University of Queensand researcher Dr Venerina Johnston has been awarded a grant to research the skills and behaviours needed by supervisors to help workers return to work after injury or illness.
The grant is part of the Australia-wide $400,000 Institute for Safety, Compensation and Recovery Research (ISCRR) 2012 Development Grants Program.
UQ researcher funded to assist return-to-work
Dr Johnston, of UQ’s School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, will be supported by Ms Kirsten Way, Dr Mary Wyatt, and Dr Bill Shaw.
The project focuses on workers returning to work after a mental disorder or musculoskeletal injury.
“The results will provide the first evidence base to develop a training program for supervisors that is specific to the Australian setting,” Dr Johnston said.
“Despite many endeavours, return-to-work rates have not improved across Australia over the past five years.
“Supervisors play a pivotal role in the return-to-work process and yet the specific knowledge, skills and behaviours supervisors require to assist this process have never been identified in the Australian setting.
“This research and the subsequent development of a training program will result in long-term benefits in terms of preventing work disability and reducing compensation costs.”
ISCRR CEO Professor Niki Ellis said that the development grants funded projects with the potential to deliver tangible benefits in the short term to ISCRR’s partners, WorkSafe Victoria and the Transport Accident Commission.
“By supporting smaller scale projects conducted over 12 months, the grants provide an important opportunity for investigators to initiate research that they see will make a difference in a relatively short period of time,” Professor Ellis said.
[Source: http://www.uq.edu.au/news/?article=24284]
Return to work research, is it really necessary?
Well, let’s hope something positive comes from this study. Happy to be a guinea pig if its of any help.
With regards to my own return to work, well my last attempt was a nightmare, which resulted in me almost taking my own life.
I had been working full time in a senior management position, despite my crippling disability. I was due to undergo major surgery number 6 for gross instability of the shoulder, which was dislocating just about every day at work. My medical treaters, in particular my surgeon, had made numerous, written medical requests for fairly straight forward ergonomic surpport (aids) in the workplace and would actually not allow me to continue work without the ergomomic support in place. A last ditch attempt in writing was made to the Director of Health and Safety (and my boss) to no avail, and I was forced to continue work, full time in visible distress. The ergonomics were, between brackets requested way back in 2006, however multiple urgent, written requests were made during the last 6 months prior to my sixth surgery, to no avail. My boss had the guts to demand I postpone my surgery by a whopping three months as to complete a large project I was working on, and of course she promised in return to implement the necessary level of ergonomic support… bullsh*t. Anyway, I worked myself stupid up to one week before the surgery. I had a very good performance appraisal and during our “good-luck-for-your-surgery-lunch” my contract was renewed.
I underwent the major surgery. After about 5 to 6 weeks, I obtained a certificate of capacity from my surgeon, detailing the very same restrictions as prior to the surgery. I rang my boss and the return to work coordinator to inform them that I would return to work the following week. Yeah, right! I was NOT allowed to return to work, mate! Why not? The untrained RTW coordinator told me that the ergonmic needed to be in place before I could return, ha! Obviously I disagreed as there was no problem whatsoever with me working without medical requested ergonomic support prior to the surgery and, interestingly, that 50% of my job consisted of non-office work, so why was I at least not allowed to undertake that part of my job whilst awaiting for the required level of ergonomic support to be in place?
We are talking about ergonomic equipment which you can buy at Office Works here, stuff like an alternative mouse, an under-desk pull out tray, a chair with arm rests, a dictaphone, voice recognition software etc.
Well, guys, they started “implementing” the ergonomics in January. By the beginning of April things were still not in place , I kid you not (!), preventing my return to work. Mid April, I received a termination letter. How nice! After 10 years of loyal service and after having lost my arm due to their bloody stupidity (negligence). Thank you very much.
I had offered to purchase the ergonomics myself, I had offered to undertake the duties that did not involve computer work (and physical restrictions); for Christ’s sakes, they knew I was going to have major surgery at least 4 months prior to the date of the surgery and they knew that the type of surgery I was to have would further impair me (reduce function) in exchange for pain relief (it was about a salvage procedure).
The employer must prepare a return to work plan within 10 days, and must keep in touch with the injured worker. Did you know that?
To terminate me was just plain immoral and unlawful.
The worst part, perhaps, came about 18 months later, when I suddenly started receiving over-friendly emails from a new unknown-to-me return to work coordinator (asking how I was doing, informing that I had been paid etc etc) and my pay slips (salary) started arriving in the mail. Prior to that I had never ever received my pay slips in the mail (after having been sacked). I nearly fell over when I noticed that I was demoted, and seemingly reinstated! When I contacted my lawyer, it became pretty clear that I was “officially still employed by the very same employer” – basically someone (obviously the insurance company or someone highly ranked) must have realised that my employer had made the biggest mistake of their lives and tried to COVER UP. How nauseating.
But rest assured, I still have their sacking letter, all their nasty emails, the immediate “vocational assessment” the insurer sent me to (and their stupid letter sates that the reason being the termination of my employment), but I also have their attempt to bribe me! Yes, they tried to offer me hush money, a miserable $6000 and they were so stupid as to text this to me!
How is that for an example return to work!
It happens every day to many Aussies, we call it “constructive dismissal” and “discrimination”.
I am not sure if “studies” are needed in the field, I would have thought that the culture ought to change… but that is my severely injured opinion.
While we have a competitive, agressive legally burdeonsome process, that the criminals in these insurance organisations exploit to the fullest capacity, the goal of employees should be NOT to return to work until they are themselves satisfied they are at their full capacity to work. If it’s anything less than full capacity, they should focus on rehabilitation, and do volunteer work, or anything else that’s not returning to work. Returning to work before full capacity places the financial burden directly on the employer, and forces their hand to sack employees who are not “economically competitive” … this is how competition works, dead wood gets cut. No amount of “we promise” changes that, unless there’s a legally binding AND ENFORCABLE contract to that end. Until 100% capacity has been restored, workers SHOULD NOT go back to work. This is the only way within the current framework to get insurance companies to act for the interests of restoring workers capacity rather than undermining it and offloading the liability to someone else. And of course, they get to win-win, because if workers do this, their “brand advertising” telling society that anyone with an injury who doesn’t go back to work the next day is a stinking bludger who deserves social punishment. If only they knew the games, and the consequences of their actions for their fellow man.
In the current system, going back to work sooner is NEVER the right thing to do.
Ben.
I may not entirely agree with this, Ben, as I do believe that there is a benefit (especially psychologically) to return to work in suitable, or modified duties as soon as you are able to and provided the employer has really suitable employment available, such as light duties, modified duties etc. I do believe however that it is of uttermost importance that those suitable duties are heavily monitored by the treating doctor and that there is a real and binding return to work plan in place (that equals a contract really).
What has happened to me (and undoubtedly has happened to many injured workers) is that I was repeatedly forced back to work but to the very same duties that caused the injury and the aggravations of the injury. This resulted in me having to undergo major reconstructive surgery to the arm every single year for 7 years! Basically, whilst I had a certificate of capacity allowing me work, I had a list of physical restrictions which were blatantly disregarded by both the insurer and the employer! So, they basically forced me to undertake duties way beyond my physical restrictions and I ended up damaging my arm over and over again. When I refused or threatened to refuse to o to continue work in those conditions, workcover threatened to cut me off all benefits by stating that I was non-compliant. It’s a catch 22 really. Unless you can go to court and dispute the who thing.
So, yes, workcover (and the employer) does most often not give a flying sh*t. You are a number to them, a slave. You are broken, you get replaced.
If I had been looked after properly, as per the legislation, I am certain that I would not nearly have been as impaired as I am now. But due to their selfish, immoral, carelessness and apathy to even spend $200 on basic ergonomic aids, I am now a complete write off to society, never will be able to work again and will cost the insurer an arm and a leg (as well as my former employer as inevitably my lawsuit will affect their premiums in a nasty way).
Researching return to work? Come on,guys! Wake up! Change the culture! Ensure the injured employees are cared for properly when they return to work, ensure they are truly in “suitable duties” and don’t get re-injured for the sake of workcover case manager’s RTW bonusses! Nothing more to it really….
The problem with return to work isn’t what happens when things go well — obviously if someone “gets better” during the transitional light duties period, then everythings hunky dory.
The problem is when people don’t get better, or never return to 100% capacity. Then the liability for the injury has transfered from the insurance to the employer — and in competitive conditions, there will be an excuse found to sack the worker that’s not as productive as an able bodied worker. And then the worker is “legitimately sacked” and has no further ability to claim insurance.
If the worker stayed on insurance benefits until that 100% capacity was returned — yes it cost the insurance and perhaps the worker would have healed quicker being back at work feeling productive (I would argue volunteer work would achieve this same thing, while not being done in a high pressure competitive environment) – but in the downside event, where the worker never heals, the liability is clearly with the insurance, as it should be. And until the legislation changes to allow a more “friendly reasonable” approach, this is the only attitude workers can have. Workcover pushes the “back to work” mantra in the news specifically because they know it causes workers to fall on their own sword legally and socially. It should be illegal for them to advertise and manipulate in this way.
You are looked after as per the legislation. The legislation is broken, and allows you to be abused by them pursuing certain tactics. One cannot read law “optimistically” … it must be read as to “what one can get away with” … the law may sound reasonable to a normal person, but lawyers and politicians know it’s all about what you can get away with. Push it to within an inch of it’s life. And that’s what insurance companies are doing in the name of profit and political benefit.
I hope I’m making sense and you object to my assertions about why “return to work sub 100% capacity” with the present legislation is not in the best interests of either the employee or the employer.
Ben.
Here your arguments are extremely well put and I could not agree more with you. The way you present your point of not returning to work until you are at 100% capacity would indeed prevent the leeches of shifting the liability onto the employer, who will then of course use various tactics such as “constructive dismissal” to get rid of you. This is a very lucrative way for the insurance companies to wipe their hands of you, indeed and I had not looked at it from this angle – congratz Ben! It may actually be the only and best solution until such a time as the legislation is actually enforced!
(and don’t be mean to yourself, you’re not a complete write off. You’re contributing positively to society through this blog. I’m serious.)
Ben.
Oh my, thanks for the compliment! And I mean it!
But…. saying that, I still have lost my independence, my dignity and ability to earn an income, duh!
I know. I’m sorry that my political apathy prior to my crash has contributed to your suffering. I wish I could fix it.
Ben.
So am I…I beat myself up every day
How do you do it? How do you not give up?
I have this URGE, this DRIVE to make things better and to continue doing what I was born to do : help people.
I find that urge depressing under the realisation one can’t fix it.
Ben.
It is depressing, but on the other hand I know that I am making a small difference in a positive way to heaps of injured people and that certainly helps me feel better. I would feel totally depressed if I wasn’t able to even try to give that (tiny bit of) help, support and knowledge.
I believe if all of us, injured people, only made this tiny bit of effort, all our combined efforts would go a long way!
So get out there, source some articles, write your own stories (or parts of it), send me some of your WTF workcover letters and documents, and let’s expose the wrongdoings of those bloodsucking leeches! Alternatively offer us some of your own advice (tips) on how to deal with some aspects of workcover (TAC), comment on articles, support other commentators, whatever — just make that tiny little bit of difference today and, together, we’ll go a long way
Until it results in people reading it, understanding it, and then applying pressure to politicians, it won’t make any difference.
I’ve spent a lot of time trying to get people to act politically, and there is nothing that works — uninjured people get better outcomes for themselves if they “leave injured poeple to suffer” and take the insurance money and spend it on things for themselves. And that’s how people act, consistently. Even if they “say they care” they simply do not change their behaviours.
Collecting articles and publishing them is merely pissing in the wind because people are too selfish to change, and do the right thing.
There needs to be a broad, well considered strategy, well resourced, well funded, access to mass-media, and even then the opposition is more well funded, has broad political support (financial incentive) and most people think “it’s good enough, lazy bludging injured people should get back to work” because there’s been a multi-year campaign to manipulate the public perception.
I’m not saying it makes no difference. I’m just saying it can’t actually work as it stands, not even long term. Hundreds of years, and the outcome will be identical.
Your time would be much better spent studying politics, and getting involved with a minor political party, and stirring up a hornets nest getting your face on the news and voice on the radio. Need to be able to appeal to the masses, convince them it’s some kind of “unacceptable evil” .. only, you’ve got a hard slog, because your enemy will say “not making insurance companies seek profits is communism, not democracy” and you lose again — no matter what you say, no matter how right you are, you’re a communist who even death is too good for. The public is fickle, they want drama, and doing the “right thing” isn’t that.
A long stream of victims setting themselves on fire on the steps of parliament would probably get cheers that the leaches of society stopped consuming resources rather than opposition to unjust laws and abuse of human rights.
Our society needs to fundamentally shift it’s “growth obsession” and externalised costs, poorly regulated “free markets” where lobbying changes the rules to suit corporations over consumers, where consumer rights protections are a joke. We’re treated as “objects for consumption” rather than people.. and consume we do, at an ever increasing rate, until there will be nothing left.
Humanity could do so much better wtih even a little co-operation.
But complaining upwards from below won’t ever change it. No amount of “ask nicely petitions” will encourage anything but the barest of ‘compromise’ changes. And certainly nothing that results in long term stability, sensible policies for rates of resource consumption, accounting for all costs, not just financial ones, including all externalities, top to bottom across the entire economy. Any policy other than this creates too many gaps to push the boundaries, compete, take advantage and unfairly compete. And it’s not good for humanity. Corporations aren’t a life form worth optimising our society to serve.
Ben.
Even by “trying to help some victims” better play the TAC/workcovers games, all we do is encourage them to up the ante, push harder, force more cases through court. We don’t fix the system, we make it worse.
The change must be politcial, the structures and incentives have to be changed, or we’re doing our part to make the world worse, while we convince ourselves we’re nice people trying to help.
Am I making sense?
Ben.
I think that whilst we are clearly unable to make that legislative change, aworkcovervictimsdiary is certainly helping me (and many other injured wokers) better understand the “system” and the tactics the insurance companies use. The blog arms us with knowledge and this surely makes us stronger?
Also has the perverse effect that the better we arm ourselves – the more of their insane hoops we jump through as victims, the more agressively they’ll find new ways of denying us, and lobbying the government for insurance reform due to “insurance crisis” to reduce even further the legal rights we are even fighting to claim.
Only have to look at the history of common law rights, and how they’ve been eroded using this tactic over time.
Basically, either give up trying to claim (the total amount you’re likely to get turns into an annuity no better than the disability pension anyway “almost always”) … or organise, get everyone together, form a ‘victims union’ … advertise, lobby, and agressively fight for reform ‘for the people’ — this needs to not just be victims, but victims friends, families, and the general public. The politicians need to be forced to all adopt “non-profit” legislation and ‘for the people’ insurance policies, or it will never be fixed. Constant erosion of rights and funding.
Ditto with this NDIS thing — they’re proposing an enormous cut to funding — but with a short term increase. The people currently under hardship see it as a saviour, but the long term outcome of the NDIS policy will be a shift of liability from “the population at large” through taxation, to business and ‘social’ mechanisms (ie, forcing family to look after people, unfunded). There are aspects of the plan which could work, but certainly not in a highly competitive environment where everyones fighting selfishly, and some people at the top have more leverage to misappropriate than those who the money was intended for. Long term result, rich get richer. There needs to be a much more fundamental shift before a ‘social funding’ plan for disability can work, and the NDIS doesn’t even come close to addressing that issue. As it stands, it’s an excuse to cut funding massively while having enough political support through “short term increase in funding” … It’s once again selling our future, our childrens future, for a small tokenistic payement today.
This is not what reform looks like.
Where is the independant media doing an analysis of this stuff, tearing it apart. Academics being consulted, reviewed, reported on. Explained. When we have a political-media system that requires everything to be boiled down into a 20sec soundbite, we are handing all our power to anyone who has a silver tongue — all we’ll get is a steady progression of liars and thieves as our leaders.
Wake the hell up.
Ben.