External

The Quality of Working Life (QWL) project concluded that many employees use the compensation system to address perceived organisational and management problems.

In considering this information it becomes doubly important to zero in on the real issues underlying a claim.

If, as the QWL researchers surmise, the lodgement of a claim can be interpreted as a call for assistance then the employer needs to properly understand the issues involved to address and resolve them satisfactorily.  This is so whether or not the compensation claim is accepted.

In addition, it is obviously important to identify the key issues to enable the Comcare Australia Claims Manager to make a decision about liability for the claim.

The most logical place to start is to establish the facts relating to the claim.  This process is often difficult in stress cases since the information available to the Claims Manager is confused by allegation and perception.  It must be noted that the Claims Manager must refrain from making moral judgements about the relative 'fault' of the parties where the two are in dispute.

CASE EXAMPLE

An employee lodges a compensation claim for stress after being moved from a job in which he/she is expert, to a new area in which he/she has not previously worked.

Agency management claims that the move was arranged because organisational priorities had changed and more staff were required in the areas to which the employee was moved.  Management also state that the change in priorities was explained to all staff affected and that all staff were provided with training before they were moved to enable them to undertake the new duties.

The employee claims victimisation by management who conspired to arrange the move and that the training provided was not appropriate to the job.

What are the facts?

  • the employee was moved to a new area

  • the employee is not experienced in the duties of the new area

  • training was provided

  • there is conflict between the employee and management

It is NOT the Claims Manager's role to decide whether:

  • the employee should have been moved

  • the employee was victimised

  • the training provided was adequate

Once the facts have been established it is the decision-maker's responsibility to decide whether the SRC Act 1988 provides coverage in the particular circumstances of that case.  Legislative coverage is briefly discussed later in this Part.

An employee's perception of an event and the subsequent effect of that perception on the condition suffered is a question of the individual's psychological state and should not be confused with the facts.

CASE EXAMPLE

An employee lodges a claim alleging that work overload has lead to the development  of a stress related condition.

The Perceptions

The employer's perception is that the employee does less work than most other staff in the section and therefore that the amount of work undertaken could not be considered an overload.

The employee argues that their workload has almost doubled without provision of extra assistance from the employer.

What are the Facts?

  • the employee received/processed Y units of work during the period covered by the claim

  • the employee usually receives/processes X units of work

Considerations for the Decision-Maker

  • It is appropriate to check the usual level of work for that  employee since any change in the work situation is probably relevant.  Any increase over the usual amount of work handled by the employee may be considered an overload by the employee.

  • It is generally not appropriate to compare the work of that employee with the 'average' or with other employees (the employer takes the employee as he/she is).  However, complicating factors may be introduced if the employer considers the employee's usual work performance is unreasonably below standard.  It may be appropriate to examine whether formal work performance counselling, rather than an 'overload' of work, is the true precipitating factor.

  • The Claims Manager may NOT decide whether the employee has a genuine perception that the workload is high.  The facts should be presented to a medical professional for identification of the actual contributing factors.