Published Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 at 01:13 PM
Minister for State Development, Employment and Industrial Relations
The Honourable John Mickel
QUEENSLAND WORKERS AND BUSINESSES WORSE OFF UNDER FEDERAL WORKERS COMPENSATION SCHEME
Queensland workers and businesses will be worse off if there is a take over of the States system by the federal Comcare scheme Queensland Minister for State Development, Employment and Industrial Relations John Mickel said today.
“As examples a worker who becomes tetraplegic (paralysis of hands, impaired upper body movement and paralysis of the trunk and lower limbs) who was earning $1000/week gross and with a dependant spouse and children aged 7 and 8 at the time of injury. Could receive 7% less compensation ($100 000) if their employer was insured under Comcare rather than the Queensland Workcover scheme”, Mr Mickel said.
“A worker who is killed who was earning $1000/week with a dependant spouse and two children aged 7 and 8 could receive $100 000 less if their employer was insured through Comcare instead of Queensland’s Workcover Scheme”
“Furthermore under the Queensland Scheme workers still have access to common law and journey claims, the Commonwealth Government has announced it will be abolishing journey claims under Comcare”
The Commonwealth is allowing corporations that compete against the Commonwealth to self insure under the Comcare Scheme.
“Companies operating in Queensland should remain with the Queensland system because Queensland has lower average premiums for businesses while providing better entitlements for workers.”
The average premium in Queensland is 1.20%, the Comcare (Federal Scheme) is 1.77%, the Queensland average has decreased by 22.6% over the last 5 years whilst Comcare’s average levy has increased by 56.6% over the last five years.
“I fear the extension of Comcare to corporations that compete against the Commonwealth will be extended and workers and their families will be worse off,” Mr Mickel said.
Details of the two scenarios comparing entitlements under Comcare and Workcover are attached.
_______________________________________________
Workers’ Compensation Entitlements
– Queensland and the Federal Workers’ Compensation Schemes
The Workplace Relations Ministers’ Council Comparative Performance Monitoring Report – Comparison of occupational health and safety and workers’ compensation schemes in Australia and New Zealand Eighth Edition (November 2006) outlines a number of scenarios that allow for a comparison of worker entitlements under Queensland’s workers’ compensation scheme with self-insured employers under the Federal workers’ compensation scheme (Comcare).
Scenarios 1 and 2 are extracted from the Comparative Performance Monitoring Report. This report is collated using the input of each Australian jurisdiction on the application of their entitlements to the scenario on 1 January 2005. As changes to these entitlements may have been made after this date, these are also noted.
Note: Weekly benefits cut off in the Queensland scheme after 5 years and the Comcare scheme at age 65. However, this is unlikely to have a significant impact as 88% of all Queensland claims are finalised within the first 26 weeks (2005-06).
Queensland allows access to common law. Comcare does not allow access to common law.
Scenario 1: Permanent Incapacity
The employee’s pre-injury earnings were $1000 gross per week. The employee is 35 years of age and has a dependent spouse and two children aged 7 and 8. The older child entered the workforce and stopped being dependent at 16 and the other remained in full-time education until age 25. The employee contributed to a superannuation fund. There was no contributory negligence on his part and no mitigating factors.
As a result of the workplace incident, the employee was diagnosed with complete tetraplegia below the 6th cervical neurological segment. This resulted in paralysis of his hands, impaired upper body movement and paralysis of the trunk and lower limbs. He lost all lower body function and was wheelchair-bound. Incapacity was total and permanent and there was no real prospect of returning to work.
As at 1 January 2005, a Comcare worker in this scenario would receive 7% ($100,000) less compensation than a Queensland worker (Queensland $1.519M;Comcare $1.420M). (Indicator 17).
These entitlements payable to the injured employee include the weekly benefits payable for the remainder of the employee’s working life (30 years), all lump sum payments for permanent incapacity, including estimates of common law settlements, but excluding medical and like services.
Scenario 2: Fatality
The employee’s pre-injury earnings were $1000 gross per week. The employee is 35 years of age and has a dependent spouse and two children aged 7 and 8. The older child entered the workforce and stopped being dependent at 16 and the other remained in full-time education until age 25. A workplace incident resulted in the death of this employee. The employee’s spouse did not re-enter the workforce or remarry for ten years.
As at 1 January 2005, a Comcare worker’s family would receive 17% ($63,000) less compensation than a Queensland workers’ family (Queensland $355,000; Comcare $292,000). (Indicator 17).
However, since November 2005 amendments to the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 mean that a Queensland worker’s family in this situation would receive additional statutory entitlements. This would overall mean an entitlement of over $100,000 more than a Comcare worker’s dependant family.
In particular the following relevant changes were made to benefits (excluding indexation):
• the lump sum payment to the dependent family increased by approximately $60,000 to $374,625;
• an addition lump sum payment of $10,000 was introduced for dependent spouses;
• the lump sum payment to dependent children was increased by approximately $2,500 to $20,000; and
• the weekly payment to dependent children was increased from 7% to 10% of Queensland Ordinary Time Earnings.
In contrast no changes (excluding indexation) have been made to Comcare’s entitlements that could impact on the entitlements of a worker’s family in this situation.
Note: While not applicable to the scenario an additional weekly payment for dependent spouses who have dependent children under school age of 10% of Queensland Ordinary Time Earnings was also introduced in November 2005. These benefits are not available under Comcare.
Media contacts: Chris Brown 3224 7349 or Elouise Campion 3224 6784
13 December 2006
“As examples a worker who becomes tetraplegic (paralysis of hands, impaired upper body movement and paralysis of the trunk and lower limbs) who was earning $1000/week gross and with a dependant spouse and children aged 7 and 8 at the time of injury. Could receive 7% less compensation ($100 000) if their employer was insured under Comcare rather than the Queensland Workcover scheme”, Mr Mickel said.
“A worker who is killed who was earning $1000/week with a dependant spouse and two children aged 7 and 8 could receive $100 000 less if their employer was insured through Comcare instead of Queensland’s Workcover Scheme”
“Furthermore under the Queensland Scheme workers still have access to common law and journey claims, the Commonwealth Government has announced it will be abolishing journey claims under Comcare”
The Commonwealth is allowing corporations that compete against the Commonwealth to self insure under the Comcare Scheme.
“Companies operating in Queensland should remain with the Queensland system because Queensland has lower average premiums for businesses while providing better entitlements for workers.”
The average premium in Queensland is 1.20%, the Comcare (Federal Scheme) is 1.77%, the Queensland average has decreased by 22.6% over the last 5 years whilst Comcare’s average levy has increased by 56.6% over the last five years.
“I fear the extension of Comcare to corporations that compete against the Commonwealth will be extended and workers and their families will be worse off,” Mr Mickel said.
Details of the two scenarios comparing entitlements under Comcare and Workcover are attached.
_______________________________________________
Workers’ Compensation Entitlements
– Queensland and the Federal Workers’ Compensation Schemes
The Workplace Relations Ministers’ Council Comparative Performance Monitoring Report – Comparison of occupational health and safety and workers’ compensation schemes in Australia and New Zealand Eighth Edition (November 2006) outlines a number of scenarios that allow for a comparison of worker entitlements under Queensland’s workers’ compensation scheme with self-insured employers under the Federal workers’ compensation scheme (Comcare).
Scenarios 1 and 2 are extracted from the Comparative Performance Monitoring Report. This report is collated using the input of each Australian jurisdiction on the application of their entitlements to the scenario on 1 January 2005. As changes to these entitlements may have been made after this date, these are also noted.
Note: Weekly benefits cut off in the Queensland scheme after 5 years and the Comcare scheme at age 65. However, this is unlikely to have a significant impact as 88% of all Queensland claims are finalised within the first 26 weeks (2005-06).
Queensland allows access to common law. Comcare does not allow access to common law.
Scenario 1: Permanent Incapacity
The employee’s pre-injury earnings were $1000 gross per week. The employee is 35 years of age and has a dependent spouse and two children aged 7 and 8. The older child entered the workforce and stopped being dependent at 16 and the other remained in full-time education until age 25. The employee contributed to a superannuation fund. There was no contributory negligence on his part and no mitigating factors.
As a result of the workplace incident, the employee was diagnosed with complete tetraplegia below the 6th cervical neurological segment. This resulted in paralysis of his hands, impaired upper body movement and paralysis of the trunk and lower limbs. He lost all lower body function and was wheelchair-bound. Incapacity was total and permanent and there was no real prospect of returning to work.
As at 1 January 2005, a Comcare worker in this scenario would receive 7% ($100,000) less compensation than a Queensland worker (Queensland $1.519M;Comcare $1.420M). (Indicator 17).
These entitlements payable to the injured employee include the weekly benefits payable for the remainder of the employee’s working life (30 years), all lump sum payments for permanent incapacity, including estimates of common law settlements, but excluding medical and like services.
Scenario 2: Fatality
The employee’s pre-injury earnings were $1000 gross per week. The employee is 35 years of age and has a dependent spouse and two children aged 7 and 8. The older child entered the workforce and stopped being dependent at 16 and the other remained in full-time education until age 25. A workplace incident resulted in the death of this employee. The employee’s spouse did not re-enter the workforce or remarry for ten years.
As at 1 January 2005, a Comcare worker’s family would receive 17% ($63,000) less compensation than a Queensland workers’ family (Queensland $355,000; Comcare $292,000). (Indicator 17).
However, since November 2005 amendments to the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 mean that a Queensland worker’s family in this situation would receive additional statutory entitlements. This would overall mean an entitlement of over $100,000 more than a Comcare worker’s dependant family.
In particular the following relevant changes were made to benefits (excluding indexation):
• the lump sum payment to the dependent family increased by approximately $60,000 to $374,625;
• an addition lump sum payment of $10,000 was introduced for dependent spouses;
• the lump sum payment to dependent children was increased by approximately $2,500 to $20,000; and
• the weekly payment to dependent children was increased from 7% to 10% of Queensland Ordinary Time Earnings.
In contrast no changes (excluding indexation) have been made to Comcare’s entitlements that could impact on the entitlements of a worker’s family in this situation.
Note: While not applicable to the scenario an additional weekly payment for dependent spouses who have dependent children under school age of 10% of Queensland Ordinary Time Earnings was also introduced in November 2005. These benefits are not available under Comcare.
Media contacts: Chris Brown 3224 7349 or Elouise Campion 3224 6784
13 December 2006