactedfromApril2009changedthewayinjuredworkerswithpermanentimpairmentareassessed.Thenewlegislationprovidesforasignificantincreaseinthemaximumamountpayabletoworkerswhosufferapermanentseriousinjuryorillness,from$230982to$420558.Thesystemisnowweightedsothatmorecompensationispaidtothosewithmoderatetoseriouspermanentinjuries,ratherthanthosewithminorpermanentinjuries.

IntheAustralianGovernmentscheme,theproclamationoftheEmployment and Workplace Relations Amendment Act 2009 amendedthevalueofbenefitsundertheSRCAct,applyingretrospectivelytoallcompensabledeathsoccurringfrom13May2008.ThesebenefitswerefurtheramendedfromJuly2008,withlumpsumpaymentsincreasedto$412000.

In2008,NewSouthWalesincreaseditslumpsumdeathbenefitsto$425000andenabledthebenefittobepaidtoaworker’sestatewherethedeceasedleavesnodependants.

InNewZealand$460000ispayabletodependants,higherthanmostoftheAustralianjurisdictions.TheNewZealandschemeprovideslittleinthewayoflumpsumamountsbutprovideshighweeklybenefitstothespouseandchildrenwhilethechildrenremaindependants.Indicator 17 – Level of entitlements for permanent incapacity or fatality as at 1 January 2009

+ In New South Wales there is no upper limit on compensation that could be paid from a common law claim. The amount provided is an estimate of entitlements payable under common law for claims similar to the scenario in question.

* There is no upper limit on compensation that could be paid for a common law claim in Queensland. The amount provided is based on an example similar to the scenario in question.

** There is no upper limit on compensation that would be expected from a common law claim under this scenario in the Australian Capital Territory. ^ In Western Australia there is no upper limit on compensation that could be paid from a common law claim. The amount provided is based on estimates from approved insurers in the Western Australian scheme.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

NSW QLD TAS VIC WA SA NT Aus Gov ACT NZ

Fata

lity a

nd p

erm

anen

t inca

pacit

y ($'0

00)

Statutory$’000 1127 906 604 1569 295 1672 1448 1388 1208 1369Commonlaw$’000 +4000 *983 1067 88 ^1038 n/a n/a n/a **n/a n/aFatality$’000 549 604 382 415 282 720 416 565 269 460


Chapter5–Workers’compensationschemeperformanceTherearesignificantdifferencesinthefundingarrangementsforthevariousschemesaroundAustralia.Theschemesthatarecentrallyfunded(NewSouthWales,Victoria,Queensland,SouthAustralia,ComcareandNewZealand)havetheirworkhealthandsafetyandworkers’compensationfunctions,staffingandoperationalbudgetsfundedbypremiums.Forthosejurisdictionswithprivatelyunderwrittenschemes,fundingforthenon-workers’compensationfunctionscomesdirectlyfromgovernmentappropriation.Thisdifferenceinfundingarrangementsmayhaveanimpactonthedatashowninthissection.

AssetstoliabilitiesratioThissectionreportsthestandardisedratioofassetstonetoutstandingclaimliabilities(fundingratio)foreachjurisdictionoverthepastfiveyears.Thisindicatorisameasureoftheadequacyoftheschemetomeetfutureclaimpayments.Ratiosabove100%indicatethattheschemehasmorethansufficientassetstomeetitspredictedfutureliabilities.Conversely,lowratioscouldbeanindicationoftheneedforaschemetoincreaseitspremiumratestoensureassetsareavailableforfutureclaimpayments.Fundingratiotrendsshouldthereforebeconsideredinconjunctionwiththepremiumratesreportedelsewhereinthisreport.

Whileastandarddefinitionofthefundingratioofnetoutstandingclaimliabilitieshasbeenadoptedtoimprovecomparabilityacrossjurisdictions,therestillremainfundamentaldifferencesbetweencentrallymanagedandprivatelyunderwrittenschemes.

PrivatelyunderwrittenschemesaregovernedbytheAustralianPrudentialRegulatoryAuthority’s(APRA)prudentialregulatoryrequirementstomakesurethatenoughfundsareavailabletocoverallliabilities.Includingthemeasureforprivatelyunderwrittenschemesalongsidecentrallyfundedschemesismisleadingbecausethefundingratiomeasureforprivatelyunderwrittenschemesdoesnotcapturethetrueextentoftheprivateschemesabilitytomeetfutureclaimpayments.Therefore,thefundingratiosofprivatelyunderwrittenschemesareshownonaseparategraphtothoseforthecentrallyfundedschemes.

Indicator18ashowsthattheaveragefundingratioforcentrallyfundedschemesfellto106%in2008–09asaresultoffallsinallcentrallyfundedjurisdictions,withtheexceptionofComcare.Thisfallislinkedtopoorerinvestmentreturnsandindicatesthattheseschemesexperiencedadeclineinassetsavailabletomeetclaimliabilities.Howeverthemajorityofcentrallyfundedjurisdictions,exceptNewSouthWalesandSouthAustralia,havefundingratiosabove100%,indicatingthatassetsarestillsufficienttomeetfutureliabilities.Itislikelythatthisdeclineislinkedtotheglobalfinancialcrisis,whichinevitablyexertspressureoninvestmentreturns,wagesgrowthandpremiumrevenue.


Indicator 18a – Standardised ratio of assets to net outstanding claim liabilities for centrally funded schemes

InNewSouthWales,thedropinthefundingratiowasduetoboththelowerthanforecastinvestmentreturnsin2008–09asaresultoftheglobalfinancialcrisis,andanincreaseintheActuariallyAssessedClaimsliabilities.

InNewZealand,thedropinthefundingratiowasmainlyduetoanincreaseinoutstandingclaimsliability.Thiswasduetonon-economicdrivers(improvedassessmentoffuturecostsoftreatmentandrehabilitationsupport,continuedincreaseinclaimdurationforweeklycompensation,andthecombinationofincreaseddemandandinflationarytrendsforelectivesurgeryandmedicaltreatments),revisedeconomicassumptionsandtheadditionalinriskmarginduetotheabovefactors.

Indicator18bshowsthatin2008–09theaveragefundingratioforprivatelyunderwrittenschemesroseto122%.Thisisdespitethe8%fallinthefundingratioobservedforWesternAustraliafrom139%in2007–08to128%in2008–09.Tasmaniarecordeda2%increaseintheirfundingratiofrom131%in2007–08to134%in2008–09.TheAustralianjurisdictionsoperatingprivatelyunderwrittenschemeshavefundingratiosabove100%,indicatingthatassetsaresufficienttomeetfutureliabilities.

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

2004-05 158% 113% 104% 80% 63% 97% 81%2005-06 232% 129% 114% 104% 66% 118% 88%2006-07 222% 146% 118% 121% 66% 131% 99%2007-08 195% 138% 117% 119% 61% 124% 93%2008-09 146% 120% 117% 98% 56% 106% 81%2008-09 CF Av 106% 106% 106% 106% 106% 106%

Qld Vic Comcare NSW SA CF Average NZ


Workers’ compensation scheme performance

Indicator 18b – Standardised ratio of assets to net outstanding claim liabilities for privately underwritten schemes

TheSeacareandAustralianCapitalTerritoryPrivateschemesareprivatelyunderwritten,butnodataarecurrentlyavailableforthisindicator.Refertopage51ofAppendix1-Explanatorynotesformoreinformation.

Selfinsurersareexcludedfromthefundingratiomeasuresastheworkers’compensationassetsandliabilitiesarenotquarantinedfromtherestoftheselfinsurer’sbusiness.Selfinsurersareregulatedineachjurisdictionandarerequiredtolodgefinancialguaranteeswiththeregulatoryauthoritytoprovidesecurityforworkers’compensationentitlements.Theleveloftheguaranteevariesacrossthejurisdictions.AsummaryofthecurrentrequirementscanbefoundinSafeWorkAustralia’sComparison of Workers’ Compensation Arrangements in Australia and New Zealandatsafeworkaustralia.gov.au.

Thedatashowninthisindicatormaydifferfromjurisdictions’annualreportsduetotheuseofastandarddefinitionofassetsandliabilities.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

180%

2004-05 152% 124% 102% 127%2005-06 168% 113% 103% 132%2006-07 145% 128% 110% 126%2007-08 131% 139% 112% 120%2008-09 134% 128% 112% 122%2008-09 PU Av 122% 122% 122% 122%

Tas WA NT PU Average


SchemeexpenditureSincecentrallyfundedandprivatelyunderwrittenschemeshavedifferentfinancialstructuresthejurisdictionshavebeenshownintheirrespectivefundingarrangementgroup.Whilethestandardisationmethodologyprovidesacomparablemeasureacrossthetwogroups,cautionshouldstillbeexercisedwhenmakingsuchcomparisons.

Indicator19showstheamountandproportionoftotalschemeexpenditurepaidoutinpaymentstoinjuredemployeesplusadministrativecostsfortheperiods2004–05and2008–09.

Thisindicatorshowsthatin2008–09,compensationpaiddirecttotheclaimantaccountedforjustoverhalfofallschemeexpenditure.In2008–09,allAustralianjurisdictions,withtheexceptionofComcareandSeacare,recordedanincreaseintheproportionoftotalschemeexpenditurepaiddirecttotheclaimantcomparedtothatpaidin2004–05.Directcompensationispaidtoinjuredemployeeseitherasweeklybenefits,redemptions,commonlawsettlements(excludinglegalcosts)andnon-economiclossbenefits.

In2008–09,sixofthenineAustralianjurisdictionsrecordedadecreaseintheproportionoftotalexpenditurededicatedtoinsuranceoperationscomparedto2004–05,withthemostsubstantialfallsrecordedbyNewSouthWalesandTasmania.Thisresultedina7.2percentagepointdecreaseintheproportionoftotalexpenditurebyAustralianschemesoverthisperioddedicatedtoinsuranceoperationfunctionsoftheschemes.

AlljurisdictionswiththeexceptionofQueensland,TasmaniaandSeacarerecordedincreasesintheproportionofexpenditureassociatedwithotheradministrationin2008–09comparedto2004–05.Costsassociatedwithotheradministrationincludeexpenditureassociatedwithcorporateadministration,butexcludescorporateadministrationcostsallocatedtoworkhealthandsafety.

TheNewZealandproportionsdisplayadifferentpatterntotheAustralianschemeswithalowerproportionindirecttoclaimantexpenditureandahigherproportioninservicestoclaimantexpenditure.ThisisduetothenatureoftheNewZealandschemewhereagreaterproportionofworkers’medicalcostsareidentifiedaswork-related.InAustralia,theMedicaresystemwouldmostlikelypickupsomemedicalcostsforwork-relatedinjurieswhereaworkers’compensationclaimisnotsubmitted.



Cen

tral

ly fu

nded

Priv

atel

y un

derw

ritte

nSc

hem

e C

osts

NSW

Vic

Qld

SAC

omca

reW

ATa

sN

TSe

acar

eA

ustr

alia

NZ

Expe

nditu

re ($

M)

2004–0

5Directtoclaimant

948.0

623.2

469.1

277.8

148.6

267.9

39.5

31.8

4.4

2 81

0.3

126.0

Servicestoclaimant

522.7

294.6

87.0

99.8

53.5

128.8

19.8

11.5

0.7

1 21

8.6

116.3

Insuranceoperations

673.5

346.1

112.2

52.6

32.1

154.0

29.3

6.2

0.8

1 40

6.8

30.3

Regulation

22.5

32.1

6.1

12.3

1.2

3.8

0.5

0.0

0.1

78.5

12.4

Disputeresolution

33.4

19.6

5.0

2.4

1.9

2.9

0.9

0.2

0.0

66.3

0.0

Otheradm

inistration

5.4

11.7

31.5

10.7

7.0

4.5

0.7

0.7

0.4

72.6

19.4

Tota

l2

205.

61

327.

371

0.9

455.

524

4.4

561.

990

.750

.36.

45

653.

130

4.3

2008–0

9 Directtoclaimant

1094.3

892.6

731.9

427.4

142.7

393.0

47.6

49.7

7.0

3 78

6.2

257.4

Servicestoclaimant

606.3

362.2

212.4

120.2

57.3

175.5

28.4

17.4

1.8

1 58

1.4

185.8

Insuranceoperations

410.4

369.6

104.4

81.0

46.9

185.2

26.6

4.7

1.5

1 23

0.3

41.8

Regulation

36.0

58.6

7.5

12.8

1.1

4.3

1.4

0.0

0.0

121.

722.7

Disputeresolution

31.3

22.1

8.5

8.0

4.2

4.2

1.0

0.2

0.4

80.0

0.0

Otheradm

inistration

15.6

29.5

32.8

35.5

14.1

6.7

0.4

1.3

0.4

136.

537.6

Tota

l2

193.

91

734.

61

097.

568

5.0

266.

376

8.8

105.

573

.411

.06

936.

154

5.3

Indi

cato

r 19

– Sc

hem

e ex

pend

iture


Indi

cato

r 19

– Sc

hem

e ex

pend

iture

con

tinue

d

Cen

tral

ly fu

nded

Priv

atel

y un

derw

ritte

nSc

hem

e C

osts

NSW

Vic

Qld

SAC

omca

reW

ATa

sN

TSe

acar

eA

ustr

alia

NZ

Perc

enta

ge o

f tot

al e

xpen

ditu

re (%

) 20

04–0

5Directtoclaimant

43.0

47.0

66.0

61.0

60.8

47.7

43.5

63.2

68.4

49.7

41.4

Servicestoclaimant

23.7

22.2

12.2

21.9

21.9

22.9

21.9

22.9

11.5

21.6

38.2

Insuranceoperations

30.5

26.1

15.8

11.5

13.1

27.4

32.3

12.3

12.2

24.9

10.0

Regulation

1.0

2.4

0.9

2.7

0.5

0.7

0.6

0.0

1.3

1.4

4.1

Disputeresolution

1.5

1.5

0.7

0.5

0.8

0.5

1.0

0.3

0.0

1.2

0.0

Otheradm

inistration

0.2

0.9

4.4

2.4

2.9

0.8

0.7

1.3

6.6

1.3

6.4

Tota

l10

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

2008–0

9 Directtoclaimant

49.9

51.5

66.7

62.4

53.6

51.1

45.1

67.7

62.9

54.6

47.2

Servicestoclaimant

27.6

20.9

19.4

17.5

21.5

22.8

27.0

23.7

16.3

22.8

34.1

Insuranceoperations

18.7

21.3

9.5

11.8

17.6

24.1

25.2

6.5

13.3

17.7

7.7

Regulation

1.6

3.4

0.7

1.9

0.4

0.6

1.3

0.0

0.2

1.8

4.2

Disputeresolution

1.4

1.3

0.8

1.2

1.6

0.5

1.0

0.3

3.3

1.2

0.0

Otheradm

inistration

0.7

1.7

3.0

5.2

5.3

0.9

0.4

1.8

4.0

2.0

6.9

Tota

l10

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0



Administrativecostsareimpactedonbythetypeofschemeinoperation.Indicator20showsthedistributionofdirectpaymentsintoweeklybenefitsandlumpsums.Thepaymentoflongtermweeklybenefitsresultsinhigheradministrationcosts.Thisindicatorshowsthatin2008–09theSeacare,Comcare,NewSouthWales,Victoria,WesternAustraliaandTasmaniaschemespaidoutmoreasweeklybenefitswhileQueensland,SouthAustraliaandNorthernTerritoryschemespaidoutmoreaslumpsumbenefits.

FortheNorthernTerritoryandSouthAustralia,thehigherproportionofbenefitspaidaslumpsumsin2008–09representsashiftfrom2007–08,wheretheproportionoflumpsumbenefitspaidwas47%and39%ofdirectpayments,respectively. IntheNorthernTerritory,theshifttolumpsumpaymentswasmainlyduetothelargeincreaseinnumberofclaimsthathavereceivedacommutationpayoutwithanincreaseintheaveragepaymentperclaimcomparedtolastyear.Therewasalsoanincreaseintheamountofdeathlumpsumpayments(7paymentsupfrom2paymentsinthepreviousyear).

InSouthAustralia,from1July2009legislativeandpolicyrestrictionshavebeenappliedtoredemptionsonclaimswithaninjuryonorafter1July2006.Theserestrictionsapplytoallclaimsfrom1July2010.TheincreaseinredemptionactivitypriortothegeneralapplicationoftheserestrictionsisconsistentwithworkundertakenintheLongTermValuationProjectwherecohortsofclaimswereidentifiedforintensivecasemanagementtoachieveanoutcome,ofwhichredemptionisoneoption.TheNewZealandschemehaslittleprovisionforlumpsumpayments.Indicator 20 – Direct compensation payments by type and jurisdiction, 2008–09

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Per

cent

age

of d

irect

com

pens

atio

n

Weekly benefits 94% 92% 62% 54% 54% 53% 46% 46% 32% 53% 100%

Lump Sums 6% 8% 38% 46% 46% 47% 54% 54% 68% 47% 0%

S'care C'care NSW Vic WA Tas NT SA QLD Aust NZ


DurablereturntoworkThissectionpresentsthedurablereturntoworkratecompiledfromdatapublishedinthe2008–09Australia and New Zealand Return To Work Monitor (RTWMonitor),whichreportsonreturntoworkoutcomesandinjuredworkers’perceptionsofthereturntoworkprocess.Thereportcanbefoundathwca.org.au/reports_rtw.php.Thesurveyincludesinjuredworkerswhohavebeenpaid10daysormorecompensation,butdoesnotincludeinjuredworkersfromorganisationswhoself-insuretheirworkers’compensationrisk.WesternAustraliaandtheAustralianCapitalTerritorydonotparticipateinthissurvey.Refertopage50ofAppendix1-Explanatorynotesformoreinformation.

ThesampleselectedforallRTWMonitorsurveysconsistedofinjuredworkerswhohad:

• submittedaclaimseventoeightmonthsbeforethedateofthesurveyorseventoninemonthsforTasmania,theNorthernTerritoryandtheAustralianGovernment,duetothesmallnumberofclaimsinthesejurisdictions.ForSeacare,duetoitsevensmallersize,theentirepopulationofclaimantswereinvitedtobeinterviewedoverfourroundsinAugust,November,FebruaryandMay,and

• 10daysormorecompensationpaid,inclusiveofanyexcess.

Durablereturntoworkreferstoaninjuredworkerwhoreturnedtoworkandwasstillworkingatthetimeofthesurvey,seventoninemonthsaftertheirclaimandismeasuredbytheinjuredworkerreportingtheirworkstatus,sourcesofincomeandcompensationstatus.

Durablereturntoworkratesreportedhereareestimatesbasedonasampleoftheeligiblepopulation.Differencesbetweenandwithinjurisdictionsshouldbeinterpretedwithcaution.Refertopage50ofAppendix1forfurtherinformation.Indicator 21 – Durable return to work rate

0

20

40

60

80

100

Per c

ent

2004-05 85 86 81 78 75 70 75 62 76 792005-06 89 88 81 81 81 67 77 64 80 792006-07 85 75 83 78 78 65 76 71 77 812007-08 84 68 79 75 76 64 75 82 75 802008-09 88 81 80 73 72 71 69 67 72 752008-09 Aus Av 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72

C'care NT Tas Qld NSW SA Vic S'care Aust NZ



Indicator21revealsthatthe2008–09Australianaverageratefordurablereturntoworkwas72%.Thedurablereturntoworkratehasconsistentlydeclinedoverthepastfouryears.TheNorthernTerritoryrecordedthelargestincreaseinthedurablereturntoworkrate(13percentagepointincrease).ImprovementswerealsorecordedinSouthAustralia,ComcareandTasmania.Seacarerecordeda15percentagepointdecreaseinthedurablereturntoworkrate,asubstantialdeclinefromimprovementsrecordedinpreviousyears.

The2008–09durablereturntoworkrateswerethelowestonrecord,withlabourmarketinfluenceshavinganimpact.Closetohalftheinjuredworkerswithadurablereturntoworkindicatedthatrecoveryfromtheinjurywasamongthereasonsfortheirreturntowork,althoughoverthelastfewyearsanincreasingproportionreturnedbecauseofeconomicneed(RTWMonitor,2008–09).

Eachjurisdictionfacesvaryingchallengesintheirendeavourstoimprovereturntoworkrates.Somedriversofreturntoworkaredefinedbylegislationandcanbeinfluencedbythenatureoftheschemedesign(whetheritisshortorlongtailinnature).Forexample,thebenefitstructurecaninfluencereturntowork,ascantheassociatedstepdownprovisions,andlegislativedifferencesregardingearlyclaimsreporting,employerobligationsandcommonlawarrangements.

DisputationrateAdisputeisanappealtoaformalmechanism,suchasareviewofficerorconciliationormediationservice,againstaninsurer’sdecisionordecisionsrelatingtocompensation.Disputesexcludecommonlawandalsoexcluderedemptionsandcommutationsunlessprocessedasdisputesthroughthejurisdiction’sdisputeresolutionsystem.

Indicator22showsthenumberofnewdisputesasaproportionofnewclaimslodgedinthereferencefinancialyear.Themeasureincludesalldisputeslodgedfortheyearagainstanyclaimforthecurrentyearandallpastyears.ItshouldalsobenotedthatthenumberofnewclaimsusedinthiscalculationisallclaimslodgedincludingunderexcessclaimswhichdonotresultinapaymentratherthantheseriousclaimsusedinChapters1and2ofthisreport.

Thecomparisonofdisputationratesbetweenjurisdictionsmustbetreatedwithcautionduetojurisdictionaldifferencesinschemedesign,typesofdecisionswhichcanbeappealed,disputeresolutionmodelsandthecostofappeals.

Indicator22showsthattheAustraliandisputationratefor2008–09was7.5%ofclaimslodged,comparedto7.4%in2007–08.Despitethisslightincrease,theAustraliandisputationratefor2008–09isstilllowerthanthatrecordedduring2004–05to2006–07.

Decreasesfromthepreviousyearwererecordedinthreejurisdictionswithincreasesrecordedinsix.QueenslandreportedthelowestdisputationrateofalltheAustralianjurisdictionsat3.3%ofclaimslodged,whileSouthAustraliarecordedthehighestrateat16.7%ofclaimslodged.

In2008–09,15%ofclaimsmadebyseafarersresultedinanapplicationtotheAdministrativeAppealsTribunal(AAT)forreview.Thisrepresentsaslightreductionfrompreviousyears.ThevastmajorityofthemattersgoingtotheAATarefinalisedbytheconsentofthepartieswithoutgoingtoahearing.


During2008–09,theComcareschemeexperienceda16%increaseinthenumberofclaimsreceived.Atthesametime,thenumberofnewdisputeslodgedin2008–09decreasedby17%.Thisresultedina28%decreaseinthedisputationrate,from12.3%in2007–08to8.9%in2008–09.ThetimetakenforastatutorydisputetoariseafterComcarehasmadeadeterminationislikelytobeuptooneyear.Accordingly,anydecreaseinnewclaimsinoneyearislikelytoresultinachangeinstatutorydisputesthenextyear.Indicator 22 – Proportion of claims with dispute

InSouthAustralia,thereisprovisionfordeemingdelayed,non-exemptdecisionsasdisputes.Thismayincreasetherateforthisschemecomparedtootherjurisdictions.Thecommencementofsomeofthemajorlegislativechanges,witheffectfrom1July2008(inparticularthechangeswhichcameintoeffect1April2009andthetransitionalprovisionsrelatedtothatchange),havecontributedtotheincreaseinclaimswithadisputeforSouthAustraliain2008–09.

ThedisputationrateforTasmaniaisinfluencedbytheexistenceofapreliminarydisputeprocessthatwasoriginallyintendedtoprotectworkersagainstfrivolousandvexatiousdisputesbyemployers.InJuly2004,a‘reasonablyarguablecase’testwasintroducedtodeterminedisputesandtheperiodallowedtodetermineliabilitywasincreasedfrom28to84days.Thesechangeshavehadadramaticimpactonthenumberofinitialliabilitydisputes.Subsequently,thedisputationrateinTasmaniahasfallenfrom10.5%to7.5%overthepastfiveyears.

InNewZealand,theAccidentCompensationCommissionistakingamoreactivemanagementapproachintheprovisionofrehabilitationandtreatment.Asaresultmoretreatment,rehabilitationandsurgeryrequestshavebeendeclinedandconsequentlymoreclaimantsareseekingtheircasesbereviewedorreconsidered.ThishasledtoanincreaseinthedisputationrateforNewZealandin2008–09.

TheNewZealanddisputationrateisverylowbecauseoftheuniversalnatureofNewZealand’saccidentcompensationscheme.Sincepeoplewhohaveaccidentsarecoveredwhethertheaccidentoccursatwork,home,ontheroad,playingsportetc.,andwhethertheyareemployed,self-employedoranon-earner(child,pensioner,student,unemployed),thereareveryfewdisputesrelatingtocover.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Pro

porti

on o

f new

cla

ims

2004-05 11.4% 16.8% 37.8% 10.6% 6.7% 10.5% 9.0% 5.3% 3.9% 9.2% 0.3%

2005-06 11.7% 14.9% 28.8% 10.1% 4.7% 7.7% 9.3% 5.3% 3.7% 8.7% 0.3%

2006-07 10.6% 15.2% 28.9% 10.3% 6.0% 6.5% 7.9% 5.1% 2.9% 7.7% 0.4%

2007-08 13.6% 16.6% 16.2% 12.3% 6.3% 7.2% 6.7% 3.8% 3.1% 7.4% 0.3%

2008-09 16.7% 15.5% 15.5% 8.9% 7.7% 7.5% 7.0% 3.9% 3.3% 7.5% 0.5%

2008-09 Aus Av 7.5% 7.5% 7.5% 7.5% 7.5% 7.5% 7.5% 7.5% 7.5%

SA Vic S'care C'care NT Tas NSW WA Qld Aus Av NZ



DisputeresolutionOnlysomejurisdictionscansupplydataonthetimeinvolvedtoresolvedisputes.Thespeedthatdisputesareresolveddependsonthesystemsandprocessesinplaceforeachjurisdiction.Generally,thesimplertheprocess,thefasterthedisputeisresolved.Wherethereisalaginthecollection,exchangeandlodgementofinformationbyoneormoreparties,disputesarelikelytobemoreadversarialandthereforemorecostly.Ahighpercentageofdisputesresolvedinalongertimeframemayalsoindicatethatthereareahighnumberofmorecomplexdisputesbeingdealtwithwithinajurisdiction,orthattherearesomemandatorymedicalorlegalprocessesinplacewhichinherentlydelayresolution.

Indicator23demonstratesthatinthepastfiveyearsinAustralia,therehasbeenaslightdecreaseintheproportionofdisputesresolvedwithinonemonth.However,thepercentageofdisputesresolvedwithinthree,sixandninemonthshasremainedstableduringthisperiod.Indicator 23 – Percentage of disputes resolved within selected time periods (cumulative)

Jurisdiction Within 1 month (%)

Within 3 months (%)

Within 6 months (%)

Within 9 months (%)

2004–05NSW 2.0 32.0 65.0 80.0

Victoria 2.3 51.4 74.4 87.4

Queensland 30.0 81.5 88.6 92.6

WesternAustralia 39.3 64.1 80.5 87.4

Tasmania 36.5 67.0 80.7 87.4

Comcare 6.0 16.3 28.2 47.6

Australia* 13.1 55.9 74.3 85.3NewZealand 7.8 79.3 92.0 94.9

2008–09NSW 8.5 45.4 89.3 97.6

Victoria 1.9 51.2 76.8 89.6

Queensland 15.9 83.1 92.0 95.3

WesternAustralia 27.3 43.9 60.1 70.8

Tasmania 49.5 65.6 81.5 90.3

Comcare 3.0 7.9 19.0 34.5

Australia* 10.2 54.5 73.9 84.4

NewZealand 2.0 27.0 71.8 87.1

* includes only those jurisdictions listed above but excludes NSW

Onaveragehalfthedisputeswereresolvedwithinthreemonthsfromthedateoflodgement,withQueenslandresolvingthehighestproportionofdisputes(83%)withinthattime.

In2008–09,Tasmaniaresolvedhalfofdisputedclaimswithinonemonth,significantlyhigherthananyotherjurisdiction.Moreover,theproportionofdisputesresolvedafterthree,sixandninemonthsinTasmaniawashigherthantheAustralianaverage.

Incontrast,lessthan4%ofdisputeswereresolvedwithinonemonthinboththeVictorianandComcareschemes.TheresolutiontimesforVictoriaareimpactedbythecompulsoryconciliationprocesswhichmayormaynotinvolvemedicalpanelreferralandthefactthatcourtlitigationcanonlyoccurattheconclusionofthecompulsoryconciliationprocess.


Overall,Comcaredisputesgenerallytookmoretimetoresolvethandisputesinotherjurisdictions.AsComcaredisputesproceedtoanexternalandindependentbody,Comcarehasnocontrolovertheassociatedtimeframesfordisputeresolution.Thesedisputestendtobequitecomplexandrequirealongtimetoresolve.

TheresolutiontimesforNewSouthWalesareaffectedbytheincorporationofamandatorymedicalassessmentintotheWorkers’CompensationCommission’sproceedingsinrelationtodisputesoverpermanentimpairmententitlements.Entitlementtocompensationforpermanentimpairmentisthesubjectofover70%ofdisputeapplicationslodgedwiththeCommission.WhileNewSouthWalesresolvesasmallpercentageofdisputeswithinonemonth,89%ofdisputesareresolvedwithinsixmonthsand98%ofdisputesareresolvedwithinninemonthsoflodgement.

NewZealandhasadjustedcurrentandhistoricfiguresfornewclaimstoincludeallclaimsreceivedregardlessofclaimacceptance.Thisisdifferentfrompreviousdatawhichonlyincludedacceptedclaims.TheresolutionratesforNewZealandarebetterthanmostAustralianjurisdictions,howeverasnotedinIndicator22,thisschemehasveryfewdisputestoresolve.

40 Workplace Relations Ministers’ Council40 WorkplaceRelationsMinisters’Council

Chapter6–Industryinformation

ClaimsbyindustryIndicator24showstheincidencerateofclaimsacrossindustriesinAustraliaindescendingorderbasedonthe2008–09year.In2008–09,theAgriculture,forestry&fishingindustryreportedthehighestincidencerateat25.2claimsper1000employeesfollowedbytheTransport&storageindustry(25.0),theManufacturingindustry(23.4)andtheConstructionindustry(21.8).

UndertheNationalOHSStrategythefollowingindustrieshavebeenidentifiedasprioritiesforimprovement:Transport&storage,Manufacturing,ConstructionandHealth&communityservices.FollowingthefirsttriennialreviewoftheNationalOHSStrategy,theAgriculture,forestry&fishingindustrywasaddedtothislistfrom2005–06.Thesefiveindustriesaccountfor34%ofallemployeesinAustralia.ThefourhighestincidencerateshavebeenrecordedinindustriesreceivingfocusundertheNationalOHSStrategy.MoreinformationontheprogressofthesepriorityindustriesagainsttheNationalOHSStrategytargetscanbefoundatsafeworkaustralia.gov.au.

Decreasesintheincidencerateofclaimsfromthepreviousyearwererecordedinmostindustries,themostnotableofwhichwererecordedintheCommunicationservicesindustry(29%),Electricity,gas&watersupply(27%),andMining(24%).

Excludingthesepreliminarydata,fallsintheincidencerateofclaimswererecordedinallindustriesovertheperiod2004–05to2007–08.Thegreatestpercentagefallof25%overthisperiodwasrecordedbytheElectricity,gas&watersupplyindustry.TheMiningindustryrecordedthesecondlargestpercentagefallof22%,whiletheProperty&businessservicesindustryrecordedthethirdlargestfallof21%.MoredetailedinformationonclaimsbyindustrycanbefoundintheCompendium of Workers’ Compensation Statistics,whichcanbefoundatsafeworkaustralia.gov.au.

PremiumratesbyindustryIndicator25showsaveragepremiumratesbyindustryinAustralia,indescendingorderfortheyears2004–05to2008–09.ThesedatashowthattheAgriculture,forestry&fishingindustryrecordedthehighestaveragepremiumrateat3.6%ofpayroll.ThelowestpremiumratewasrecordedbytheFinance&insuranceindustryat0.3%ofpayroll.

Premiumratesforallindustrieshavedecreasedsince2004–05.Thelargestpercentagefallof57%wasrecordedfortheCommunicationservicesindustry.TheElectricity,gas&watersupplyindustryrecordedthesecondlargestpercentagedecreaseof43%,whiletheMiningandConstructionindustrieseachrecordedthethirdlargestpercentagedecreaseof40%.

Thepublishedindustryratesforanumberofschemesarenotnecessarilybasedsolelyonrisk-profileorperformance,assomeschemescross-subsidisepremiums.Thepremiumratesquotedinthissectionofthereportarebasedonpremiumsineachindustrydividedbyremunerationinthatindustry.


05101520253035

Claims per 1000 employees

2004

-05

26.8

28.2

28.9

26.3

18.6

16.8

24.7

17.7

15.2

12.6

9.7

10.0

10.0

8.6

11.5

9.3

3.7

16.0

2005

-06

26.1

27.2

28.2

24.2

16.8

16.7

20.2

15.5

14.6

12.4

9.1

9.6

8.5

8.0

8.3

8.2

3.6

14.9

2006

-07

25.2

26.7

27.5

22.0

16.4

14.7

20.7

14.8

13.7

11.6

9.0

9.3

7.5

8.1

10.0

7.3

3.2

14.2

2007

-08

24.5

25.3

25.3

22.2

15.5

16.0

19.3

14.7

13.0

11.8

8.6

9.9

7.9

7.5

8.6

7.6

3.0

13.8

2008

-09

25.2

25.0

23.4

21.8

16.6

15.1

14.7

14.0

12.1

11.3

8.6

8.6

7.8

6.5

6.3

5.4

2.8

13.0

Aus

Av13

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.013

.0

AI

CE

QF

BO

MH

GP

LN

DJ

KAu

s A v

A A

gric

ultu

re, f

ores

try &

fish

ing

B M

inin

g C

Man

ufac

turin

g D

Ele

ctric

ity, g

as &

wat

er s

uppl

y E

Con

stru

ctio

n F

Who

lesa

le tr

ade

G R

etai

l tra

de

H A

ccom

mod

atio

n, c

afes

& re

stau

rant

s I

Tra

nspo

rt &

stor

age

J C

omm

unic

atio

n se

rvic

es

K F

inan

ce &

insu

ranc

e L

Pro

perty

& b

usin

ess

serv

ices

M

Gov

ernm

ent a

dmin

istra

tion

& de

fenc

e N

Edu

catio

n O

Hea

lth &

com

mun

ity s

ervi

ces

P C

ultu

ral &

recr

eatio

nal s

ervi

ces

Q P

erso

nal &

oth

er s

ervi

ces

Indi

cato

r 24

– In

cide

nce

rate

of s

erio

us c

laim

s* by

indu

stry

* In

clud

es a

ccep

ted

wor

kers

’ com

pens

atio

n cl

aim

s fo

r tem

pora

ry in

capa

city

invo

lvin

g on

e or

mor

e w

eeks

of c

ompe

nsat

ion

plus

all

clai

ms

for f

atal

ity a

nd p

erm

anen

t inc

apac

ity

42 WorkplaceRelationsMinisters’Council

Industry information

Indi

cato

r 25

– A

ustr

alia

n av

erag

e pr

emiu

m ra

tes

by in

dust

ry

012345

% of payroll

2004

-05

4.8

3.5

3.4

4.1

3.2

2.7

2.2

2.3

1.6

1.8

1.9

1.6

1.3

1.7

1.0

1.3

0.4

2.2

2005

-06

4.6

3.3

3.2

3.7

3.0

2.6

2.2

2.2

1.5

1.7

1.8

1.5

1.2

1.5

0.9

1.2

0.4

2.0

2006

-07

4.2

2.9

2.9

3.2

2.7

2.4

1.9

1.9

1.4

1.5

1.5

1.3

1.1

1.4

0.8

1.0

0.3

1.8

2007

-08

3.8

2.7

2.6

2.7

2.5

2.2

1.7

1.7

1.3

1.3

1.3

1.2

1.0

1.1

0.7

1.0

0.3

1.6

2008

-09

3.6

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.3

2.0

1.7

1.6

1.3

1.2

1.2

1.1

1.0

0.9

0.7

0.5

0.3

1.5

2008

-09

Aus a

v1.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

51.

5

AI

CE

QH

OG

PF

BM

ND

LJ

KAu

s Av

A A

gricu

lture

, for

estry

& fis

hing

B M

ining

C M

anuf

actu

ring

D

Elec

tricit

y, ga

s & w

ater

supp

ly

E C

onstr

uctio

n

F W

holes

ale tr

ade

G R

etail

trad

e

H

Acc

omm

odat

ion, c

afes

& re

staur

ants

I T

rans

port

& sto

rage

J Co

mm

unica

tion

serv

ices

K F

inanc

e &

insur

ance

L P

rope

rty &

bus

iness

serv

ices

M

Gov

ernm

ent a

dmini

strat

ion &

def

ence

N E

duca

tion

O H

ealth

& co

mm

unity

serv

ices

P C

ultur

al &

recr

eatio

nal s

ervic

esQ

Per

sona

l & o

ther

serv

ices


Appendix1-Explanatorynotes1.Workers’compensationclaimsdata

ScopeThedatapresentedinthisreportarecollectedthroughtheNational Data Set for Compensation-based Statistics(NDS)andarecompiledannuallyfromclaimsmadeundertheState,TerritoryandAustralianGovernmentworkers’compensationActs.TheNewZealandAccidentCompensationCorporationalsocollectsdatainaccordancewiththeNDS.Thisreportisrestrictedtoseriousclaimswhichresultedinafatality,permanentincapacityoratemporaryincapacitywithoneweekormoreofcompensation(timelostfromwork)excludingthoseoccurringonajourneytoorfromwork.Oneworkingweekisdefinedasbeinglostwhenthenumberofhourslostisgreaterthanorequaltothenumberofhoursusuallyworkedperweek.

Thedatainthisreportdonotcoverallcasesofoccupationalinjuryanddiseaseasgenerallyonlyemployeesarecoveredbyworkers’compensation.Thereforemanycontractorsandself-employedworkersarenotcoveredbythesedata.Theexclusionofself-employedpersonsislikelytoresultinanunderstatementofthenumberofcasesforindustrieswhereself-employedpersonsarecommon,forexample,Agriculture,forestry&fishing;ConstructionandTransport&storage-Roadtransport.Howevertheincidenceandfrequencyratesshowninthisreportforallindustriescanbeconsideredreliableasthedenominatorsusedinthecalculationoftherateshavebeenadjustedtoalsoexcludeself-employedpersons.

Inaddition,thefollowinghavebeenexcludedfromthedatainthisreport:• temporarydisabilityoccupationalinjuriesresultinginabsencesfromworkofless

thanoneworkingweek• militarypersonnelwithintheDefenceForces• casesnotclaimedasworkers’compensationornotacknowledgedasbeing

work-related,and

• claimsforcompensationtotheDustDiseasesBoardofNewSouthWales.

AustralianGovernmentemployeesworkingineachjurisdictionhavebeenincludedinAustralianGovernmentfiguresratherthanStateorTerritoryresults.AustralianCapitalTerritoryPublicServiceemployeesarecoveredbytheComcareschemebutoperateundertheworkhealthandsafetyprovisionsoftheAustralianCapitalTerritory.Assuch,theseemployeesandtheirclaimshavebeencombinedwithAustralianCapitalTerritoryPrivatesectoremployeesforreportingoutcomesinChapters1and2ofthisreport.

Thefollowingtableshows:thepreliminarynumberofseriousclaims;anestimateofthenumberofemployeesineachjurisdiction;andanestimateofthenumberofhoursworkedineachjurisdictionin2008–09.NotethatthenumberofseriousclaimsshownforVictoriaincludetheadjustmentfactorsasexplainedlaterinthesenotes.Theemployeeandhoursfiguresinthetablebelowarethoseusedtocalculatetheincidenceandfrequencyratesinthisreport.Pleasenotethatthenumberofclaimsshownwillincreasewhenupdatedinformationisprovidedbythejurisdictionsfornextyear’sreport.


Appendix 1

Appendix Table 1 – Summary of key jurisdictional data, 2008–09

Jurisdiction Serious claims

% of claims Employees % of

employees Hours (‘000) % of hours

NewSouthWales 42640 33.1 3008600 30.4 5062954960 30.8

Victoria 24130 18.7 2447800 24.8 3955047950 24.1

Queensland 31060 24.1 1857900 18.8 3064510000 18.6

WesternAustralia 12670 9.8 1047700 10.6 1808446690 11.0

SouthAustralia 9010 7.0 705100 7.1 1133402150 6.9

Tasmania 3500 2.7 211800 2.1 332125840 2.0

NorthernTerritory 1290 1.0 109800 1.1 198731860 1.2

AustralianCapitalTerritory 1640 1.3 128800 1.3 204800290 1.2

AustralianGovernment 2660 2.1 362300 3.7 652572260 4.0

Seacare 140 0.1 4700 0.0 21012120 0.1

Australian Total 128 730 100.0 9 884 500 100.0 16 433 604 120 100.0

NewZealand 22980 1784420 3207680640

TimeseriesandadjustmentofschemedataTheestimatesfornumberofemployeesandhoursworkedaresuppliedbytheAustralianBureauofStatistics(ABS)andarebasedonthe Labour Force SurveyandtheSurvey of Employment and Earningsdata.Thesedataarematchedtothescopeoftheclaimsdatabutmaynotbeexact,particularlyinthesmallerjurisdictionsduetothenumberofemployeesbeingderivedfromasurveyofthepopulationratherthanacensus.ThelabourforceestimatesarethenbenchmarkedagainsttheCensuseveryfiveyears.

Incidenceandfrequencyrateswillalsodifferfromthosepresentedinpreviousreportsduetothenumberofacceptedclaimsshownforaparticularyearincreasingduetofurtherdatadevelopment.Thismayinvolveadditionalclaimsbeingacceptedorshortertermclaimswithtemporaryincapacityincurringadditionaltimelosttothenmatchthedefinitionofaseriousclaim:onethatinvolvesoneormoreworkingweeksoftimelost.

Claimsdatashowninthisreportfor2008–09arepreliminary,unlessotherwisestated,astheyaretakenfromanearlierstageofclaimsprocessingthandataforpreviousyearsshowninthispublication.Therefore,thesedataarelikelytobeunderstatedandcomparisonof2008–09datawithpreviousannualdatashouldbeundertakenwithcaution.

Inanalysingtrendsovertime,considerationneedstobegiventoanychangestojurisdiction-specificlegislationduringtheperiodconcerned.Whereprovided,commentaryrelatingtothesecomparisonsshouldbereadcarefully.

FrequencyratesfortheSeacareschemehavebeencalculatedusinga24-hourbasisinrecognitionofthe24-hourriskofexposureduetothenatureofmaritimeindustryemployment.ThisdefinitionisconsistentwithdatapublishedbytheSeacareAuthority.

DuetodifficultiesobtainingtimelostinhoursfortheNorthernTerritory,datahavebeenestimatedusingthedefinitionofaworkingweekoffiveworkingdays.TomakethedatareportedfromtheNorthernTerritoryanddatareportedforallotherjurisdictionscomparable,thedatafortheNorthernTerritoryhasbeenincreasedbyafactorof1.3%from2000–01onwards.


DefinitionofinjuryanddiseaseOccupationalinjuriesaredefinedasallemployment-relatedinjurieswhicharetheresultofasingletraumaticevent,occurringwhileapersonisonduty,orduringarecessperiod,andwheretherewasashortornonexistentlatencyperiod.Thisincludesinjurieswhicharetheresultofasingleexposuretoanagent(s)causinganacutetoxiceffect.

Occupationaldiseasesaredefinedasallemployment-relateddiseaseswhichresultfromrepeatedorlong-termexposuretoanagent(s)orevent(s),orwhicharetheresultofasingletraumaticeventwheretherewasalonglatencyperiod(forexample,thedevelopmentofhepatitisfollowingasingleexposuretotheinfection).

InthisreportIndicator10reportsdataonfatalitiesfrominjuriesseparatelytodisease.Inthisindicatortheinjuriesdataalsoincludeclaimsformusculoskeletaldisorders(MSD).ThischangewasnecessitatedbytheintroductionofanewcodingsysteminVictoriain2002–03whichresultedinahighnumberofclaimspreviouslycodedassprainsandstrains(injuries)beingcodedasdiseasesofthemusculoskeletalsystemandconnectivetissue,moreaccuratelyreflectingtherepetitiveandlongtermmusclestressthatresultsintheseconditions.Tominimisetheeffectofthiscodingchangeontimeseriesconsistency,musculoskeletaldiseaseshavebeencombinedwiththedataoninjuriesforallyearsandalljurisdictionsinthisreport.Asimilarchangeincodingpracticesacrossallotherjurisdictionshasbeenoccurringprogressivelyfrom2005–06asthe3rdeditionoftheTypeofOccurrenceClassificationScheme(TOOCS)isintroducedineachjurisdiction.

AdjustmentofVictoriandataOnlyclaimsinvolvingoneormoreweeksofcompensationhavebeenusedforanalysisinChapters1and2toenablegreatercomparabilityinthejurisdictionaldata.Thistakesaccountofthedifferentemployerexcessesthatexistinvariousschemes.HoweverundertheVictorianworkers’compensationschemetheemployerisgenerallyliableforthefirst10daysoflostwagesbytheinjuredworkerplusthefirst$546(asat30June2008)ofmedicalservices,unlesstheemployerhaselectedtheExcessBuyoutoption.MoreinformationontheExcessBuyoutoptioncanbefoundatworksafe.vic.gov.au.

AsemployersdonotalwaysprovideWorkSafeVictoriawithinformationonclaimslastinglessthan10daysanadjustmentfactorneedstobeappliedinordertocompareVictorianclaimsdatawithotherjurisdictions.TocalculatetheVictorianunder10dayexcessimpact,thepercentageofclaimsofoneandtwoweeksdurationforVictoriawascomparedwiththepercentageofoneandtwoweeksclaimsforotherAustralianjurisdictions.Fromthiscomparison,thenumberofVictorianoneandtwoweeksclaimswasincreasedbyafactorsothatthepercentageofsuchclaimswassimilartotheAustralianaverageforoneandtwoweeksdurationclaims.Theanalysiswasundertakenattheindustrydivisionleveltoallowforagreaterdegreeofhomogeneityinrespectofclaimduration.TheapplicationofthefactorshasincreasedtheclaimssuppliedbyWorkSafeVictoriafrom20763to24115.

SizeofbusinessThenumberofemployeesineachofthefivebusinesssizegroupshasbeenprovidedbytheABS.EmploymentdataarebasedontheAustralian Industry, 2005–06publication(cat.No.8155.0)andderivedusingacombinationofdirectlycollecteddatafromtheAnnual Economic Activity SurveyconductedbytheABSandbusinessincometaxprovidedbybusinessestotheAustralianTaxationOffice.Thescopeandcoverage


Appendix 1

oftheseestimatesarefortheprivatesectorwhichconsistsofallbusinessentitiesintheAustralianeconomyexceptforentitiesclassifiedasgeneralGovernment.Dataonthenumberofclaimsiscollectedineachjurisdictionbyavarietyofmethods,someviatheclaimformandothersbyimputingestimatesfromthedatasuppliedbyemployers.

SelfinsurersjoiningComcare-adjustmentofclaimsOn15March2007newlegislationcameintoeffect,whichextendedthecoverageoftheOccupational Health and Safety Act 1991 (theOHSAct) toorganisationslicensedtoself-insureundertheSafety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988.

Previously,formerCommonwealthauthoritiesandlicensedprivatesectorcorporationsoperatedundertheCommonwealthworkers’compensationregime,butwerecoveredbystateandterritoryworkhealthandsafetylegislationinthejurisdictionsinwhichtheyoperated.Thisamendmentremovedtheneedformultiplecomplianceregimes.However,asthenumberofemployeesandhoursworkedwereoriginallyonlyavailablefromtheworkhealthandsafetyjurisdictions,workers’compensationclaimsfromthoseauthoritiesandcompaniesself-insuringwithComcarewereallocatedtotheirworkhealthandsafetyjurisdictionsfor2005–06and2006–07.In2007–08,theABSundertookareviewofthemethodologyusedtocalculatethenumberofemployeesandhoursdata.Asanoutcomeofthisreview,thenumberofemployeesandhoursdataisnowavailablefromtheworkers’compensationjurisdictionsfortheseyearsandassuch,claimsofthoseauthoritiesandcompaniesself-insuringundertheComcareschemenowremainwithinthescheme.SelfinsurershavebeenincludedintheComcareschemeiftheywereself-insuringwithComcareatJune30intherelevantyear.

2.CommentonenforcementdataForyearspriorto2007–08,AustralianGovernmentdataarenotcomparablewithotherjurisdictions’data.Intermsofworkplaceinterventions,thedataforComcareonlyrepresentinterventionswhichresultedinacomprehensiveinvestigationreport.Theydonotincludevisitstoworkplacesforprovidingadvice,routineworkplacevisitsorindustryforumsandpresentations.

FollowingtheGovernment’sdecisioninMarch2007tograntlicensedself-insurerscoverageunderthe1991OHSAct,thenumberofemployeesregulatedbyComcareincreasedby49percentfrom291535full-timeequivalent(FTE)employeespriortotheMarch2007legislativeamendmentto435585FTEemployeesasatJune2009.Inresponse,Comcareincreaseditsfieldactiveinspectorsfrom22in2005–06to47in2007–08,withafurtherincreaseto60by30June2009,basedinsevenregionalofficesacrossAustralia.Thisensuredappropriateinvestigatorresourcestoeffectivelyregulatethegrowingjurisdiction.TheincreasednumberofworkplaceinterventionsandcourtbasedenforcementactionscanbedirectlyrelatedtothelargeandgrowingnumberofemployersandemployeesthatComcareregulatesacrossitsjurisdiction.

DataprovidedbyWesternAustraliainrelationtoproactiveandreactiveinterventionsincludethenumberofvisits(includingrepeatvisits)forinvestigationswithacompletiondatebetweenthereportingperiod.Ineffortstoprovidestableandreliabledataandtopreventdoublecounting,visitspertainingtoopeninvestigationshavebeenexcluded.

3.StandardisedaveragepremiumratesIn2008FinityConsultingPtyLtdwasengagedtoundertakeareviewofthestandardisationmethodologyusedtocalculatethepremiumratemeasure.Anumberofchangestothecalculationofthepremiumratemeasurewereproposedandhavebeenimplementedsincetheeleventheditionofthisreport.


Thesignificantchangesareasfollows:

• earnedamountsforpremiumsandremunerationaretobesuppliedbutwrittenamountscanbesuppliedifearnedamountsaretoodifficulttoobtain

• thefivemostrecentyears’premiumsandwagesdataisnowsubmittedbyjurisdictions,enablingtheupdatedpremiumratesdatatobepublishedonayearlybasis

• allleviescollectedbyjurisdictionsarenowincludedinthepremiumratemeasure

• forselfinsurers,thechainladdermethodologyhasbeendiscontinuedandreplacedwitheitheractuarialestimatesorinsuredsectorrates,and

• tobeconsistentwithotherjurisdictions,thepremiumratemeasureforNewZealandnowincludesthelevyonemployerstofundtheworkers’compensationportionofthe‘ResidualClaimsAccount’,whichrelatestoworkers’compensationclaimsincurredpriorto1July1999.

Otherissuesaffectingthecomparabilityofpremiumratesacrosstheschemesinclude:

• differencesinbenefitsandcoverageforcertaintypesofinjuries,inparticularthecoverageofthejourneytoandfromwork

• differentlevelsofaccidentfrequencyandseverity

• differencesinclaimsmanagementarrangements

• variationsinthefundingarrangementsfordeliveryofworkhealthandsafetyservices,withsomejurisdictionsprovidingdegreesofcross-subsidisation

• differencesinthedefinitionsofwagesforpremiumsettingpurposesincludingwhethersuperannuationcontributionispartofwages

• differentschemeexcessdeductibles(notethatwageunder-declarationhasnotbeenaccountedforasitisconsideredtohaveasimilarprevalenceineachjurisdiction)

• differentlevelsofself-insurance

• differentindustrymixes

• differencesinpremiumcalculationmethodology,forexample,someschemeshaveexperienceratingformulaeandsomehaveexemptionsforemployerswithlowpayrolls,and

• differentactuarialassumptionsusedinthecalculationofpremiumrates.

Thepremiumratedatainthisreporttakeintoaccountdifferencesinremuneration,self-insuredpremiums,employerexcessandjourneyclaimcoverage.

Premiumsintheself-insuredsectorMostjurisdictionsallowlargeemployerstoself-insuretheirworkers’compensationiftheyprovetheycanmanagetheassociatedfinancialandotherrisks.Jurisdictionswithalargeproportionofemployeesunderself-insurancearrangementsincludeNewSouthWales,SouthAustralia,TasmaniaandtheAustralianGovernment.Significantlyfewerself-insurersoperateinVictoria,Queensland,WesternAustraliaandtheAustralianCapitalTerritoryPrivateScheme.Anumberofmethodologiesareemployedinthisreporttoobtainanestimateoftheamountofpremiumthatself-insurerswouldpay.


Appendix 1

EmployerexcessfactorsSomeschemeshavenon-compensableexcesseswherebytheemployerpaysthefirstfiveor10dayscompensationand/ormeetsmedicalexpensestoamaximumamount.Toimprovecomparabilityofpremiumrates,acommondeductibleofthefirstfivedayscompensationwithnomedicalcostshasbeenapplied.ThefactorsappliedtotheinsuredsectordataineachjurisdictionareshownintheAppendixTable2.Adjustmentfactorsarealsoappliedtotheself-insuredsectortomakethedataconsistentwiththecommondeductibleofthefirstfivedayscompensationwithnomedicalcosts.Appendix Table 2 – Premium rate adjustment factors (%)

JurisdictionEmployer excess factors Journey factor

Insured sector Self insured sector Time lost excess

Time lost excess Medical expenses excess

NewSouthWales n/a n/a -3.2 -7.5

Victoria 2.0 1.0 -2.9 n/a

Queensland -1.5 n/a -3.5 -6.0

WesternAustralia -1.5 n/a -1.8 n/a

SouthAustralia 2.0 n/a -2.9 n/a

Tasmania n/a 0.4 -4.0 n/a

NorthernTerritory -2.5 n/a -2.9 -3.0

AustralianCapitalTerritoryPrivate

-2.0 n/a -2.0 -6.0

AustralianGovernment -2.0 n/a -3.0 n/a

Seacare Excessadjustmentfactorsreviewedannually -7.1

NewZealand n/a n/a 2.9 n/a

JourneyfactorsAlljurisdictionsexceptVictoria,WesternAustralia,SouthAustralia,Tasmania,AustralianGovernmentandNewZealandprovidesomelevelofcoverageforjourneyclaims.Henceanestimatedamountequaltothecostofprovidingthiscoveragehasbeenremovedfromthepremiumratesofthejurisdictionswhoprovidethistypeofcoverage.ThefactorsappliedareshownintheAppendixTable2.InNewZealandjourneyclaimsarecoveredbyadifferentscheme.

SeacareschemeSeacareschemepoliciesoftenincludelargeexcesses,rangingfrom$5000to$100000,representingapproximatelythreeweekstomorethan12monthscompensation,withthemajorityofpoliciescontainingexcessesinthe$5000to$25000range.Anadjustmentfactorhasbeendevelopedtotakeintoaccountthelargeandvariabledeductible.TheimpactofthisfactorisobservedinthenotabledifferencebetweenSeacare’srawpremiumrateandthepremiumrateaftertheemployerexcessadjustmenthasbeenapplied(seecolumns3and4oftheAppendixTable3).


EffectofadjustmentfactorsonpremiumratesAppendixTable3presentsaveragepremiumrateswithvariousadjustmentstoassistcomparability.Eachcolumninthistablerepresentsprogressivelyadjustedpremiumratesasfollows:

Column 1. Thesedataareaveragepremiumratesforinsuredemployersonly,calculatedusingthedefinitionofremunerationasusedbythatjurisdiction,i.e.superannuationincludedwhereapplicable.GSTwasexcludedinallcases.Ratesareapplicabletotheemployerandmedicalexcessesthatapplyineachjurisdictionandhenceshouldnotbecompared.

Column 2. Theseratesareaveragepremiumratesfortheinsuredsectoradjustedtoincludesuperannuationinthedefinitionofremuneration.EstimatesofsuperannuationwereappliedtoWesternAustralia,TasmaniaandtheNorthernTerritory.Allotherjurisdictionswereabletoprovideappropriatedata.DataforNewZealandwerealsoadjustedtoincludesuperannuation.

Column 3. Theseratesaretheaveragepremiumratesforeachjurisdictionincludingboththeinsuredandself-insuredsectorsbeforeanyadjustmentfactorsareapplied.

Column 4. Theseratesadjusttheratesincolumn3toaccountforthedifferentemployerexcessesthatapplyineachjurisdiction.Theadjustmentmadetothedatafromtheself-insuredsectormaybedifferenttothatappliedtothepremiumpayingsectorduetotheassumptionthatanilemployerexcessappliestotheselfinsuredsector.MoreinformationontheadjustmentfactorsusedinthiscalculationisincludedintheExplanatorynotesattheendofthissection.

Column 5. Theseratesfurtheradjusttheratesincolumn4toremoveacomponentcomparabletothecostofprovidingworkers’compensationcoverageforjourneystoandfromwork.TheseadjustmentsapplytoalljurisdictionsexceptVictoria,WesternAustralia,SouthAustralia,TasmaniaandNewZealandwherethecoverageforthesetypesofclaimsisoutsidetheworkers’compensationsystem.

Appendix Table 3 – Effect of adjustment factors on premium rates in 2008–09

Jurisdiction

Average premium rates for premium paying sector

Total(a) average premium rate

Total(a) average premium rate adjusted for employer excess

Total(a) average premium rate adjusted for employer excess and journey claims

Unadjusted Adjusted to include super- annuation

1 2 3 4 5

NSW(b) 1.89 1.89 1.99 1.98 1.83

Vic 1.41 1.41 1.34 1.38 1.38

Qld(c) 1.12 1.12 1.15 1.14 1.07

WA(d) 1.28 1.15 1.16 1.14 1.14

SA 3.05 3.05 2.77 2.82 2.82

Tas 1.56 1.41 1.39 1.38 1.38

NT 2.19 1.98 1.84 1.80 1.74

ACTPrivate 2.29 2.29 2.31 2.27 2.13

AusGov 1.13 1.13 0.98 0.95 0.95

Seacare(e) 4.16 4.16 4.16 4.16 3.86

Australia 1.54 1.54 1.58 1.58 1.52

NZ 1.09 0.98 0.90 0.90 0.90(a) Total of adjusted premium for insured sector plus calculated premium for self-insured sector. (b) The NSW average premium rates also include the dust diseases levy which is not part of the WorkCover New South Wales scheme but is payable by employers in that State.(c) Queensland includes stamp duty levied at a rate of 5% of the premium including GST. (d) Western Australia includes a temporary levy to meet the costs associated with the failure of HIH Insurance Ltd.(e) Note that there are no self-insurers in the Seacare scheme.


Appendix 1

4.ReturntoworkdataDataforthe2008–09Australia and New Zealand Return to Work Monitor(RTWMonitor)aredrawnfromasurveyconductedbyCampbellResearchandConsultingonbehalfoftheHeadsofWorkers’CompensationAuthorities.ThesurveyisconductedinNovemberandMayeachyear.The2008–09sampleconsistedof2965injuredworkerswhohadmadeaworkers’compensationclaim.ThefiguresreportedinthissectionforComcareincludetheAustralianCapitalTerritoryPublicService.TheAustralianCapitalTerritoryPrivateSectorandWesternAustraliadonotparticipateinthissurvey.TheAustralianaverageforeachyeariscalculatedusingthejurisdictionsthatparticipatedinthesurveyforthatyear.ThefullRTWMonitorreportcanbeviewedathwca.org.au.Appendix Table 4 – Sample size by jurisdiction 2008–09Jurisdiction Total Sample SizeNewSouthWales 600

Victoria 600

Queensland 600

SouthAustralia 382

Tasmania 379

NorthernTerritory 120

Comcare 240

Seacare 44

TOTAL of Australian jurisdictions 2 965

NewZealand 600

SamplingerrorThefollowingparagraphistakenfromtheRTWMonitor.

Asampleofalleligibleinjuredworkersissurveyed,assuchthestatisticsproducedhavesamplingerrorassociatedwiththem.Thatis,estimatesfromthesurveymaydifferfromthenumbersthatwouldhavebeenproducedifalleligibleinjuredworkershadbeensurveyed.Thestatisticalestimateofsamplingerroristhestandarderror.Thestandarderrorprovidesabasisformeasuringtheprecisiontowhichthesampleestimatecanestimatethepopulationvalue.Thereisabouta5%chancethatthetruevalueliesoutsidearangeoftwostandarderrorseithersideofthesampleestimate.Sucharangedefinesa95%confidenceintervalforthatestimate.

Appendix5showsthestandarderrorsforthecurrentsamplesizeatthe95%confidenceinterval.Thistableindicatesthatifthesurveyestimateproducedavalueof50%thenwecanbe95%certainthatthetruevaluewouldliebetween48.2%and51.8%iftheentirepopulationwassurveyed.Appendix Table 5 – Survey estimates of 50% and 80% at 95% confidence interval

Survey estimate of 50% Survey estimate of 80%Samplesize Confidence

intervalLowerband Upperband Confidence

intervalLowerband Upperband

2965 +/-1.8% 48.2% 51.8% +/-1.4% 78.6% 81.4%


InterpretationofSeacareAuthorityreturntoworkresultsSeacareAuthorityinjuredworkersfaceuniqueproblemsinattemptingtoreturntoworkwhichneedtobeconsideredwheninterpretingSeacareresults.Tofacilitategraduatedreturntoworkforaninjuredseafarer,asupernumerarypositiononashipneedstobefoundandtherearefewsupernumerarypositionsavailable.Also,itcanbedifficulttoincludeshore-baseddutiesaspartofagraduatedreturntowork,asmanyseafarersliveindifferentlocationstotheiremployers’offices.

Injuredseafarershavetobepassedasmedicallyfitunderfitness-for-dutiesregulationstoresumefullpre-injuryduties.Theinjurytimeforseafarersmayalsobeextendedbythefactthatshipsareawayfromportforfourtosixweeks,meaningthatinjuredworkersmaynotbeabletoresumeworkimmediatelyaftertheyaredeemedfittodoso.Thesefactorscanresultininjuredworkerswaitingadditionaltimetoreturntowork.

5.AssetstoliabilityratiodataAlongwiththepremiumratesmeasure,FinityConsultingPtyLtdwasengagedtoundertakeareviewofthestandardisationmethodologyusedtocalculatetheassetstoliabilitiesratio(fundingratio).Anumberofchangestothecalculationofthefundingratiowereproposedandhavebeenimplementedsincetheeleventheditionofthisreport.Thesignificantchangesareasfollows:

• thestandardisationfordifferentdiscountandinflationrateshasbeenremovedbecauseititdidnotresultinanysignificantimprovementtothedata

• forcentrallyfundedschemes,thefundingratiohasbeenadjustedtoremovenon-claimliabilitiesfromboththeassetsandliabilities

• forComcare,‘pre-premiumbusiness’arisingfromclaimspriorto1July1989hasbeenexcludedfromthemeasureasthisisfundeddirectlyfromspecialappropriationsfromtheAustralianGovernment,and

• tobeconsistentwithotherjurisdictions,thefundingratiomeasureforNewZealandincludesclaimliabilitiesandthecorrespondingassetsinthe‘ResidualClaimsAccount’.

Differentmeasuresofassetstoliabilitiescanarisefromdifferenteconomicandactuarialassumptionsinvaluingliabilitiesaswellasdifferencesinthedefinitionsof:

• assetsandnetassets,and

• liabilities,suchasallowanceinsomeschemesforprudentialmargins,andallowancefordifferentlevelsofclaimhandlingexpenses.

Differentdefinitionsofnetassetshavebeenaddressedinthispublicationbytheapplicationofaconsistentdefinition.Forcentrallyfundedschemes,netassetsareequaltothetotalcurrentandnon-currentassetsoftheschememinustheoutstandingclaimrecoveriesasattheendofthereferencefinancialyear.Forprivatelyunderwrittenschemes,assetsareconsideredtobetheinsurers’overallbalancesheetclaimsprovisions.

Aconsistentdefinitionofnetoutstandingclaimliabilitieshasalsobeenadopted,buttherearestillsomedifferencesbetweenjurisdictionsinthemeasurementofnetoutstandingclaimliabilities.Theserelatetothedifferentclaimhandlingexpenseassumptionsbyjurisdictionsforwhichadjustmentshavenotbeenapplied.

Forcentrallyfundedschemes,netoutstandingclaimliabilitiesareequaltothetotalcurrentandnon-currentliabilitiesoftheschememinusoutstandingclaimrecoveriesasattheendofthereferencefinancialyear.Forprivatelyunderwrittenschemes,liabilities


Appendix 1

aretakenasthecentralestimateofoutstandingclaimsforthescheme(excludingtheself-insuredsector)asattheendofthereferencefinancialyear.

Forjurisdictionswithaseparatefunddedicatedtoworkers’compensation(centrallyfundedschemes),theassetssetasideforfutureliabilitiescanbeeasilyidentifiedfromannualreports.CentrallyfundedschemesoperateinVictoria,Queensland,SouthAustralia,ComcareandNewZealand.

Forjurisdictionswhereworkers’compensationisunderwrittenbyinsurancecompanies(privatelyunderwrittenschemes),assetsaresetasidetomeetallinsuranceliabilitiesbuttheinsurancecompaniesdonotidentifyreservesspecificallyforworkers’compensationliabilities.Fortheseschemes,netassetsareconsideredtobethebalancesheetprovisionsmadebytheinsurersattheendofeachfinancialyear.PrivatelyunderwrittenschemesoperateinWesternAustralia,Tasmania,theNorthernTerritory,theAustralianCapitalTerritoryandSeacare.

TheNewSouthWalesschemeisamanagedfund,combiningsomeofthefeaturesofcentrallyfundedschemesandprivatelyunderwrittenschemes.UndertheWorkCoverScheme,insurershavebeenlicensedasfundmanagersonbehalfoftheWorkCoverAuthorityofNewSouthWales.

PrudentialmarginsManyjurisdictionsaddprudentialmarginstotheirestimatesofoutstandingclaimsliabilitiestoincreasetheprobabilityofmaintainingsufficientassetstomeettheliabilitiesestimate.Thisisdoneinrecognitionthatthereareinherentuncertaintiesintheactuarialassumptionsunderlyingthevalueofoutstandingliabilities.Theadditionofaprudentialmarginwilllowertheassetstoliabilitiesratioforthatjurisdiction.Assomejurisdictionsdonothaveprudentialmargins,thesemarginshavebeenremovedfromtheestimatestoenhancecomparability.Forjurisdictionsthatuseprudentialmarginsindeterminingtheirliabilities,therewillbeagreaterdiscrepancybetweentheratiosshowninthisreportandthoseshownintheirannualreports.Themarginsthathavebeenremovedare:

• NSW—riskmarginof1%removedfrom2004–05,3%from2005–06,13%from2006–07and2007–08and12%from2008-09.

• Victoria—prudentialmarginof8.5%removedfrom2005–06,2006–07,2007–08and2008–09.

• Queensland—prudentialmarginof15%removedfrom2004–05;11.6%from2005–06,11.8%from2006–07,11.7%from2007–08and12.7%2008–09.

• SouthAustralia—aprudentialmarginof7%removedfrom2004–05,5%removedfrom2005–06and2006–07,and5.2%removedfrom2007–08and2008–09.

• NorthernTerritory—prudentialmarginof15%removedfromallyears.

• Comcare—noprudentialmarginwasappliedin2004–05or2005–06.In2006–07aprudentialmarginof6.9%wasremovedfrompremiumbusinessanda7.5%marginforpre-premiumbusiness.In2007–08aprudentialmarginof9.6%wasremovedfrompremiumbusinessanda9%marginremovedforpre-premiumbusiness.In2008–09aprudentialmarginof11.8%wasremovedfrompremiumbusinessanda12.7%marginremovedfrompre-premiumbusiness.

Theliabilitiesfortheremainderoftheschemesarecentralestimates,withoutprudentialmargins.


6.SchemeexpendituredataInadditiontothepremiumrateandfundingratiomeasures,FinityConsultingPtyLtdwasengagedtoundertakeareviewtotheschemeexpendituremeasurein2008.Anumberofchangestothemeasurewererecommendedandhavebeenimplementedsincetheeleventheditionofthisreport.Thenewdataitemsareasfollows:

Directtoworkercostsarecompensationspaidtoinjuredemployeeseitherasweeklybenefits,redemptions,lumpsums,commonlawsettlements(excludinglegalcosts)andnon-economiclossbenefits.

Servicestoworkercostsencompass:medicaltreatment,rehabilitation,legalcosts,returntoworkassistance,transportation,employeeadvisoryservicesandinterpretercoststhatareusedtoassistemployeesrecoverfromtheirinjuryandreturntowork.

Insuranceoperationscostsencompass:claimsmanagement,premiums/levymanagement,feespaidtoagents,medicalreports,licensedinsurerexpenses,registrationofemployers,collectionofpremiumsandothercostsassociatedwiththeclaimsmanagementandpremiumcollectionfunctionsofthescheme.

Regulationcostsinclude:licenceandperformancemanagement,complianceactivity,fraudinvestigations,litigationandprosecution,returntoworkandcompensationadvertising,ITcosts,injurymanagementandreturntoworkresearch,actuarialservicesandadministrationandoverseeingofself-insurersandexemptemployers.

Disputeresolutioncostsincludeallactivitiesassociatedwiththefinalisingofdisputesotherthanthedirectcostsassociatedwithaclaim,suchaslegalrepresentationcosts,whichareincludedasclaimpayments.Includescostsassociatedwithdepartmentsofjustice/courts,conciliation,medicalpanelsandworkerscompensationtribunals/courts.

Otheradministrationcostsincludeexpenditureassociatedwithcorporateadministration,butexcludescorporateadministrationcostsallocatedtoworkhealthandsafety.Costsencompassexecutivemanagement,board/managementcommittee,corporateplanningandreporting,finance,humanresourcesandpersonnel,administration,auditcosts,corporatelegalcosts,bankchargesandITcosts(includingdepreciation).


App

endi

x Ta

ble

6 –

Key

feat

ures

of A

ustr

alia

n w

orke

rs’ c

ompe

nsat

ion

sche

mes

, 200

8–09

New

Sou

th

Wal

es

Vict

oria

Que

ensl

and

Wes

tern

A

ustr

alia

Sout

h A

ustr

alia

Tasm

ania

Nor

ther

n Te

rrito

ryA

ustr

alia

n C

apita

l Te

rrito

ry

Priv

ate

Aus

tralia

n G

over

nmen

t

Fund

Typ

eM

anag

ed

fund

Cen

tral

fu

ndC

entr

al

fund

Priv

ate

insu

rers

Cen

tral

fu

ndPr

ivat

e in

sure

rsPr

ivat

e in

sure

rsPr

ivat

e in

sure

rsC

entr

al

fund

Cov

er fo

r jo

urne

y cl

aim

sYes

No(

a)Yes

No(

f)No

No

Yes-limited(

c)Yes

Asof13April2007theSRC

delcarednocoveragefor

non–workrelatedjourneysor

recessbreaks.

Com

mon

law

av

aila

ble

Yes

Yes-limited

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes-limited

Red

empt

ions

/Se

ttlem

ents

av

aila

ble

Yes

Yes-limited

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes-limited

Num

ber o

f em

ploy

ees

(b)

3008600

2447800

1857900

1047800

705100

211800

109800

110300

362200

Num

ber o

f se

lf-in

sure

rs68

(e)

3723

2770pluscrow

n13

4pluscrown

829

(d)

Stan

dard

ised

av

g. p

rem

ium

ra

te (%

)1.83

1.38

1.07

1.14

2.82

1.38

1.74

2.13

0.95

Fund

ing

ratio

(%

) 98

120

146

128

56134

112

n/a

117

Dis

puta

tion

rate

(%)

7.0

15.5

3.3

3.9

16.7

7.5

7.7

n/a

8.9

Dur

able

retu

rn

to w

ork

rate

(%

) 72

6973

n/a

7180

81n/a

88

(a) N

ote

that

jour

ney

clai

ms

are

cove

red

by th

e TA

C in

Vic

toria

for i

njur

ies

sust

aine

d to

/from

wor

k. J

ourn

ey in

jurie

s su

stai

ned

in th

e co

urse

of w

ork

are

com

pens

able

und

er th

e A

ccid

ent

Com

pens

atio

n A

ct 1

985.

(b) T

he n

umbe

r of e

mpl

oyee

s is

sup

plie

d fro

m th

e A

BS

usi

ng L

abou

r For

ce S

urve

y da

ta a

s a

base

, with

a n

umbe

r of a

djus

tmen

ts a

pplie

d to

acc

ount

for

diffe

renc

es in

wor

kers

com

pens

atio

n co

vera

ge fo

r som

e ju

risdi

ctio

ns. F

igur

es a

re ro

unde

d to

the

near

est 1

000.

(c) J

ourn

ey c

laim

s no

t cov

ered

if in

cide

nt in

volv

es a

mot

or v

ehic

le. T

his

is c

over

ed b

y th

e M

otor

Acc

iden

ts (C

ompe

nsat

ion)

Am

endm

ent A

ct 2

007.

(d

) As

at J

une

30th

, 200

9.

(e) A

s at

Jun

e 30

th, 2

009

New

Sou

th W

ales

had

60

self

insu

rers

and

7 s

peci

alis

ed in

sure

rs.

(f) C

over

age

for i

njur

ies

durin

g a

jour

ney

aris

ing

out o

f or i

n th

e co

urse

of e

mpl

oym

ent a

t the

dire

ctio

n of

the

empl

oyer

. Cov

erag

e is

con

ditio

nal o

n th

ere

bein

g no

sub

stan

tial d

evia

tion

in th

e jo

urne

y m

ade

for a

ny re

ason

unc

onne

cted

with

the

wor

ker’s

em

ploy

men

t.

Appendix2-KeyfeaturesofAustralianWorkers’CompensationSchemes

App

endi

x Ta

ble

7 –

Entit

lem

ents

und

er A

ustr

alia

n w

orke

rs’ c

ompe

nsat

ion

sche

mes

for a

war

d w

age

earn

ers

as a

t 1 J

anua

ry 2

009^*

New

Sou

th

Wal

esVi

ctor

iaQ

ueen

slan

dW

este

rn

Aus

tral

iaSo

uth

Aus

tral

iaTa

sman

iaN

orth

ern

Terr

itory

Aus

tral

ian

Cap

ital

Terr

itory

Aus

tral

ian

Gov

ernm

ent

Entit

lem

ents

exp

ress

ed a

s a

perc

enta

ge o

f pre

-inju

ry e

arni

ngs

for a

war

d w

age

earn

ers

0-13

wee

ks

(tota

l in

capa

city

)

100%

(excl

overtim

e)**

95%uptomax.

$1250

85%ofN

WE***

(or100%under

industrialagreement)

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

14-2

6 w

eeks

(tot

al

inca

paci

ty)

100%

(excl

overtim

e)**

75%uptomax

85%ofN

WE***

(or100%under


100%

90%

85%

100%

100%

100%

27-5

2 w

eeks

(tot

al

inca

paci

ty)

90%(excl

overtim

e)upto

$367.70pw+

allowances*

*

75%(exclO

/T)

uptomax

75%NWEor70%

QOTE

***

100%

80%

85%

75-90%

Iflessthanstatfloor

100%

.Otherwise,

then65%

-minstat

floor($543)and

max($1922).

27-45wks100%

46-52wks75%

53-1

04

wee

ks (t

otal

in

capa

city

)

90%(excl

overtim

e)upto

$367.70pw+

allowances*

*

75%(exclO

/T)

uptomax

75%NWEor70%

QOTE

***

100%

80%

53-78weeks

85%,79-104

weeks80%

75-90%

Iflessthanstatfloor

100%

.Otherwise,

then65%

-minstat

floor($543)and

max($1922).

75%

104+

wee

ks

(tota

l in

capa

city

)

90%(excl

overtim

e)upto

$381.40pw+

allowances*

*

75%(exclO

/T

uptomax.,

subjecttowork

capacitytest

after130weeks)

75%NWEor

70%QOTE

if>

15%im

pairm

ent,

otherwisesingle

pensionrate

***

100%

80%subjectto

capacityreview

80%

75-90%

Iflessthanstatfloor

100%

.Otherwise,

then65%

-minstat

floor($543)and

max($1922).

75%

Oth

er e

ntitl

emen

tsLu

mp

Sum

s-

max

imum

>75%

impairm

ent:

$220000for

multipleinjuries

or$231000for

backim

pairm

ent

+$50000pain&

suffering

$396690

$244710

$168499+up

to$126374+if

theinjuryhas

resultedintotal

permanent

incapacity

$420558

$223824

$231254.40

permanent

impairm

ent

$185288cpi

indexed

$155960.87

permanent

impairm

ent+

$29242.68non-

econom

icloss

Lim

its-

med

ical

and

ho

spita

l

$50000orgreater

amountprescribed

ordirectedbyWC

Com

mission

52weeks

fromcessation

ofweekly

paym

ents

##

Medical-no

limit.Hospital-4

days(>

4daysif

reasonable)

$50550+

$50000

inspecial

circum

stances

+uptoan

additional

$250000

++

inspecial

circum

stances

Nolim

itNolim

its,but

entitlements

ceaseafter9

years

Nolim

itNolim

itNolim

it

Dea

th

bene

fits

(all

juris

dict

ions

pa

y fu

nera

l ex

pens

es

to d

iffer

ing

amou

nts)

$425000+

$104.10pwfor

eachdependant

child

$265590

(shared)+pre-

injuryearnings-

relatedpensions

toamaximum

of$1250pw

fordependent

partner/sand

children

$458370+$12245

todep.spouse+

$24480foreach

dep.familymem

ber

under16orstudent

+$90.60pw

perchild

tospousewhile

childrenareunder

6yrs+$113.25pw

perdep.child/

familymem

ber

whilechildren/family

mem

bersareunder

16yrsorastudent

$230992+

$44.20pw

for

eachdependant

child+max

of$50550

form

edical

expenses

#

Dependentpartner

and1dependant

child-Pa

rtner

$378502.20

(90%

)+weekly

paym

entsof50%

notionalw

eekly

earnings,child

$42055.80(10%

)+weeklypaym

ents

of12.5%

notional

weeklyearnings.

$223824+100%

weeklypaym

ent

0-13weeks,

85%weekly

paym

ent14-78

weeks,80%

weeklypaym

ent

79-104weeks

+$60.66pw

for

eachdependant

child

$289068+

$111.18pw

foreach

dependant

childto

maxof10

children

$185288cpi

indexed+$61.76

pwcpiindexedfor

eachdependant

child

$429304+

$118.06pwfor

eachdependant

child


App

endi

x Ta

ble

7 –

Entit

lem

ents

und

er A

ustr

alia

n w

orke

rs’ c

ompe

nsat

ion

sche

mes

for a

war

d w

age

earn

ers

as a

t 1 J

anua

ry 2

009^*

New

Sou

th

Wal

esVi

ctor

iaQ

ueen

slan

dW

este

rn

Aus

tral

iaSo

uth

Aus

tral

iaTa

sman

iaN

orth

ern

Terr

itory

Aus

tral

ian

Cap

ital

Terr

itory

Aus

tral

ian

Gov

ernm

ent

Entit

lem

ents

exp

ress

ed a

s a

perc

enta

ge o

f pre

-inju

ry e

arni

ngs

for a

war

d w

age

earn

ers

0-13

wee

ks

(tota

l in

capa

city

)

100%

(excl

overtim

e)**

95%uptomax.

$1250

85%ofN

WE***

(or100%under


100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

14-2

6 w

eeks

(tot

al

inca

paci

ty)

100%

(excl

overtim

e)**

75%uptomax

85%ofN

WE***

(or100%under


100%

90%

85%

100%

100%

100%

27-5

2 w

eeks

(tot

al

inca

paci

ty)

90%(excl

overtim

e)upto

$367.70pw+

allowances*

*

75%(exclO

/T)

uptomax

75%NWEor70%

QOTE

***

100%

80%

85%

75-90%

Iflessthanstatfloor

100%

.Otherwise,

then65%

-minstat

floor($543)and

max($1922).

27-45wks100%

46-52wks75%

53-1

04

wee

ks (t

otal

in

capa

city

)

90%(excl

overtim

e)upto

$367.70pw+

allowances*

*

75%(exclO

/T)

uptomax

75%NWEor70%

QOTE

***

100%

80%

53-78weeks

85%,79-104

weeks80%

75-90%

Iflessthanstatfloor

100%

.Otherwise,

then65%

-minstat

floor($543)and

max($1922).

75%

104+

wee

ks

(tota

l in

capa

city

)

90%(excl

overtim

e)upto

$381.40pw+

allowances*

*

75%(exclO

/T

uptomax.,

subjecttowork

capacitytest

after130weeks)

75%NWEor

70%QOTE

if>

15%im

pairm

ent,

otherwisesingle

pensionrate

***

100%

80%subjectto

capacityreview

80%

75-90%

Iflessthanstatfloor

100%

.Otherwise,

then65%

-minstat

floor($543)and

max($1922).

75%

Oth

er e

ntitl

emen

tsLu

mp

Sum

s-

max

imum

>75%

impairm

ent:

$220000for

multipleinjuries

or$231000for

backim

pairm

ent

+$50000pain&

suffering

$396690

$244710

$168499+up

to$126374+if

theinjuryhas

resultedintotal

permanent

incapacity

$420558

$223824

$231254.40

permanent

impairm

ent

$185288cpi

indexed

$155960.87

permanent

impairm

ent+

$29242.68non-

econom

icloss

Lim

its-

med

ical

and

ho

spita

l

$50000orgreater

amountprescribed

ordirectedbyWC

Com

mission

52weeks

fromcessation

ofweekly

paym

ents

##

Medical-no

limit.Hospital-4

days(>

4daysif

reasonable)

$50550+

$50000

inspecial

circum

stances

+uptoan

additional

$250000

++

inspecial

circum

stances

Nolim

itNolim

its,but

entitlements

ceaseafter9

years

Nolim

itNolim

itNolim

it

Dea

th

bene

fits

(all

juris

dict

ions

pa

y fu

nera

l ex

pens

es

to d

iffer

ing

amou

nts)

$425000+

$104.10pwfor

eachdependant

child

$265590

(shared)+pre-

injuryearnings-

relatedpensions

toamaximum

of$1250pw

fordependent

partner/sand

children

$458370+$12245

todep.spouse+

$24480foreach

dep.familymem

ber

under16orstudent

+$90.60pw

perchild

tospousewhile

childrenareunder

6yrs+$113.25pw

perdep.child/

familymem

ber

whilechildren/family

mem

bersareunder

16yrsorastudent

$230992+

$44.20pw

for

eachdependant

child+max

of$50550

form

edical

expenses

#

Dependentpartner

and1dependant

child-Pa

rtner

$378502.20

(90%

)+weekly

paym

entsof50%

notionalw

eekly

earnings,child

$42055.80(10%

)+weeklypaym

ents

of12.5%

notional

weeklyearnings.

$223824+100%

weeklypaym

ent

0-13weeks,

85%weekly

paym

ent14-78

weeks,80%

weeklypaym

ent

79-104weeks

+$60.66pw

for

eachdependant

child

$289068+

$111.18pw

foreach

dependant

childto

maxof10

children

$185288cpi

indexed+$61.76

pwcpiindexedfor

eachdependant

child

$429304+

$118.06pwfor

eachdependant

child

^

E

ntitl

emen

t ben

efits

do

not i

nclu

de s

uper

annu

atio

n.*

Pay

men

t thr

esho

lds

and

spec

ific

bene

fit a

rran

gem

ents

may

als

o ap

ply.

The

rele

vant

juris

dict

ion

shou

ld b

e co

ntac

ted

dire

ctly

if fu

rther

info

rmat

ion

is re

quire

d.**

Ben

efits

sho

wn

for e

mpl

oyee

s w

orki

ng u

nder

an

indu

stria

l aw

ard.

If n

ot u

nder

an

awar

d, b

enefi

ts a

re 8

0% o

f pre

-inju

ry e

arni

ngs

for fi

rst 2

6 w

eeks

. Diff

eren

t rat

es a

pply

afte

r 26

wee

ks.

***

N

WE

- no

rmal

wee

kly

earn

ings

, QO

TE -

Sea

sona

lly a

djus

ted

amou

nt o

f Que

ensl

and

Full-

time

adul

t per

sons

ord

inar

y tim

e ea

rnin

gs s

ubje

ct to

wor

k-re

late

d im

pairm

ent

+

In c

ases

whe

re a

n in

jury

resu

lts in

the

perm

anen

t tot

al in

capa

city

of a

wor

ker,

and

thei

r soc

ial a

nd fi

nanc

ial c

ircum

stan

ces

just

ify it

, an

arbi

trato

r my

orde

r up

to a

n ad

ditio

nal 7

5% o

f the

Pre

scrib

ed

Am

ount

for w

eekl

y pa

ymen

ts.

++

If t

he in

jure

d w

orke

rs’ d

egre

e of

per

man

ent w

hole

of p

erso

n im

pairm

ent i

s 15

% o

r mor

e an

d\ w

here

the

wor

ker’s

soc

ial a

nd fi

nanc

ial c

ircum

stan

ces

just

ify it

#

Lum

p su

m s

hare

d un

der s

tatu

tory

form

ulae

bet

wee

n sp

ouse

and

chi

ldre

n. P

ensi

on p

ayab

le to

par

tner

for 3

yea

rs a

nd to

chi

ldre

n un

til a

ge o

f 16

(or 2

1 in

full-

time

stud

y)##

E

xcep

t for

wor

kers

who

rece

ive

a se

ttlem

ent o

r aw

ard

of p

ecun

iary

loss

dam

ages

or a

sta

tuto

ry v

olun

tary

set

tlem

ent.


Appendix3-JurisdictionalcontactinformationJurisdiction Organisation Contact detailsNewSouthWales WorkCoverNSW WorkCoverAssistance131050

[email protected]

Victoria WorkSafeVictoria AdvisoryService1800136089info@worksafe.vic.gov.auwww.worksafe.vic.gov.au

Queensland WorkplaceHealthandSafetyQueensland–DepartmentofJusticeandAttorneyGeneral

Infoline1300369915www.worksafe.qld.gov.au

WesternAustralia WorkCoverWA

WorkSafeWA-DepartmentofCommerce

(08)93885555www.workcover.wa.gov.au

(08)93278777www.commerce.wa.gov.au/WorkSafe

SouthAustralia SafeWorkSA

WorkCoverSA

(08)83030245www.safeworksa.gov.au

131855www.workcover.com

Tasmania WorkCoverTasmaniaandWorkplaceStandards

Helpline1300366322(insideTas)(03)62337657(outsideTas)[email protected]

NorthernTerritory NTWorkSafe [email protected]

AustralianCapitalTerritory

WorkSafeACT-OfficeofRegulatoryServices

(02)62073000www.workcover.act.gov.au

Seafarers SeacareAuthority (02)[email protected]

AustralianGovernment Comcare 1300366979www.comcare.gov.au

NewZealand AccidentCompensationCommission

6449184295www.acc.co.nz

comparative performance monitoring report · comparative performance monitoring report ......

Documents