Until 2005, smoking-related claims for compensation were denied on the basis that smoking (and associated disease or illness) was not reasonably incidental to a claimant's service in the ADF. Until the change, it was policy that the decision to smoke or not to smoke was ultimately a matter of personal choice for the member.
Most employers have a documented policy for the approval of study leave, involving two elements:
In contrast, where a client has been suspended for compensation under S57(2), i.e. for failure without reasonable excuse to attend a medical examination required by the Delegate, the suspension relates only to that claim to which the proposed medical examination related. The client may continue to receive benefits under other accepted claims, or to progress investigations for other injuries, unrelated to the suspended claim.
Claims for multiple injuries arising from a single incident (e.g. a spinal injury, a hand injury, lacerations and a knee injury all arising from a vehicle roll-over) should be considered for liability together and be dealt with thereafter on a single file. The liability determination establishes the status of these injuries as a suite of medical consequences of a single injurious incident and this is relevant to the structure of later Permanent Impairment lump sum payments.
In cases involving promotions, transfers and benefits, a member may commence a grievance procedure against their supervisor or employer challenging the process used or seeking a different promotion or transfer outcome.
The processing of a claim for compensation should not be deferred pending the outcome of the grievance procedure, but should be decided on the facts and evidence available to the Delegate at the time of claim determination. This can be justified on several grounds:
Note: however, liability can and should be found in cases where an ADF member is posted to (residing at) a location where neither Ross River nor Barmah Forrest viruses are known, but is subsequently required to attend a temporary work place (i.e. a course, a field exercise, a camp etc.) in an area where the disease is endemic.
The material contribution “test” still applies for any diseases where the date of onset is prior to 13 April 2007.
The definition of 'disease' at S4(1) of the SRCA requires that for a disease to be considered compensable, it must have been 'contributed to in a material degree by the employer's employment'.
This exclusion was amended to 'reasonable administrative action' by the SRCOLA 2007 (effective 13 April 2007). The amendment only applies where the date of onset of a disease is on/after 13 April 2007. The following sections outline the exclusion as it stands for SRCA claims where date of injury/disease is pre 13 April 2007.
Section 4(2) of the SRCA, in defining the term 'injury' for purposes of the Act, states:
Coverage under the 1988 Act extends to injuries sustained during any activities undertaken during an ordinary recess, subject to the exclusion in S6(3). This includes cover where the employee goes home for lunch. Any travel undertaken during an ordinary recess is not subject to the exclusionary provisions in S6(2), but is subject to S6(3) (abnormal risk).
'Temporarily absent' essentially means that the employee has left the workplace but intends to return to resume the day's work.
This provision covers (but is not confined to) those attendances initiated by the employee, where employer approval is sought. The usual situation here would be that of completing/undertaking some sort of part-time study, where study leave approval has been sought from the employer.
Other situations such as union training courses and self-development courses would also fall into this category provided employer approval for attendance has been granted.
