SHARE OF WORK PERSONAL DAMAGE COSTS
In 1995, the Industry Commission costed damage to people from work for the year 1992-93. In 2004, the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission (NOHSC) updated the costings to the year 2000-01. They also added in the estimated costs of personal suffering.
Industry
Commission (1995)
From “Work, Health and Safety” Vol. II pp 104, Table
C.10,11,12 (National Accounts Basis) for the year
1992-93,
Employer 30% Worker 30% Community 40%
Also in Table C.15 pp 106, the ratio of Indirect Costs to Direct Costs (Workers Compensation Costs) was given for each state as X : 1,
NSW Vic Qld WA SA Tas ACT NT
X = 3.4 1.9 7.4 5.1 2.5 4.7 2.0 3.5
NOHSC (2004)
From “The Cost of Work-related Injury and Illness for Australian Employers, Workers and the Community” pp 23 Table 2.1,
Employer 25% Worker 44% Community 31%
From Table 3.1 pp 28, including pain, suffering and
early death,
Employer 10% Worker 77% Community 13%
Class I Fatal
65% Class I Non-fatal 90% Class II 3.5%
The vast majority of Class I damage is a by-product of “modern” technology (my experience of many thousands of Class I cases). “Modern” technology improves our standard of living.
If Class I non-fatally damaged people are not
compensated and enabled to continue a comparable standard of living, they
subsidise ours. Similarly, dependents of
inadequately or inappropriately compensated Class I fatally damaged people
subsidise us.
Do you wish to have your standard of living
subsidised by Class I work damaged people?
Do you wish to belong to a nation which has the
following cultural VALUE?
G L
Geoff McDonald & Associates Pty Ltd