Some EBAs include journey accident cover, some unions will cover you for this, too.
If you're away on a work related trip you are covered, whether you trip and break your ankle while walking down the street or have a light fall on you.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 131 to 140 of 203
21-04-2012 09:48 #131Senior Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
21-04-2012 09:51 #132Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
I was just googling as it appears that commonwealth employees may not be covered for journey claims as they are under different legislation (I think she was a commonwealth employee, which is why I mention it, but she wasn't on a journey anyway).
21-04-2012 11:02 #133
It's just the law that actually classes this as a workplace injury is what I don't agree with, not her right to claim as such. I've tried explaining this view many times - I do not blame her, I blame the technicalities in the law that allows this just because her employer sent her there initially.
I wonder if she would still be covered if she chose to extend her trip by a day to see her friend and then hurt herself? Should she still be covered in that situation? Going by the PP of some, then people think she should be covered for everything just because her work originally sent her...that's logic I don't agree with, but each to their own of course.
I'm also not against workplace compo at all, it's an essential cover all employees are entitled too, absolutely. It's just my personal opinion that the cover should be reserved for actual injuries sustained whilst carrying out your duties or at work. If I was injured doing my job then I'd expect to be covered, thats not hypocrital at all. If I was injured in a hotel room then I would blame the hotel, not my company - that's the issue here for me, I can't speak for others though.
The Following User Says Thank You to Pesca77 For This Useful Post:
21-04-2012 12:20 #134
If you were covered during the hours of the work function, and you spilled something on your dress who would be responsible if you injured yourself while changing in your room... or if the injury happened in your room after the function ended???? Same injury, same room, different times...
Its all well and good for you not to agree but lets be practical here, to have to prove negligence/liability/responsibility in each and every case like this is absolutely impossible, a logistical and legal nightmare, impractical, unworkable... imagine the legal workload of work/hotel trying to disprove their liability...
i would guess that is why the law has been set up as it is, if you are there at the behest of your employer, they bear the 'responsibility'
Last edited by Gothel; 21-04-2012 at 12:23.
21-04-2012 13:09 #135
Its not money grabbing, she's not making money out of this. Its compensation. She will have had medical costs, time off work, psychologist bills. A workcover claim is quite modest - its no big windfall by any means. Its to reimburse you for the consequences of the accident. Certainly no free ride to be injured.
21-04-2012 13:22 #136
She was injured because of a light smashing not a p3nis injury to the face.
Of course she should be covered. Good for her if she got laid on a work trip
21-04-2012 13:36 #137
The Act she recovered under was the Safety, Rehabilitation and compensation Act (Cth). Its an interesting read. Anyone can read it for free on Austlii (google it). Cth employees are covered quite extensively for any injury occurring during your course of employment (course of employment is not just at work, working, its a much broader term than that.)
There are good reasons for insuring people for injuries like this. Its cost shifting. Someone must pay the bills. An injured employee who can't work will quickly run out of resources. Would you rather they seek help from the welfare system, or claim from an insurance company set up specifically for injured employees? Its just a matter of practicality. In this country there are mechanisms to support people in times of hardship. They're far from perfect, and people still fall through the cracks, but I find it reassuring to know 'no fault'protections are in place.
21-04-2012 14:08 #138
It ****es me off though reading this that I didn't know about work cover and what my rights were when I dislocated my knee at work when I was 20. (like while working. On the premises. During my shift. Doing my job. NO grey area!!!) and I just didn't know. So they didn't pay me for the rest of the day (though I did actually stay at work?!?) bullied me into coming the next day, (child care, so no putting my feet up, I had to walk on it!) and I covered my medical expenses (probably only $100-$150 on GP, pain killers & anti inflamitaries and a stretchy knee brace thing - but STILL!)
I hope aside from a bit of debate, I hope this case brings workers rights to people's attention who may not have known they had rights!
21-04-2012 14:12 #139
I did jump to a conclusion because frankly, I didn't really believe you. You are throwing around the word "morally" etc when to be honest, morals don't really come in to this. But let's say your moral reference really was just that you think she is morally wrong for making her claim. The lady made a worker's comp claim. The employer covered her salary and medical costs. It is then up to the employer to recoup losses they have incurred from the negligent party- the hotel. That is the procedure. Not many people have the money to engage a lawyer and sue privately, and that is usually done to receive a lump sum payout and it takes months or even years. Well and good, but this lady obviously would have had time off and expenses then and there. By following the correct procedure she saved herself time and money, she was not a burden on centrelink etc and the avenue was still there for the employer to recoup their losses, so the negligent party still pays, the lady gets her treatment and is not out of pocket while recovering. Why is that such a "low act"?
The facts are, she did nothing legally wrong, so legally, the story is indeed at it's end. Sorry if that offends you. If you think the laws should be changed, that's cool, go ahead and campaign for it. Imagine for a moment this woman was blinded- not inconceivable with a presumably glass fitting hitting you in the face. I'm sure you'll find people out there that have been so afflicted. Would you still say she should have sued the hotel and waited years for financial recompense while paying their own way out of....what? She'd likely be unable to work anymore- through no fault of her own. Her retirement fund? Or live in near poverty on disability payments? I actually think suggesting the laws change to reflect this is much lower, morally speaking. That is the end of the story from MY perspective.
21-04-2012 14:31 #140
I'm sorry I think the world has gone mad
***Happy to be a Mummy & Daddy of ONE! :-) ***
By suemp in forum Family FinancesReplies: 13Last Post: 01-05-2012, 11:10
By RmumR in forum General ChatReplies: 10Last Post: 14-02-2012, 08:25
By MissPoss in forum General ChatReplies: 9Last Post: 22-01-2012, 19:00
Life FertilityLife Fertility Clinic is a boutique fertility clinic located in Spring Hill, Brisbane. Our dedicated fertility and IVF ...
LATESTWhy it is OK for your child to be differentWhat is a blessing way? How is it different to a baby shower?7 ways to break the ‘mumnotony’ at home
POPULARWhen can I start giving chores to my children?New baby nursery checklist – a guide to newborn essentialsWhat to pack for labour and hospital – a checklist
FORUMS - chatting now ...
Lite & Easy ???Second Trimester Chat
ongoing chat threadGeneral Chat
Happiness thread.General Chat
The Vampire Diaries LAST EPISODEMovies / Music / Books / TV Chat
Egg Donation in Greece #5Egg Donation
A - Z of baby girl namesGames & fun stuff
Placenta distance for natural birthThird Trimester Chat
Come chat, Ladies who are 40+ TTC or ExpectingConception & Fertility General Chat