Powerful British Union Opposing Spending Cuts for Workers Safety

 

 
 
Public Sectors Workers Being Assaulted
 
It is an outrage that public sector workers continue to be assaulted while carrying out their duties, and urgent action is needed to prevent and deter these attacks, British public sector workers’ union UNISON recently noted.
 
Following a parliamentary debate on attacks against NHS workers recently, the UK’s largest union called for the government to take urgent action to recognize the human cost of verbal and physical assaults on public sector workers.[WCx]
 
 
Government Cutting Spending, Union Opposes
 
The 2010/11 NHS Staff Survey revealed that 7% of NHS staff were victims of assault during that year, but the union fears that under-reporting is hiding the true extent of the problem. Yet, despite this, the government is reportedly continuing with a cuts agenda that will threaten initiatives to prevent these attacks and the ability of the police to find and prosecute the perpetrators.
 
 
Staff Nurse Assaulted and Suffered Needlestick Injury
 
According to UNISON, a staff nurse from Scunthorpe reported an assault – including a horrific needlestick injury – at the hands of a patient in January 2012:
 
A patient had attacked a nurse earlier in the day, after which no one felt able to approach him. When, with colleagues, I went to clean the patient up, I was subjected to a violent attack that left me on sick leave for three months. I have had intensive physiotherapy and still regularly attend physio sessions.
 
I suffered a needlestick injury while trying to sedate the patient and will be tested for blood borne viruses in the next few weeks. During the time I was off work and, for some time since, I have been in constant pain, I had limited use of my right arm and restricted movement of my neck. I could not hold a pen to write or brush my teeth.
 
Everyday tasks took hours and I became depressed and withdrawn. Even now I am unable to perform all my duties as a nurse. Yet, mine was not a serious injury. I have made considerable improvement but will always have some level of pain and restriction of movement.”
 
 
Unison Union Lobbying Against Cuts
 
Dave Prentis, UNISON general secretary remarked, “It is right that the police have special protection under the law from assaults, but all public sector workers should be protected from attacks in the line of duty.
 
Cuts to public services mean that it is hard working public services that often bear the brunt of frustration and anger from the public. Assaults of any kind – whether verbal or physical – are unacceptable, and it is important that prosecution rates, and resulting sentences, reinforce that message.
 
Public sector cuts are hindering efforts by employers and the authorities to prevent these attacks happening in the first place. Health & safety is not just red tape, it saves lives, but how can the Health & Safety Executive protect workers when their budgets are being cut by more than a third?”
 
Prentis added, “The parliamentary debate shows that this sort of violence is on the radar, but more needs to be done urgently. UNISON demands that the government cracks down on this sort of crime and provides our public servants with the protection they deserve.”  [WCx]
 
UNISON is Britain and Europe's biggest public sector union with more than 1.3 million members.
 
 

Author Michael B. Stack, CPA, Director of Operations, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. is an expert in employer communication systems and part of the Amaxx team helping companies reduce their workers compensation costs by 20% to 50%. He is a writer, speaker, and website publisher.  www.reduceyourworkerscomp.com Contact mstack@reduceyourworkerscomp.com

 

 


WORKERS COMP MANAGEMENT MANUAL:  www.WCManual.com

VIEW SAMPLES PAGES

MODIFIED DUTY CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/transitional-duty-cost-calculator.php

 

Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.

 

©2012 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact us at: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

Workers Compensation News From Around the Net

Input Needed in Providers Opioid Audit
 
The Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers’ Compensation (TDI-DWC) acknowledges that prescription drug abuse and misuse, including opioids, is a serious issue in all health care delivery systems, including workers’ compensation.
 
 
The TDI-DWC seeks input and suggestions regarding the development of a new Plan-Based Audit for health care providers prescribing opioids. The Plan-Based Audit sets the scope, methodology, selection criteria, and program area responsibilities as laid out in the Medical Quality Review Procedure. A copy of the proposed Health Care Providers Pain Management Services (Opioid) Plan-Based Audit can be viewed at the TDI website here. [WCx] 
 
 
Broadspire Launches BOLD® Rx Network
 
Broadspire, a Crawford Company and TPA of workers compensation claims, liability claims and medical management services, has launched its BOLD Rx Network to help control the medical costs associated with WC claims. See here for more information.[WCx]
 
 
According to Broadspire, the BOLD Rx Network uses a multi-leveled strategy to achieve superior penetration rates and savings compared to the rest of the industry. “Rather than just partnering with one pharmacy benefit management (PBM) company, as is traditionally seen in the marketplace, Broadspire leverages multiple partners based on the value they bring to clients, creating a stronger pharmacy program,” they write.
 
Federal Court Rejects NLRB Authority to Force Posting of Employee Rights Notice
 
According to a well-written newsletter from McGuireWoods, a world-wide lawfirm with 900 lawyers, in Chamber of Commerce of the U.S., et al. v. NLRB (Dist. S.C., April 13, 2012), a South Carolina federal district court held that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) does not have statutory authority to force employers to post notices that the NLRB claims are designed to inform employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act.
 
 
McGuireWoods writes, “The Court’s decision directly conflicts with a recent decision from a separate federal court in the District of Columbia. These developments place all employers covered by the Act in a very difficult position.”
 
 
The regulations are to take effect April 30, 2012. “The conflicting court cases make it unclear whether employers will be required to post the NLRB notices on the current April 30, 2012 deadline. (Click here for more),” they write.
 
 
Columbus Dispatch Notices Lawsuits Against Doctors on Decline
 
Columbus Dispatch reporter Alan Johnson writes here that Ohio’s tort-reform law has reduced closed claims by 41 between 2005 and 2010. He discovered average payments for medical malpractice cases have declined 38 percent over that period.
 
 
Johnson writes, “The legal fight over curbing lawsuits and settlements in medical malpractice cases reached a tipping point in 2003 when the General Assembly passed and Gov. Bob Taft signed Senate Bill 281. The law capped non-economic damages, commonly known as ‘pain and suffering,’ at $500,000 per occurrence.”
 
 
Johnson reports that Tim Maglione, of the Ohio State Medical Association says doctors’ medical malpractice rates have dropped more than 26 percent. “It’s not only good news and a good trend, but it is proof that tort reform accomplished what it set out to do — slow the growth of what we thought were runaway lawsuits and to stabilize the market for physicians,” Maglione said. The numbers have also gone down, he said in the article, because doctors and hospitals are working harder to improve safety and cut down on mistakes. “The best error is the one that never happens.”
 
 
Progressive Medical Releases Annual Workers’ Compensation Medication Trends Report
 
According to Progressive Medical, Inc., WC medication spending declined in 2011. Their annual analysis, found here, reveals changes to medication expense patterns in workers’ compensation claims from 2010 to 2011 for Progressive Medical clients, as well as key factors that may influence future expenditures, such as chronic pain, product mix and government activity.
 
 
Key highlights from the 2012 Workers' Compensation Medication Trend Report include:
  1. Although medication AWP inflation was 5.8 percent in 2011, data shows a 1.3 percent reduction in total medication spend per claim.
  2. There was an overall 3.3 percent decrease in utilization per injured worker from 4.3 percent fewer prescriptions and a 1.1 percent decrease in average days of medication supply received.
  3. Across the industry, narcotics account for 35 percent-40 percent of workers' compensation medication spend while Progressive Medical showed a 3.9 percent decrease in total spending per claim in this drug category. Progressive Medical believes this is due to an emphasis on conducting interventions earlier in the lifecycle of a claim.
 
 
Note: If your company has any developments you'd like to share, please send them to us at: RShafer@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com

 

 

Author Rebecca Shafer, JD, President of Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. is a national expert in the field of workers compensation. She is a writer, speaker, and publisher. Her expertise is working with employers to reduce workers compensation costs, and her clients include airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality, and manufacturing. She is the author of the #1 selling book on cost containment, Workers Compensation Management Program: Reduce Costs 20% to 50%. Contact: RShafer@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

 


WORKERS COMP MANAGEMENT MANUAL:  www.WCManual.com

MODIFIED DUTY CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/transitional-duty-cost-calculator.php

 

Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.

 

©2012 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact us at: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

3,000 Workers at Turkish UPS Subsidiary Gain Collective Bargaining Rights

 
Nearly 3,000 workers at a Turkish UPS subsidiary have won the right to be represented by a Turkish International Transport Worker's Federation (ITF) affiliate following more than a year of bitter struggle.
 
 
According to an ITF report, workers at the company are entitled to be represented collectively by Türkiye Motorlu Tasit Isçileri Sendikasi (TÜMTIS) after Turkey’s ministry of labor and social security certified the union as the workers’ representative.
 
 
The victory comes 15 months after 163 workers who had registered to join the union or were members of it were dismissed by the company; they subsequently won the right to reinstatement and compensation.
 
 
Kenan Öztürk, TÜMTİS’ general president, commented, “This achievement is not only ours. It is the result of the collaboration of many trade unions under the umbrella of the global delivery network of the ITF, and especially the Teamsters union in America, which represents hundreds of thousands of UPS workers in the company’s home country. The European Transport Workers’ Federation and its affiliates also played an integral role in this victory.”
 
 
The success follows a concerted campaign by UPS workers and their union to improve job conditions at global delivery companies operating in Turkey.
 
 
As Öztürk added, “We will now continue toward negotiating a strong collective agreement for UPS workers and we will continue to apply our organizational efforts at MNG-Fed Ex, DHL, and TNT in Turkey.”(WCxKit)
 
 

According to the ITF, TÜMTİS’ victory represents a positive pointer to the future for all global delivery company workers who may be struggling for union recognition and good contracts; the ITF is working to help union

 
 
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.


Our WC Book:  http://www.wcmanual.com
WORK COMP CALCULATOR: http://www
.LowerWC.com/calculator.php
 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

Union Says Cost Cutting Motive for Measures Impacting Workplace Safety

Cost-cutting, not deregulation, is the motive for a package of measures announced by the government which will impact on the work of the Health and Safety Executive, British trade union Prospect reported recently.
 
The comments follow the launch of a New Strategy for Health and Safety Regulation in Great Britain that will include: (WCxKit)
 
1.      A further review of regulation.
 
2.      A reduction in proactive regulation.
 
3.      The introduction of more fees for employers when HSE inspectors find fault.
 
 
Commenting on the strategy Prospect negotiator Mike Macdonald noted, “Today's announcement shows  health and safety regulation in Britain is now driven by the government's wish to cut spending rather than by a professional assessment of what action saves lives and avoids accidents.
 
 
The key question should be what type of regulation best suits British business and its workforce, not a simplistic dogma that all regulation is bad.”
 
 
At present, Macdonald stated, the average small or medium business is more apt to cease trading after six years than be visited by an HSE inspector, averaging once every 14 years.
 
 
It's hardly excessive regulation and it also seems perverse to announce a review after introducing such significant change,” Macdonald continued. "It looks as if the government is determined to announce cuts before Professor Ragnar Lofstedt even starts his review. What happens if he concludes that more inspection, not less, is required?”
 
 
Prospects HSE members firmly believe that proactive inspection is vital not least because prevention is less expensive and better for business, employees and the taxpayer than the cost of putting lives back together after an accident, according to Macdonald. (WCxKit)
 
 
We understand that the removal of proactive inspection from lower-risk workplaces is one of the least damaging options. But the government should recognize that this still means lives are being risked to achieve 35% budget cuts, far in excess of the average cut across the public sector. We have to ask, is health and safety such a low priority that it deserves such a cut,” Macdonald added.
 
  
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact:Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
 
 
 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com

NLRB Says Workers Should Not Have Lost Jobs for Facebook Postings

The National Labor Relations Board said earlier this month that a non-profit in organization in Buffalo was wrong to fire five workers for Facebook postings that criticized working conditions, and disclosed that it has more than two dozen cases involving worker complaints aired on the social media site.
 
 
According to a report from The Wall Street Journal, the NLRB complaint against Hispanics United of Buffalo reaffirms the agency's position in a prior case that labor law permits employees to discuss the terms and conditions of their employment with co-workers and others—including postings on social-media sites. (WCxKit)
 
 
In the recent complaint, an employee of Hispanics United who was slated to meet with management regarding working conditions posted on Facebook a co-worker's allegation that employees didn't assist the nonprofit's clients enough, the NLRB said. That post attracted responses from other employees who defended their work and blamed conditions like work loads and staffing issues. When Hispanics United learned about the postings, it released the five employees who participated, stating their comments were harassment of the employee originally mentioned in the post, the NLRB remarked.
 
 
The NLRB claimed the Facebook discussion was "protected concerted activity" under the National Labor Relations Act. The earlier case was brought to the agency by a union representing an employee of ambulance company American Medical Response of Connecticut.
 
 
In that incident, the employee posted comments regarding her supervisor and responded to further comments from her co-workers. That case was settled in February when the company agreed to revamp its rules to ensure they don't restrict workers rights. A separate, private settlement was reached between the company and the employee, though terms weren't disclosed. (WCxKit)
 
 
According to NLRB spokeswoman, at least three other complaints have been issued from regional offices since the American Medical Response case. All of those appear to have been settled, she added.
 
 
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact:Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.

 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

Misssissippi Worker Wins 322 Million Asbestos Suit

In what attorneys report was the largest ever single-plaintiff asbestos verdict in U.S. history, a Mississippi jury has awarded $322 million to a former oil field employee who reportedly inhaled asbestos dust while mixing drilling mud.
 
 
According to fairwarning.org, Thomas “Tony” Brown Jr., 48, worked in the oil fields from 1979 to the mid 80s as a roughneck on rigs in Mississippi and offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. He sued Chevron Phillips Chemical Co., which sold the drilling mud, and Union Carbide Corp., the manufacturer, for causing him to develop asbestosis, a lung disease caused by asbestos exposure. He is now on oxygen daily. (WCxKit)
 
 
The jury award was for medical expenses, pain and suffering, and punitive damages down the road.
 
 
“Although the asbestos was known to cause cancer and lung disease, Chevron Phillips and Union Carbide continued to market these almost 100 percent pure asbestos products long after they knew the dangers,” Allen Hossley, a lawyer for Brown, told The Wall Street Journal.
 
 
Both Chevron Phillips and Union Carbide said they would appeal the verdict. “The credible medical evidence introduced at trial clearly demonstrates that while Mr. Brown suffers from shortness of breath, such [a] condition is not attributable to asbestos exposure,” a Union Carbide spokesman informed the Jackson Clarion-Ledger. The companies also contended that because Brown was illiterate and could not read the hazard statement on the drilling mud additives, he was not entitled to argue that they had provided inadequate warnings.
 
 
If the verdict is upheld, Brown will be entitled to an amount close to equal to Union Carbide’s yearly net income, which was $459 million in 2010. Union Carbide is a subsidiary of The Dow Chemical Co. (WCxKit)
 
 
Asbestos products were used in drilling mud due to the fact asbestos is fire-resistant and a strong bonding agent.
 

Author Rebecca Shafer
, JD, President of Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. is a national expert in the field of workers compensation. She is a writer, speaker, and website publisher. Her expertise is working with employers to reduce workers compensation costs, and her clients include airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality, and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact:RShafer@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
 
 
 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com

Judge Oregon Company Broke Law in Firing Workers

Altogether, Local 296 accused BrucePac of firing 17 union supporters and attempting to mask the firings in a 42-worker mass layoff.

Agents of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)  deemed there wasn’t enough evidence to pursue charges in 13 of the firings, but issued a complaint in four, and held a trial in front of administrative law judge Lana Parke. It’s against federal law for a company to fire a worker for union activity.

At BrucePac, firings took place at both Oregon plants, on every shift, in every department — operations, sanitation, maintenance, quality assurance, accounting.

In a workplace of approximately 350, the employer laid off 42 workers  — one month after a union campaign began.

Local 296 came out against the firings, placed pickets outside BrucePac, and filed 18 charges with the NLRB.

BrucePac informed NLRB agents it didn’t know the terminated workers were union supporters, so it couldn’t have fired them for being union supporters.

In her written decision, Parke ordered BrucePac to halt interrogating employees about union activities, threatening employees with unspecified reprisals for backing the union, and terminating employees for engaging in union activities. She also ordered the company to offer reinstatement and back pay to three of the fired workers, and post a notice in the workplace detailing all her instructions and letting workers know of their right to form a union. (workersxzcompxzkit)

BrucePac reportedly failed to reinstate within the judge’s timeline, meaning it may have been planning to appeal her ruling to the next level: the National Labor Relations Board in Washington, D.C.  

 

Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers’ Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, manufacturing, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. He can be contacted at: Robert_Elliott@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.

Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers' comp issues.

© 2010 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

CANADA Concerns Raised About Excessive Requests for Medical Information

Workers at an  Iron Ore Company of Canada (IOC) facility are concerned about the possibility of excessive medical information requests. The company, one of Canada's largest iron ore producer, asked all of its personnel in safety sensitive positions at the mine and processing facility to sign over access to their "complete medical forms," according to George Kean, president of United Steelworkers Canada Local 5795.  

Those who refuse
 to comply could face disciplinary action, including termination, Kean said. The workers learned about the safety request and related policy in very late December 2009 and of the company’s plan to implement the new policy in January 2010.

However
,  the union contacted the provincial government, arguing the company policy represented an unreasonable invasion of privacy, according to Kean. The province's occupational health and safety branch responded by ordering IOC to delay implementation until IOC addressed the union's concerns, he added.

"We did hear
 some concerns from the union and we're looking into them," stated Vanessa Colman-Sadd, a spokeswoman with Newfoundland and Labrador's Department of Government Services. Describing the case as "very sensitive," she declined to comment as to whether or not the department's office of health and safety issued a compliance order.

Kean reported
 the union expected to hear from the government and/or the company within days about revisions to the policy – possibly applying to more than 1,200 workers. The union wasn't fairly consulted about the policy before it was released in December, according to Kean. "There was very little discussion with the employer on it.” He added the policy failed to indicate clearly just what medical information the company would be able to access.

Information from
 the province's Human Rights Commission says when it comes to worker medical assessments, employers should "limit the amount of information that they receive directly." The commission guideline add "an employer should only ask the examining physician to provide general information on whether the employee can perform the functions of the job, and if not, what the employee's limitations are and what accommodations can be made by the employer." (workersxzcompxzkit)

Ramifications
 are possible for workers and employers who are on the wrong side of an information challenge. For instance, a worker who refuses a reasonable request for medical info could be disciplined. On the flip side, a company that fires an employee for turning down an unreasonable request could be hit with an unfair dismissal legal action.

Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers' Compensation costs, including airlines, health care, manufacturing, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. He can be contacted at: Robert_Elliott@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.


Podcast/Webcast: Claim Handling Strategies
Click Here
:
http://www.workerscompkit.com/gallagher/podcast/  Claim_Handling_Strategies/index.php  


Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers' comp issues.
 
©2009 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com

CANADA Termination of Disabled Union Workers and Accommodation Law In Canada

Attendance Management and the Law – Case Study II The Supreme Court  of Canada upheld grievance arbitration decisions in two court cases endorsing the right of management to terminate union employees who cannot fulfill their basic employment contract of work for compensation.

 

Essentially the  Court ruled an employer must help a disabled workers to do the essential duties of the job, not change the job to fit the functional abilities of the employee.  This duty is found in Canada’s Constitution and the Human Rights Codes of each of Canada’s Provinces and Territories.  In addition, regular attendance at work is an essential duty under contract employment.  At arbitration it was found neither employee was, for the foreseeable future, able to attend work regularly.  They were chronic absentees. The principles apply whether OCC or non-OCC injury or illness.

 

  1. The Hydro-Quebec Case (SCC) (2008)The Facts 1.  Unionized employee 2.  Terminated – chronic absenteeism (960 days over approximately 8 years) 3.  Variety of physical and mental medical problems – personality disorder 4.  Accommodated by the employer over the years 5.  At arbitration, medical evidence-prognosis doubtful regarding regular attendance at work.

 

Hydro-Quebec – Deschamps for the Unanimous Court Balancing Interests “. . .the Court must consider the interaction between the employer’s duty to accommodate a sick employee and the employee’s duty to do his or her work.” (para.
1) The Issue The interpretation and application of the undue hardship standard. The Standard In cases where an employer seeks to apply a standard, the standard must be applied “with common sense and flexibility.” (para.12)

Accommodation

1.  “. . . the goal of accommodation is to ensure that an employee who is able to work can do so . . . The purpose of the duty to accommodate is to ensure that persons who are otherwise fit to work are not unfairly excluded where working conditions can be adjusted without undue hardship.” (para. 14)
2.  “The test is not whether it is impossible for an employer to accommodate the employee’s characteristics.” (para. 15)
3.  “The employer does not have a duty to change working conditions in a fundamental way.” (para. 15) 4.  The employer “. . . does have a duty, if it can do so without undue hardship, to arrange the employee’s workplace or duties to enable the employee to do his or her work.” (para. 15)

 

Accommodation – Burden of Proof “In a case involving chronic absenteeism, if the employer shows that, despite measures taken to accommodate the employee . . . the employee will be unable to resume his or her work in the reasonably foreseeable future, he employer will have discharged its burden of proof and established undue hardship.” (para. 17)

 

Accommodation – Reasons for Dismissal 1.  “It is less the employee’s handicap that forms the basis of the dismissal than his or her inability to fulfill the fundamental obligations arising from the employment relationship.” (para. 18) 2.  “The employer’s duty to accommodate ends when the employee is no longer able to fulfill the basic obligations associated with the employment relationship for the foreseeable future.” (para. 19) Undue Hardship – The Evidence

 

In the case, where 1.  “the employee has been absent in the past due to illness, . . .
2.  “. . . the employer has accommodated the employee for several years and . . .
3.  “. . . the doctors are not optimistic regarding the possibility of improved attendance, . . .
4.  “. . . neither the employer nor the employee may disregard the past in assessing undue hardship.”  (para. 21)

 

Hydro-Quebec – Attendance Management Lessons 1.  As in McGill, the assessment of the duty of reasonable accommodation begins with the fundamental employment contract – work for remuneration.
2.  The purpose of the duty to accommodate is to arrange the employee’s workplace or duties to enable the employee to perform the essential duties of the job.
3.  Establishing standards to monitor employee attendance is a responsibility of the employer for the management of its workforce. (workersxzcompxzkit)
4.  Workplace standards must be reasonable and must be applied with common sense and flexibility. 5.  “The employer’s duty to accommodate ends where the employee is no longer able to fulfill the basic functions associated with the employment relationship for the foreseeable future.” (para. 19)

 

Attendance Management Programs – Recent Challenges 1.  City of London arbitration – July 27, 2009 2.  City of Hamilton arbitration – August 6, 2009 Author:  Attorney David Brady  can be reached at 416-864-7310 or david-brady@hicksmorley.com and http://www.hicksmorley.com

“FRAUD PREVENTION PODCAST: LISTEN TO FREE AUDIO or VIDEO http://www.workerscompkit.com/gallagher/mp3 Extremely informative 50 minute PowerPoint Presentation

 

Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker about workers’ comp issues. ©2009 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com

 

AUSTRALIA Unions Want Right to Initiate Prosecution of Unsafe Workplaces To Hold Employers Responsible

Thousands of workers  recently held protest meetings in Sydney and Melbourne to fight for stronger workplace health and safety laws so that fewer workers are injured or killed.  Unions report they are concerned that time is running out to prevent governments from caving in to a big business agenda to cut red tape at the expense of workers’ health and safety.  The meetings are part of an urgent attempt by workers and unions to change draft health and safety laws before the public comment period ends November 9.

According to  Australia Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) Secretary Jeff Lawrence, draft laws circulated in September would put workers at risk of lower safety standards. He claims unions were determined to campaign for improvements to the proposed laws to ensure they raised standards, not lowered them.

“A once-in-a-generation  opportunity to lift protections for workers by achieving the world’s best safety standards for the entire country is in danger of being missed,” Lawrence said.  “As they stand, the draft laws are about taking away protections and rights for workers, rather than lifting the overall standard. We are determined to make sure politicians take notice of workers’ concerns.” (workersxzcompxzkit)

According to Lawrence,  unions want to ensure that victims have the right to prosecute and that employers are held responsible for providing a safe and healthy workplace.  “Unions should be able to initiate prosecutions which lead to improvements in workplace safety,” Lawrence added.

Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers’ Compensation costs, including airlines, health care, manufacturing, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. He can be contacted at: Robert_Elliott@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.

We accept articles about WC cost containment. Contact us at: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or broker about workers’ comp issues.


©2009 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com

Professional Development Resource

Learn How to Reduce Workers Comp Costs 20% to 50%"Workers Compensation Management Program: Reduce Costs 20% to 50%"
Lower your workers compensation expense by using the
guidebook from Advisen and the Workers Comp Resource Center.
Perfect for promotional distribution by brokers and agents!
Learn More

Please don't print this Website

Unnecessary printing not only means unnecessary cost of paper and inks, but also avoidable environmental impact on producing and shipping these supplies. Reducing printing can make a small but a significant impact.

Instead use the PDF download option, provided on the page you tried to print.

Powered by "Unprintable Blog" for Wordpress - www.greencp.de