Who Did and Did Not Receive Workers Compensation 2009-10 (1)

7/29/2019 Who Did and Did Not Receive Workers Compensation 2009-10 (1)

1/42

WORK-RELATED INJURIES IN AUSTRALIA:

Who did and didnt receive workers

compensation in 200910

November 2011


2/42


3/42

Safe Work Australia

Work-related injuries in

Australia: Who did and

didnt receive workerscompensation in 200910

November 2011


4/42

Creative Commons

ISBN 978-0-642-33303-2[PDF]

978-0-642-33304-9[RTF]

WiththeexceptionoftheSafeWorkAustralialogo,thisreportislicensedbySafeWork

AustraliaunderaCreativeCommons3.0AustraliaLicence.Toviewacopyofthislicence,

visithttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en

Inessence,youarefreetocopy,communicateandadaptthework,aslongasyou

attributetheworktoSafeWorkAustraliaandabidebytheotherlicensingterms.ThereportshouldbeattributedasWork-related injuries in Australia: Who did and didnt

receive workers compensation in 200910.

Enquiriesregardingthelicenceandanyuseofthereportarewelcomeat:

CopyrightOfcer

Communications,ITandKnowledgeManagement

SafeWorkAustralia

GPOBox641CanberraACT2601

Email:[email protected]

Disclaimer

Theinformationprovidedinthisdocumentcanonlyassistyouinthemostgeneralway.

ThisdocumentdoesnotreplaceanystatutoryrequirementsunderanyrelevantState

andTerritorylegislation.SafeWorkAustraliaacceptsnoliabilityarisingfromtheuseof

orrelianceonthematerialcontainedonthisdocument,whichisprovidedonthebasis

thatSafeWorkAustraliaisnottherebyengagedinrenderingprofessionaladvice.Before

relyingonthematerial,usersshouldcarefullymaketheirownassessmentastoits

accuracy,currency,completenessandrelevancefortheirpurposes,andshouldobtain

anyappropriateprofessionaladvicerelevanttotheirparticularcircumstances.Tothe

extentthatthematerialinthisdocumentincludesviewsorrecommendationsofthirdparties,suchviewsorrecommendationsdonotnecessarilyreecttheviewsofSafeWork

Australianordotheyindicateacommitmenttoaparticularcourseofaction.
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_3/[email protected]://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_3/[email protected]://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_3/[email protected]://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_3/[email protected]


5/42

iii

Foreword

SafeWorkAustraliausesworkerscompensationclaimsdataasitsprimary

sourceofinformationtomeasureworkhealthandsafetyperformancein

Australia.ThesedataarecollatedastheNationalDataSetforCompensation-

basedStatistics(NDS).WhiletheNDShasmanystrengths,itdoesnotprovideinformationongroupsnotwell-coveredbyworkerscompensationschemes,such

astheself-employed.ThereforewhiletheNDScanprovidegoodinformation

onthetypesandcircumstancesofwork-relatedinjury,itcannotprovideatotal

measureofthenumberofworkersinjuredeachyear.

Toaddressthissituation,SafeWorkAustraliapartiallyfundedtheAustralian

BureauofStatisticsWork-RelatedInjuries,Australia,200910(WRIS)survey,

resultsfromwhichwerepublishedinDecember2010.Thissurveyisanupdateof

the200506surveypublishedinDecember2006.TheWRISwerecompiledfrom

datacollectedintheMultipurposeHouseholdSurvey(MPHS)thatwasconducted

throughoutAustraliainthe200910nancialyearasasupplementtotheABS

monthlyLabourForceSurvey(LFS).

TheWRIScollectedinformationoverthe200910periodfromasampleof

peopleaged15yearsandoverwhoworkedatsometimeinthelast12months

andexperiencedawork-relatedinjuryorillnessinthatperiod.Arangeofdetails

abouttheirmostrecentwork-relatedinjuryorillnesswerecollected.Asthedata

arefromasample,theresultsareadjustedorweightedtoinferresultsforthe

totalworkingpopulation.Carehasbeentakentoonlyshowresultsthatare

consideredrobustenoughforanalysis.ThisisinaccordancewithABSprinciples.

Thedemographicsoftheworkersuchasage,sexandemploymentstatus

(employee,employerorownaccountworker)aretakenfromresponsestothe

LFS.However,duetodifferencesinthescopeandsamplesizeoftheMPHSandthatoftheLFS,theweightingprocessmayleadtosomevariationsbetween

labourforceestimatesfromtheWRISandthosefromtheLFS.

Thisreportspecicallyfocussesonemployees.Thisgroupofworkersare

thosewhoareentitledtoworkerscompensation.Thereportwillinvestigate

thecharacteristicsoftheemployeeswhoappliedforandreceivedworkers

compensationfortheirwork-relatedinjury.AninjuryiscountedintheWRIS

surveyiftheworkerfeltitaroseoutoftheiremployment.Thereisnorequirement

fortheworkertoseekmedicalattentionfortheirinjuryasisthecasewith

workerscompensation.


6/42


7/42

v

Contents

Summary of ndings vii

Compensated work-related injuries 1

Characteristics by sex 4

Characteristics by age group 7

Characteristics by employment status 10

Other characteristics 13

Characteristics by occupation 14

How the injury occurred 17

Type of injury 19

Financial assistance 21

Glossary 23

Appendix 1: Injury Classications 25

Technical note 29


8/42


9/42

VII

Summary of ndings

In200910,567500employeeswereinjuredwhileworkingbutonly38%

receivedworkerscompensation.Thisisaslightdecreaseonthenumberof

employeesinjuredin200506(570700)andanotableincreaseonthe33%who

werecompensated.Whilethisisencouragingtherehasbeenanincreaseinthenumberofemployeeswhoappliedforworkerscompensationbutdidnotreceive

itfrom3.8%ofinjuredemployeesin200506to5.4%in200910.Thesedata

werederivedfrominformationcollectedintheAustralianBureauofStatistics

Work-related Injuries Survey.

Theamountoftimetakenoffworkfollowinganinjuryimpactedonwhetherthe

employeeappliedforworkerscompensation.Thedatashowedthatonly23%of

injuredemployeeswhotooknotimeoffworkappliedforworkerscompensation

comparedwith73%ofinjuredemployeeswhotook5ormoredaysoffwork.

Maleemployeesweremorelikelythanfemaleemployeestoreceiveworkers

compensationthoughthegapbetweenthesexeshasclosedslightlyinthe

fouryearssincethatlastsurvey.In200506,38%ofmaleemployeesreceived

compensationwhichroseto42%in200910whileforfemaleemployeesthe

proportionincreasedfrom26%to33%.

Agreaterproportionoffemaleemployeescomparedwithmaleemployees

felttheirinjurywastoominortoclaim(32%and28%respectively).Agreater

proportionoffemaleemployeesalsothoughttheywerenotcoveredforworkers

compensationornoteligibleforit,10%comparedwith8%formaleemployees.

Ageplayedonlyasmallroleinwhetheranemployeereceivedworkers

compensationornot.In200910,36%ofinjuredemployeesinthe1524years

agegroupreceivedcompensationcomparedwith41%inthe55yearsandover

agegroup.Similarpatternsexistedforbothmaleandfemaleemployees.

Employeeswithleaveentitlementsweremorelikelythancasuals(employees

withoutleaveentitlements)toreceivecompensation.In200910,48%of

employeeswithleaveentitlementsreceivedcompensationcomparedwith32%

ofemployeeswithoutleaveentitlements.Employeeswithoutleaveentitlements

weremorelikelytothinktheirinjurywastoominortoclaimandmorelikelyto

thinktheywerenotcoveredbyworkerscompensation.

Part-timeemployeeswerelesslikelytoapplyforcompensationcomparedwith

full-timeemployees.Part-timeshiftworkersweretheleastlikelytoapplyfor

compensationofallemployeegroups.

EmployeesbornincountriesthatdidnothaveEnglishasitsmainlanguagecountrieswerelesslikelytoapplyforworkerscompensationcompared(34%)

withthoseborninAustralia(44%)andthoseborninmainEnglishspeaking

countries(45%).

LabourersandMachineryoperators&driversweretheoccupationgroupsmost

likelytoreceiveworkerscompensation,whereasManagersandClerical&

administrativeworkersweretheleastlikelytoreceiveit.

In200910injuriesincurredinfallswerethemostlikelytobecompensatedwhile

injuriesfromExposure to mental stressweretheleastlikelytobecompensated.

Sickleavewasthemostcommontypeofnancialassistanceotherthanworkers

compensationaccessedbyinjuredemployees.Forinjuriesinvolvinglessthan5daysofwork,31%usedsickleave.Forinjuriesinvolving5ormoredays,20%of


10/42

injuredemployeesusedsickleave.Medicareorothersocialsecuritypayments

wereaccessedby7%ofallinjuredemployees.Thedatashowthatnonancial

assistancewasreceivedby12%ofemployeeswhoincurredinjuriesthatinvolved

5ormoredaysoffwork.


11/42

WHO DID AND DIDNT RECEIVE WORKERS COMPENSATION IN 200910...1

Compensated work-related injuries

Ofthe12millionpeopleaged15yearsandoverwhohadworkedatsome

timeinthetwelvemonthspriortointerviewin200910,638400experienced

awork-relatedinjuryorillness-equatingto5.3%ofworkers.Thisproportionis

adecreasefromthe6.4%ofworkerswhoexperiencedawork-relatedinjuryorillnessin200506.Theseguresincludeinjuriesthatoccurredwhileworkingor

whiletravellingtoorfromwork.

Onlyemployeesarecoveredbyworkerscompensation.In200910,92%of

workerswereemployees.Thisreportrelatesonlytothisgroup.Inaddition,

workerscompensationfortraveltoorfromworkisonlyavailableinsome

jurisdictionsandhenceinjuriesoccurringwhilecommutinghavebeenexcluded

fromthisreport.

Table1showsthatthenumberofemployeeswhowereinjuredwhileworking

fellfrom570700in200506to567500in200910.Againstabackdropof

increasingemployment,thismeanstheincidenceratehasfallenfrom65injuries

per1000employeesin200506to58in200910.

Table 1: Employees with a work-related injury: number by workers compensation

status, 200506 and 200910

Number of injuries(a) Percentage

Workers compensation status 200506 200910 200506 200910

Appliedforworkerscompensation 212600 244600 37% 43%

Receivedworkersc ompensation 190700 214100 33% 38%

Didnotreceiveworkerscompensation 21900 30600 4% 5%

Didnotapplyforworkerscompensation 358100 322900 63% 57%

Total injured employees 570 700 567 500 100% 100%

(a)numbersareroundedtonearest100andmaynotaddtototals

In200910,43%ofinjuredemployeesappliedforworkerscompensation,

animprovementonthe37%recordedin200506.However,thenumberof

employeeswhoappliedforworkerscompensationbutdidnotreceiveit(claim

wasrejected)hasalsogrownfrom3.8%ofinjuredemployeesin200506to

5.4%in200910.ThesedataareshowngraphicallyinFigure1.

Figure 1: Employees with a work-related injury: Number by compensation status,

200506 and 200910

100

200

300

400

500

600

200506 200910

Numberofinjuredemployees('000)

Total injured employees Applied for workers' compensation Received workers' compensation


12/42

2 ... SAFE WORK AUSTRALIA

Figure2andTable2showthattheproportionofinjuredemployeeswhoapplied

forworkerscompensationincreasedwithtimelostfromworkfrom23%ofinjured

employeeswhotooknotimeoffworkto73%ofinjuredemployeeswhotook5or

moredaysoffworkin200910.

Table 2: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: workers compensation

status by time lost from work, 200910

Workers compensation status No time lost Up to 4 days5 or more

daysTotal

Number of injuries(a)

Appliedforworkerscompensation 58000 76400 110200 244600

Didnotapplyforworkerscompensation 193100 88400 41400 322900

Minorinjury/toomucheffort 134000 49200 5200* 188300

Notcovered/noteligible 22700 12400 17000 52100

Negativeimpactonemployment 6300* 5500* 6100* 17900

Otherreason 30200 21300 13100 64600

Total 251100 164800 151600 567500

Percentages

Appliedforworkerscompensation 23% 46% 73% 43%

Didnotapplyforworkerscompensation 77% 54% 27% 57%

Minorinjury/toomucheffort 53% 30% 3% 33%

Notcovered/noteligible 9% 8% 11% 9%

Negativeimpactonemployment 3% 3% 4% 3%

Otherreason 12% 13% 9% 11%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100%


*EstimatehasanRSEof25%to50%andshouldbeusedwithcaution

Table2alsoshowsthatthemainreasonwhyinjuredemployeesdidnotapply

forworkerscompensationwasthattheyconsideredtheinjurytobetoominoror

thatitrequiredtoomuchefforttoclaim.Aroundone-thirdofinjuredemployees

citedthisreason.Asexpected,theproportioncitingthisreasondecreasedwith

increasingtimelostfromwork.

Figure 2: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: time lost from work by

reason did not apply for workers compensation status, 200910

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Applied for workers'

compensation

Minor injury / too

much effort

Not covered/ not

eligible

Negative impact on

employment

Other reason

Proportionofinjuredemployees No time lost

Up to 4 days

5 or more days


13/42


Ofconcernisthatnearlyoneinten(9%)injuredemployeesdidnotknow

theywerecoveredbyworkerscompensation.Thisequatesto52100injured

employeeswhodidnotseekworkerscompensationfortheirinjury.One-thirdof

theirinjuriesinvolved5ormoredaysoffwork.

Table3showsasimilarpatternfromthe200506surveybutwithlower

proportionsofinjuredemployeeswhoappliedforworkerscompensationforeachperiodoftimelostandhigherproportionswhodidnotapplyforworkers

compensationduetotheirinjurybeingtoominororrequiringtoomucheffortto

claim.

WhiletheestimatesforNegative impact on current or future employmenthave

highrelativestandarderrors(RSEs),comparisonoftheresultsfromthetwo

surveysindicatesthattherehasbeenadropinthenumberofinjuredemployees

notapplyingforworkerscompensationduetoconcernabouttheiremployment.

Therehasbeenaslightincreaseinthenumberofinjuredemployeesnotapplying

forworkerscompensationduetoOtherreason.Thiscategoryincludescases

wheretheemployeragreedtopaycosts.

Therehasbeenanotablereductioninthenumberofinjuriesthatrequired5or

moredaysoffwork,from165100in200506downto151600in200910.This

equatestoafallintheproportionthatrequired5ormoredaysoffworkfrom29%

in200506to27%in200910.

Table 3: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: workers compensation

status by time lost from work, 200506

Worker compensation status No time lost Up to 4 days5 or more

daysTotal

Number of injuries (a)



Minorinjury/toomucheffort 145800 61200 14400 221400

Notcovered/noteligible 19300 13900 15900 49100

Negativeimpactonemployment 11600 7200* 9700* 28500

Otherreason 24900 15500 18700 59100

Total 244000 161600 165100 570700

Percentages



Minorinjury/toomucheffort 60% 38% 9% 39%

Notcovered/noteligible 8% 9% 10% 9%

Negativeimpactonemployment 5% 4% 6% 5%

Otherreason 10% 10% 11% 10%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100%


*EstimatehasanRSEof25%to50%andshouldbeusedwithcaution


14/42


Characteristics by sex

Malesaccountedforjustoverhalf(54%)ofallwork-relatedinjuriesincurredby

employeesbutweremuchmorelikelytoapplyforworkerscompensationfor

theirinjurythanfemales.In200910,47%ofinjuredmaleemployeesappliedfor

workerscompensationcomparedwithonly39%ofinjuredfemaleemployees.Table4showsthatin200506theproportionofinjuredemployeeswhoapplied

forworkerscompensationwerelower(41%formales,31%forfemales)andthe

disparitybetweenthesexeswaslarger.

Table4alsoshowsthatwhilethetotalnumberofinjuredemployeesdecreased

slightlybetweenthesurveys,thenumberofinjuredfemaleemployeesroseby

19%whilethenumberofinjuredmaleemployeesfellby13%.Thefallinthe

numberofmaleemployeeswhowereinjuredoccurredinthegroupthatdidnot

applyforworkerscompensationwhiletheincreaseinthenumberoffemale

employeeswhowereinjuredoccurredmainlyinthegroupthatdidapplyfor

compensation.Figure3graphsthenumbersshowninTable4.

Table 4: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: number by workers

compensation status and sex

Male Female

Workers compensation status 200506 200910 200506 200910

Numberofinjuries(a)


Receivedwork er scompensation 133500 128900 57200 85200

Didnotreceiveworkerscompensation 11900 15400 10000 15200


Total injured employees 353 900 309 200 216 800 258 300

Percentage


Receivedworkerscompensation 38% 42% 26% 33%

Didnotreceiveworkerscompensation 3% 5% 5% 6%


Total injured employees 100% 100% 100% 100%


Figure 3: Employees with a work-related injury: Number by compensation status

and sex, 200506 and 200910

180

240

300

360

uredemployees

('000)

Total injured employees

Applied for workers' compensation

Received workers' compensation

60

120

180

Male Male Female Female

200506 200910 200506 200910

Numberofinjured


15/42


Figure3showsthatthenumberofmalesemployeeswhoappliedforworkers

compensationin200910issimilartothatreportedin200506butthatthe

numberofinjuriesincurredbythisgrouphasfallennoticeably.Forfemale

employees,thenumberwhowereinjured,appliedforcompensationandreceived

compensationallincreased.

Time lostFigure4showsthatmaleandfemaleemployeesincurredinjuriesthatrequired

similaramountsoftimeofffromwork.Whilefemaleemployeeshadaslightly

lowerproportionthatinvolvednotimeoffwork,theyhadslightlyhigher

proportionsthatinvolved510daysand11ormoredaysoffwork.

Figure 4: Employees with a work-related injury: Proportion who applied for

workers compensation by time lost from work and sex, 200910

Thesedataindicatethatthemuchlowerproportionoffemaleemployeeswho

appliedforworkerscompensationisnotlinkedtoaloweramountoftimelost

fromwork.Figure5showsthatin200910theproportionofinjurieswhere

compensationwasappliedforincreasedwiththeamountoftimelostfromwork

forbothmaleandfemaleemployees,thoughthepatternformaleandfemale

employeeswasquitedifferent.Forinjuriesinvolvingnotimeoffwork26%ofmale

employeesappliedforcompensationcomparedwith20%forfemaleemployees.

TherewerelargergapsbetweenthesexesforthePart of day/shiftand14 days

offworkcategories.However,oncevedaysoftimelostwasreached,female

employeesshowedagreatertendencythanmaleemployeestoapplyfor

compensation,76%offemaleemployeesappliedforcompensationcompared

with73%formaleemployees.Interestinglyforinjuriesinvolving11ormoredays

offwork,femaleemployeesonceagainappliedforcompensationlessoftenthanmaleemployees.

Figure5alsoshowsthatthe200506surveyshowedasimilarpattern,though

lowerproportionsoffemaleemployeesappliedforcompensationforallperiods

oftimelostexceptinthecategoryofPart of day/shiftwherethesameproportion

wasrecordedforbothmaleandfemaleemployees.Thegraphshowsthatthe

increasedproportionforfemalesapplyingforcompensationmainlyoccurredfor

injuriesresultingin510daysoffwork.In200506,54%offemaleemployees

withaninjuryresultingin510daysoffworkappliedforcompensationwhilein

200910,76%applied.Formaleemployees,increaseswererecordedforall

periodsoftimelost,thelargestbeingforinjuriesinvolvingPart of day/shiftwhich

increasedfrom33%to46%betweenthetwosurveys.

40%

60%

80%

uredemployeeswho

rkers'compensation Male

Female

0%

20%

None Part of a day/shift 14 days 510 days 11 days or moreProportionofinjured

appliedforworkers'

Time lost from work due to injury


16/42


Figure 5: Employees with a work-related injury: Proportion who applied for workers

compensation by time lost from work by sex, 200506 and 200910

Figure6showsthereasonswhyemployeesdidnotapplyforworkers

compensationfortheirwork-relatedinjury.Notethatthesedatadonotaddupto

100%astheyarecalculatedasproportionsofallinjuredemployeeswhichincludesthosethatappliedforcompensation.Figure6showsthatfemaleemployeesare

morelikelytonotapplyduetotheirinjurybeingtoominororthatapplyingwas

toomucheffort.In200910,30%ofinjuredmaleemployeesand36%ofinjured

femaleemployeescitedthisreason.Forbothsexestheproportionwhocitedthis

reasonhasfallenfromtheprevioussurveythoughtherehasbeenagreaterfallfor

femaleemployees.

Figure 6: Employees with a work-related injury: Proportion by reason did not apply

for compensation by sex, 200506 and 200910

Figure6alsoshowsthatin200910,8%ofinjuredmaleemployeesand11%ofinjuredfemaleemployeesdidnotthinktheywereeligibleforcompensation.

Comparisonwiththe200506resultsindicatesthatformaleemployeesthere

hasbeenanimprovementinthisareawithalowerproportionofmaleemployees

citingthisreasonin200910comparedtotheprevioussurvey.However,for

femaleemployeesagreaterproportionnowthinktheyarenoteligibleforworkers

compensation.

Therewasalsoasubstantialdecreasebetweenthesurveysintheproportion

offemaleemployeessayingthattheydidnotapplyforworkerscompensation

duetothenegativeimpactitmayhaveontheircurrentorfutureemployment.In

200910only3%offemaleemployeescitedthisasareasonfornotapplyingfor

workerscompensationcomparedwith7%in200506.Formaleemployeesthe

proportionwas4%inbothsurveys.

20%

30%

40%

50%

onofinjuredemploy

ees

Minor injury/

too mucheffortNot covered/ not eligible

Negativeimpact onemployment

0%

10%

20%


200506 200910 200506 200910

Proportionofin Negative

impact onemployment

Otherreason

20%

40%

60%

80%

tionofinjuredemployees

oappliedforw

orkers'

compensatio

n

None

Part of aday/ shift

14 days

510

0%

20%


200506 200910 200506 200910

Proportionof

whoappl

co

510days

11 daysor more


17/42


Characteristics by age group

In200910theproportionofemployeeswhoappliedforworkerscompensation

increasedgraduallywithagefrom38%ofemployeesinthe1524yearsage

groupto44%forthoseinthe4554yearsagegroup.Theproportionjumped

to52%forthoseinthe55yearsandoveragegroup.However,asFigure7shows,thisoldestagegrouphadthehighestrejectionratewithonly41%actually

receivingworkerscompensation.

Figure 7: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: proportion by workers

compensation status and age group

Thisisadifferentpatterntothe200506surveyresultswhichdidnotshowasclear

apatternforapplicationswiththe2534yearsagegrouprecordingthehighest

proportion(37%)toreceiveworkerscompensation.Allagegroupshaveshownanincreaseintheproportionwhoappliedforcompensationandtheproportion

whoreceivedcompensationsincethelastsurveyexceptforthe2534yearsage

groupwhichrecordednochangetotheproportionwhoreceivedcompensation

despiterecordinganincreaseintheproportionwhoappliedforit.Thesedataalso

showthatthe55yearsandoveragegrouprecordedthelargestincreaseinthe

proportionswhoappliedforandreceivedworkerscompensation,thoughalso

recordedthelargestincreaseintheproportionwhohadtheirclaimrejected.

Female employeesFigure8showsthatforfemaleemployees,theproportionwhoappliedfor

workerscompensationin200910increasedwithagefrom33%forthoseinthe

1524yearsagegroupto46%forthoseinthe55yearsandoveragegroup.Theproportionwhoactuallyreceivedcompensationdidnotshowthesame

clearpatternthougholderemployeesstillrecordedahigherrateofreceiptof

compensationthanyoungeremployees.

Therehavebeennotableincreasesintheproportionswhoappliedforand

receivedcompensationacrossallagegroupsexceptthe55yearsandover

agegroupwhichrecordedafallintheproportionwhoreceivedworkers

compensationfrom39%downto35%.Thelargestincreaseintheproportion

receivingcompensationoccurredforfemaleemployeesinthe1524years

agegroupwhichrosefrom16%in200506to31%in200910.Despitethis

increase,the1524yearsagegroupstillhasthesecondlowestproportionof

employeeswhoreceivedcompensationbehindthe2534yearsagegroup.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1524 2534 3544 4554 55 &over

Proportionofin

juredemployees

Age group (years)

Applied 200910

Received 200910

1524 2534 3544 4554 55 & over

Age group (years)

Applied 200506

Received 200506


18/42


Figure8alsoshowsthattheproportionofclaimsthatwererejectedincreased

withagefrom2%ofclaimslodgedbyfemaleemployeesinthe1524yearsage

groupto11%ofthoseinthe55yearsandoveragegroup.Whilethetypesof

claimsthatwerenotacceptedforcompensationcannotbereliablydetermined

byage,thedataindicatesthatforallfemaleemployeesclaimsinvolving

musculoskeletalconditions,crushinginjuriesandmentalconditionsweremore

likelytoberejectedthanotherclaims.

Figure 8: Work-related injuries incurred by female employees: proportion by

workers compensation status and age group

Male employeesFormaleemployeesthepatternbyageforapplyingforcompensationwasnot

asclearasforfemaleemployees.Whiletheyoungestagegrouprecordedthe

lowestproportion(42%)andtheoldestagegrouprecordedthehighest(58%),

theagegroupsinthemiddlerecordedsimilarproportions.Allagegroupsrecordednoticeableincreasesfromtheprevioussurveywiththegreatest

increaserecordedformaleemployeesinthe55yearsandoveragegroupwhich

in200506recordedthelowestproportion(38%).

Figure9showsthatwhilethe200506surveyshowedadecreaseinthereceipt

ofworkerscompensationwithage,the200910surveyshowsnodiscernible

patternbyagewithbetween40%and50%ofinjuredmaleemployeesindicating

thattheyreceivedcompensationfortheirwork-relatedinjury.

Figure 9: Work-related injuries incurred by male employees: proportion by workers

compensation status and age group

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1524 2534 3544 4554 55 &over

Proportionofinjuredemployees

Age group (years)

Applied 200910

Received 200910

1524 2534 3544 4554 55 & over Age group (years)

Applied 200506

Received 200506

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1524 2534 3544 4554 55 &over


Age group (years)

Applied 200910

Received 200910

1524 2534 3544 4554 55 andover

Age group (years)

Applied 200506

Received 200506


19/42


Thegreatestincreaseinthereceiptofworkerscompensationoccurredinthe

55yearsandoveragegroupwith47%ofinjuredmaleemployeesin200910

sayingtheyhadreceivedworkerscompensationcomparedwith29%in200506.

ComparisonofFigure8withFigure7indicatesthatin200910female

employeeswerearound10%lesslikelytoreceivecompensationthanmale

employeesofthesameageexceptforemployeesinthe4554yearsagegroupwherethepercentageofmaleandfemaleemployeeswhoreceived

compensationinthe200910surveyweresimilar.

Time lostFigure10showsthatwheretheinjuryresultedinlessthan5daysoffwork,the

proportionofinjuredemployeeswhoreceivedcompensationrangedfrom26%to

31%whereasiftheinjuryresultedin5ormoredaysoffworkthentheproportions

rangedfrom59%to69%.

Figure 10: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: Proportion who received

workers compensation by age group and time lost from work, 200910

Reason did not applyFigure11showsthattheproportionofinjuredemployeeswhodidnotapplyfor

workerscompensationbecausetheyfelttheinjurywastoominororthatitwas

tooinconvenienttoapplydecreasedwithagefrom42%ofinjuredemployeesin

the1524yearsagegroupto22%ofthoseinthe55yearsandoveragegroup.

Theproportionwhodidnotapplyastheywereeithernotawareofworkers

compensationorthoughttheywerenoteligibleforitwassimilaracrosstheage

groupsrangingfrom8%to10%.Theotherreasonsemployeesdidnotapply

includetheemployeragreeingtopaycostsorconcernaboutimpactoncurrentor

futureemployment.

Figure 11: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: Reason did not apply for

workers compensation by age group, 200910

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Less than 5 days 5 or more days


whoreceivedworkers'

compensation

Time lost from work

1524

2534

3544

4554

55 & over

0%

15%

30%

45%

1524 2534 3544 4554 55 & over

Pro

portionofinjuredemployees

Age group (years)

Minor injury / too much effort

Not eligible / not aware

Other reason


20/42


Characteristics by employment conditions

Employment statusOftheinjuredemployees,75%hadleaveentitlementsand22%didnot.

Employeeswithoutleaveentitlementsarecommonlyreferredtoascasuals.

Therewereafurther3%thatwereownermanagersofincorporatedenterprises

(OMIE)butatthetimeoftheinjuryweredeemedemployeesduetothenature

oftheirworkingarrangement.OMIEshavebeenexcludedfromthefollowing

analysis.

Ofthegroupwithleaveentitlements,48%appliedforcompensationofwhich

89%receivedit.Forthegroupwithoutleaveentitlements,32%appliedof

which82%receivedit.Thismeansthatcasualsarelesslikelytoapplyfor

compensationandtheyhaveahigherrejectionratefortheirclaims.

Figure12showsthatfemaleemployeeswithoutleaveentitlementsaretheleast

likelytoapplyforandreceiveworkerscompensationwithonly26%applyingfor

compensationofwhichonly80%actuallyreceivedit.Maleemployeeswithoutleaveentitlementsrecordedthesecondlowestproportions.Thegroupmostlikely

toapplyforcompensationwasmaleemployeeswithleaveentitlementswith52%

applyingforcompensationofwhich90%receivedit.

Figure 12: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: Proportion who applied

and received workers compensation by employment status and sex,

200910

Figure13showshowtheproportionsthatreceivedworkerscompensationforinjuredemployeeswithandwithoutleaveentitlementschangewithtimelost

fromwork.Thesedatashowthatastimelostfromworkincreasessodoes

thegapbetweenthetwogroupsofemployeesintheproportionwhoreceived

compensation,fromadifferenceofonly7%fornotimelosttonearly30%for

injuriesthatresultedin5ormoredaysoffwork.Forinjuriesinvolving5ormore

daysoffwork,72%ofemployeeswithleaveentitlementsreceivedcompensation

comparedwithjust43%foremployeeswithoutleaveentitlements.

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

geo

finjured

emp

loyees Appliedforworkers'compensation

Receivedworkers'compensation

0%

10%

20%

Employeeswithleaveentitlements

Employeeswithoutleaveentitlements




Percen

tageo

fi


21/42


Figure 13: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: Proportion who received

workers compensation by employment status and time lost, 200910

Figure14showsthatagreaterproportionofemployeeswithoutleave

entitlementsthoughttheirinjurywastoominortoclaimcomparedwithemployeeswithleaveentitlements(37%to32%respectively).Thedataalso

showthatemployeeswithoutleaveentitlementsarealotlesslikelytoknow

abouttheirrightstocompensationwith15%believingthattheyarenotcovered

forcompensation,noteligibleforit,ornotawareofworkerscompensation

comparedwith6%foremployeeswithentitlements.

Figure 14: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: Proportion by employment

status and reasons did not apply for workers compensation, 200910

Shiftwork and working hoursFigure15showstheimpactthatworkingundershiftorpart-timearrangements

hasontheproportionofinjuredemployeeswhoappliedforworkers

compensation.Asfull-timenon-shiftworkersmakeupthelargestgroupof

employees,itisnotsurprisingthattheproportionsofmaleandfemaleemployees

whoappliedforcompensationwerethesameasforallemployees(47%for

males,39%forfemales).However,forfull-timeshiftworkerssimilarproportionsof

femaleandmaleemployeesappliedforcompensation(52%offemales,50%for

males).

Therewasamuchbiggerdifferenceintheproportionsapplyingforcompensation

forpart-timeemployeeswhenshiftworkisconsideredwith42%ofpart-timenon-

40%

60%

80%

finjure

demp

loyeesw

ho

orkers

'comp

ensa

tion



0%

20%

Notimelost Upto5days 5ormoredays

Percen

tageo

finjur

rece

ive

dworker

Timelostfromwork

20%

30%

40%

ofinjure

demp

loy

ees



0%

10%

Minorinjury/toomucheffort Notcovered/noteligible Other

Percen

tageo

finj

Reasondidnotapply


22/42


shiftworkersapplyingforcompensationcomparedwithjust24%forpart-time

shiftworkers.Thedataarenotshownseparatelyformalesandfemalesdueto

thesmallnumberofmalepart-timeemployees.

Figure 15: Employees with a work-related injury: Proportion who applied

for workers compensation by shift work and full time/part time

arrangements by sex, 200910

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

finjure

demp

loyeesw

ho

workers

'compensa

tion

0%

10%

20%

30%

Fulltime Fulltime Parttime Parttime*

Nonshiftworker Shiftworker Nonshiftworker Shiftworker Proport

iono

finjure

de

a

pp

lie

dforworkers

'c

Male Female *estimateisfortotal maleandfemale


23/42


Other characteristics

Table5providesinformationonworkerscompensationapplicationsbycountry

ofbirth.ThesedatashowthatemployeeswhowereborninAustraliaappliedfor

compensationfor44%oftheirinjuriesandthoseborninmainEnglishspeaking

countriesotherthanAustraliarecordedasimilarproportion(45%).However,thoseborninothercountriesweremuchlesslikelytoapplyforcompensation(34%).

Allthreegroupsshowedsimilarproportionsfornotclaimingduetotheinjury

beingtoominortoclaim.Thebigdifferencebetweenthegroupsisthatthose

bornoutsideofAustraliaweremorelikelytothinktheywerenotcoveredby

workerscompensationornoteligibleforit.OfthoseborninmainEnglish

speakingcountries,11%didnotapplyforcompensationforthisreasoncompared

to8%ofAustralianborninjuredemployees.Forthoseborninothercountriesthe

proportionwas19%.

Table 5: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: proportion by reason did not

apply for workers compensation status and where born, 200910

Where born

AustraliaMain English

speakingcountries

Other than mainEnglish speaking

countries

Appliedforworkerscompensation 44% 45% 34%

Reasondidnotapply

Minorinjury/toomucheffort 34% 32% 30%

Notcovered/didnotthinkeligible 8% 11% 19%

Otherreasons 15% 12% 17%

Total 100% 100% 100%

Figure16showsthattheamountoftimeinthejobpriortoinjuryseemstohavesomeimpactonthelikelihoodofapplyingforcompensation.Only33%of

employeeswhowereinthejobforlessthan6monthsappliedforcompensation

comparedwith44%forthosewhohadbeeninthejobfor5yearsorlonger.

Figure 16: Employees with a work-related injury: Proportion who applied for

workers compensation by time in job prior to injury, 200910

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Up to 6 months Up to 1 year 1 to 4 years 5 years & over


Time in job at time of injury


24/42


Characteristics by occupation

Figure17showsthatthelargestnumberofemployeesinjuredwereemployedas

Technicians&tradesworkers(20%),followedbyLabourers(16%),Professionals

(15%)andCommunity&personalservicesworkers(14%).Thesefouroccupation

groupsalsohadthehighestnumberofemployeeswhoappliedforandreceivedworkerscompensation,thoughfewerProfessionalsappliedforandreceived

compensationthanCommunity&personalservicesworkers.

Figure 17: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: Number of injured

employees and number compensated by occupation, 200910

Figure18showsthatin200910Labourerswerethegroupmostlikelytoapply

forandreceiveworkerscompensationwithjustoverhalf(52%)applyingfor

compensationand47%receivingit.Managerswasthegroupleastlikelytoapplyforandreceivecompensationwithonly27%compensated.Clerical&

administrativeworkersandSalesworkerswerethegroupswiththegreatestgaps

betweentheproportionswhoappliedforcompensationandthosethatreceived

compensation.Thissuggeststhattheseemployeesaremorelikelytoputin

claimsforinjurieswhicharenotconsideredwork-related.Thedataarenotrobust

enoughtoinvestigatefurther.

Figure 18: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: proportion receiving

workers compensation by occupation, 200910

0

30

60

90

120

Technicians &trades

workers

Labourers Professionals Community &personalserviceworkers

Machineryoperators &

drivers

Managers Salesworkers*

Clerical &administrative

workers

Numberofinjuredemployees('000)

Total injured employees



* estimate for those who received workers' compensation has an RSE between 25% and 50%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Labourers Machineryoperators &

drivers

Salesworkers*

Technicians& tradesworkers

Community &personalserviceworkers

Professionals Clerical &administrative

workers

Managers




* estimate for those who received workers' com ensation has an RSE between 25% and 50%


25/42


Figure19showsthereasonsthatemployeescitedfornotclaimingworkers

compensation.Itshouldbenotedthattheseproportionshouldbeaddedtothe

proportionwhoappliedforworkerscompensationtoaddupto100%.Themain

reasonfornotapplyingwasthattheemployeefelttheinjurywastoominoror

applyingwastoomucheffort.Theproportionsrangedfrom26%forLabourersto

41%forClerical&administrativeworkers.

Figure 19: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: reasons did not apply for

workers compensation by occupation, 200910

WhilethedataforNot aware or not eligiblehashighRSEstheyindicatea

muchlargerproportionofManagerscitedthisreasonthanotheroccupations.

Thisisaconcernasmanagersofemployeesshouldbeawareofworkers

compensation.ItispossiblethatManagersfelttheirparticularinjurywasnot

eligibleforcompensation,however,thetypesofinjuriesincurredbythisgroupdonotindicateaparticularlydifferentpatterntotheotheroccupationgroupsexcept

forahigherlevelofStress or other mental condition.Managershadahigher

proportionofinjuriesthatinvolvedeithernotimeoffworkorjustthedayofinjury,

62%ofinjuriescomparedwith41%forLabourers(Figure20).

ManagersalsohadamuchhigherproportionofOther reasonfornotclaiming.

Thiscategoryincludesconcernaboutcurrentorfutureemploymentandemployer

agreedtopaycostsbothofwhichrecordedhigherestimatesthantheother

occupationgroups.TheseseparatecategoriesarenotshownduetohighRSEs

formanyoftheoccupationgroups.

Figure20showsthatformostoccupationsthereisalinkbetweentakingless

thanonedayoffworkandnotapplyingforworkerscompensationduetotheinjurybeingtoominor.Clerical&administrativeworkershadthehighest

proportionwithlessthanonedayoffwork(61%)andthehighestproportionwho

citedMinor injury/ too much effort(41%)astheirreasonfornotapplying.

Labourershadthelowestproportionofinjurieswithlessthanonedayoffwork

(41%)andthelowestproportionofinjuredemployeeswhocitedMinor injury/ too

much effort(26%)astheirreasonfornotapplyingforworkerscompensation.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Clerical &administrative

workers

Professionals Salesworkers*

Technicians &trades

workers



drivers

Managers Labourers

P

roprtionofinjuredemployees

Reason did not claim workers' compensation

Minor injury / too much effort

Not aware or not eligible*

Other reason

* estimate has a RSE between 25%and 50% and should be used with caution.


26/42


Figure 20: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: time lost due to injury by

occupation, 200910

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Managers Clerical &administrative

workers


Salesworkers

Professionals Technicians& tradesworkers


drivers

Labourers

Percentageofinjuredemployees

Less than 1 day 14 days 5 or more days


27/42


How the injury occurred

Figure23showsthatLifting, pushing or pulling objectwasthecauseor

mechanismofthehighestnumberofinjuriesincurredbyemployeesfollowedby

Hitting, being hit or cutandFall on same levelaccountingfor29%,24%and13%

ofinjuriesrespectively.Thesethreemechanismsofinjuryalsohadthehighestnumberofemployeeswhoappliedforandreceivedworkerscompensation.

TheOther mechanismscategoryincludesContact with chemicalandWorking in

unchanging positionwhichhad28000and20000employeesrespectivelyciting

thesemechanismsasthecauseoftheirinjury.Forthesemechanisms65%and

60%respectivelyinvolvednotimeoffworkandhencetheestimatesforthose

whoappliedforworkerscompensationweretoosmalltoshowinFigure23.Itis

notsurprisingthatthereasontheydidnotapplyforcompensationwasthatthey

felttheinjurywastoominortoclaim.


employees and number compensated by how injury occurred, 200910

Figure24showsthatin200910,employeeswhoincurredaFall on same level

werethemostlikelytoapplyforcompensationbutthosewhoincurredaFall

from heightwerethemostlikelytoreceivecompensation. Thedataindicatethat

allemployeeswhoappliedforcompensationduetoaFall from heightreceived

compensationwhereasforallothermechanismsaproportionhadtheirclaim

rejected.

Figure 24: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: proportion applied and

received workers compensation by how injury occurred, 200910

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

Lifting,pushingor

pullingobject

Hitting,beinghitorcut

Fallonsamelevel

Repetitivemovement*

Exposuretomentalstress*

Fallfromheight*

Othermechanisms

Num

bero

finjure

demp

loyees

('000)

Howinjuryoccurred

Totalinjuredemployees

Appliedforworkers'compensation


*estimateforthosewhoa liedandreceivedworkers'com ensationhasanRSEbetween25%and50%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Fallonsamelevel

Fallfromheight*

Lifting,pushingor

pullingobject

Repetitivemovement*


Exposuretomental

stress*

Othermechanisms

Proport

iono

finjure

demp

loyees

Howinjuryoccurred



*estimateforthosewhoa liedandreceivedworkers'com ensationhasanRSEbetween25%and50%


28/42

Exposure to mental stressrecordedthelowestproportionsofthosewhoapplied

forandreceivedworkerscompensationofallthemechanismslisted.This

mechanismhasthehighestrejectionrateofallthemechanisms.

Figure25showsthattheproportionofinjuredemployeeswhoreceivedworkers

compensationhasshownsomenotableincreasesforafewmechanisms.For

Hitting, being hit or cuttheproportionwhoreceivedworkerscompensationincreasedfrom31%to39%.

Repetitive movementandFall from heightalsoshowednotableincreasesthough

thesedatahavehigherRSEsthanmostoftheothersandshouldbeusedwith

caution.

Figure 25: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: proportion received

workers compensation by how injury occurred, 200910 and 200506

Datashowingreasonsinjuredemployeesdidnotapplyforcompensationisnot

robustenoughtoincludeinthissection.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Fallfromheight*

Fallonsamelevel

Lifting,pushingor

pullingobject


Repetitivemovement*

Exposuretomentalstress*

Othermechanisms

Proport

iono

finjure

dem

ployees

Howinjuryoccurred

Received200910

Received200506

*estimateforthosewhoappliedandreceivedworkers'compensationhasanRSEbetween25%and


29/42


Type of injury

Intermsofthetypesofinjuriesincurred,Figure26showsthatSprain/strain

accountedforthehighestnumberofinjuriesfollowedbyChronic joint or muscle

conditionandCut/open wound.Thesethreetypesofinjuryaccountedfor63%

ofinjuriesand68%oftheinjuriesthatwerecompensated.Supercial injuryrecordedthelowestnumberofincidentsandthelowestnumberthatwere

compensatedpossiblyduetothefactthat62%involvednotimelostfromwork.


employees and number compensated by nature of injury, 200910

Figure27showsthatemployeeswhoincurredaFractureweremorelikely

toapplyforandreceivecompensationcomparedwithothertypesofinjuries.

Justoverhalf(52%)ofallFractureinjurieswerecompensatedin200910.

Chronic joint or muscle condition injuriesandSprain/strain hadthenexthighestproportionsofemployeeswhoappliedforandreceivedcompensationfortheir

injury.

Figure 27: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: proportions applied for

and received workers compensation by nature of injury, 200910

Crushing injurywhichincludesinternalorgandamageandamputationsrecorded

thehighestrejectionrateforworkerscompensationclaimsin200910.While42%

appliedforcompensationjust26%receivedit.Thisisdifferenttothe200506

surveywhichshowed42%receivedcompensationandhencethe200910resultmaybeduetosampledesignissues(Figure28).

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

Sprain/strain Chronicjointormuscle

condition

Cut/openwound

Crushinginjury

Fracture Burns* Stressorothermental

condition*

Superficialinjury*

OtherNum

bero

finjure

demp

loyees

('000)

Typeofinjury

Totalinjuredemployees



*estimateforthosewhoappliedandreceivedworkers'compensationhasanRSEbetween25%and50%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Fracture Chronicjointormuscle

condition

Sprain/strain Crushinginjury

Burns* Stressorothermental

condition*

Cut/openwound

Superficialinjury*

Other

Proport

iono

finjure

demp

loyees

Typeofinjury



*estimatehasaRSEbetween25%and50%


30/42


ForStress or other mental conditionthedatashowsasubstantialincrease

intheproportionwhoreceivedworkerscompensationin200910compared

with200506.Therewereincreasesinboththeproportionwhoappliedfor

compensationandtheproportionwhoreceivedit.

ModestincreaseswererecordedforChronic joint or muscle condition injuriesand

Sprain/strain whileforFracture,Cut/open woundandSupercial injurythetwosurveysshowedsimilarresults.

Figure 28: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: proportion who received

workers compensation by nature of injury, 200910 and 200506

Datashowingreasonsinjuredemployeesdidnotapplyforcompensationisnot

robustenoughtoincludeinthissection.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Fracture Chronicjointormusclecondition

Sprain/strain Cut/openwound

Crushinginjury

Stressorothermental

condition*

Superficialinjury*

OtherProport

ionof

injure

demp

loyeesw

ho

rece

ive

dwo

rkers

'compensa

tion

Typeofinjury

Received200910

Received200506

*estimateforthosewhoreceivedworkers'compensationhasanRSEbetween25%and50%


31/42


Financial assistance

While38%ofinjuredemployeesreceivedworkerscompensation,therewere

othertypesofnancialassistancethatwereused.Figure29showsthemain

categoriesofassistance.Itshouldbenotedthataninjuredemployeecan

accessmorethanoneformofassistanceandhencethetotaloftheproportionsinFigure29canexceed100%.Thedatashowthatastimelostfromwork

increased,injuredemployeesweremorelikelytoaccessmorethanoneformof

assistance.Theseresultsaresimilartothosefoundin200506.

Whileitisnotunexpectedthatover60%ofinjuredemployeeswithnotimeoff

workdidnotreceiveanyformofnancialassistance,itisofconcernthat12%

ofthosewithinjuriesthatrequired5ormoredaysoffworkdidnotreceiveany

nancialassistance.

Otherthanworkerscompensation,themostaccessedformofassistancewas

employerprovidedsickleave.Sickleavewasusedbyaroundone-third(31%)of

injuredemployeeswhotooklessthan5daysoffworkandnearly20%useditfor

injuriesinvolvinglongerperiodsoftimeoffwork.

Employerpaymentsotherthansickleaveweremorefrequentlyusedwhereno

timewaslostfromwork.Thesepaymentswerelikelytocovermedicalexpenses.

Fortheinjuriesrequiringsometimeoffworkthesepaymentscouldinclude

annualleave.

Medicareorothersocialsecuritypaymentswereaccessedequallyregardlessof

timelost,witharound7%ofinjuredemployeesaccessingthistypeofnancial

assistance.Comparisonwithdatafrom200506showsonlyaslightreductionin

thenumberofinjuredemployeesaccessingthesetypesofpaymentsin200910.

Figure 29: Work-related injuries incurred by employees: Source of nancial

assistance by time lost from work, 200910

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

ofinjuredemployees

No time off

Up to 4 days

5 days or more

0%

10%

20%

30%

No financialassistance

Receivedworkers'

compensation

Sick leave Employer otherpayment

Medicare &social security

OtherP

ercentageofin

Source of financial assistance


32/42


33/42


Glossary

Applied for workers compensationTohaveformallyappliedforworkerscompensationbycompletinganapplication

forcompensation.

EmployeesPeoplewhoworkforapublicorprivateemployerandreceiveremunerationin

wages,salary,aretainerfeefromtheiremployerwhileworkingonacommission

basis,tips,piecerates,orpaymentinkind,orpeoplewhooperatetheirown

incorporatedenterprisewithorwithouthiringemployees.

Employment statusEmployedpeoplewereclassiedbywhethertheywereemployees,employers,

ownaccountworkersorcontributingfamilyworkers.Thispublicationonly

includesinjuriesincurredbyemployees.

Financial assistanceMonetaryassistancereceivedfromanypartytocovermedicalexpensesor

incomeloss,incurredduetotheirwork-relatedinjuryorillness.

How injury occurredTheaction,exposureoreventthatwasthedirectcauseoftheinjury,orhowthe

injurywassustained.SeeAppendix1.

IndustryAgroupofbusinessesororganisationsthatperformsimilarsetsofactivitiesin

termsoftheproductionofgoodsorservices.TheindustryoftheemployeehasbeenclassiedinaccordancewiththeAustralian and New Zealand Standard

Industrial Classication(ANZSIC),2006(ABSCat.No.1292.0).

Main English speaking countriesComprisestheUnitedKingdom,Ireland,Canada,SouthAfrica,theUnitedStates

ofAmericaandNewZealand.

OccupationAcollectionofjobsthataresufcientlysimilarintheirmaintaskstobegrouped

togetherforthepurposesofclassication.Theoccupationoftheemployeehas

beenclassiedinaccordancewiththeAustralian and New Zealand StandardClassication of Occupations(ANZSCO),FirstEdition,2006(ABSCat.No.

1222.0).

Owner managers of incorporated enterprisesPeoplewhoworkintheirownincorporatedenterprise,thatis,abusinessentity

whichisregisteredasaseparatelegalentitytoitsmembersorowners(also

knownasalimitedliabilitycompany).

Paid leave entitlementsTheentitlementofemployeestoeitherpaidholidayleaveand/orpaidsickleave

intheirjob.


34/42


Relative Standard Errors (RSEs)AllWRISdatapresentedinthisreportconformwiththeABSguidelinesregarding

dataquality.Unlessotherwisemarked,alldatapresentedhaveRSEsbelow

25%.DatawithRSEsabove50%havenotbeenpublished.Comprehensive

informationaboutRSEscanbefoundintheWRISpublication.

Shift arrangementsAsystemofworkingwherebythedailyhoursofoperationattheplaceof

employmentaresplitintoatleasttwosetworkperiods(shifts),fordifferent

groupsofemployees.

Time lost from workIncludesallworkhoursspentonmedicalconsultation,hospitalisationand

restduetotheinjuryorillness.Thedaysorshiftsabsentdonothavetobe

consecutive.

Type of injuryReferstothemaininjurysustained.SeeAppendix1.

Work-related injury or illnessAnyinjuryorillnessordiseasewhichrstoccurredinthelast12months,where

apersonsufferseitherphysicallyormentallyfromaconditionthathasarisen

outof,orinthecourseof,employment.Theinjuryorillnesswasconsideredto

beinscopeofthesurveyiftherespondentrstbecameawareofitinthelast

12months,eventhoughthecauseoftheinjuryorillnessmayhaveoccurred

outsidethe12monthreferenceperiod.Includedareinjuriesorillnessesthat

occurredwhilecommutingtoandfromwork,outsidetheplaceofworkbut

whileonworkduty,orduringworkbreaks.Informationwascollectedaboutthe

respondentsmostrecentwork-relatedinjuryorillnessiftherewasmorethanonework-relatedinjuryorillnessinthereferenceperiod.

Work-related Injuries Survey (WRIS)TheABSaspartofitsMulti-purposeHouseholdsurveycollecteddataonwork-

relatedinjuriesfromJuly2009toJune2010.Statisticsfromthistopicwere

publishedinWork-related Injuries(CatNo.6324.0).Thepublicationpresented

informationaboutpersonsaged15yearsoroverwhoworkedatsometimeinthe

last12monthsandexperiencedtheirmostrecentwork-relatedinjuryorillnessin

thatperiod.

Workers compensationIncludespaymentsbyaninsurerorotherliablepartyforcostsrelatedtoa

work-relatedinjuryorillness;medicalpayments,incapacitypayments(income

maintenanceandsalarytop-up),rehabilitationpayments,travelpaymentsand

legalpayments;andanysettlementorjudgementofclaim.


35/42


Appendix 1: Injury Classications

Work-relatedinjuriesdataareclassiedaccordingtotheTypeofOccurrence

ClassicationsSystem(TOOCS)whichwasdevelopedbySafeWorkAustralia

forcodingworkerscompensationclaims.Thework-relatedinjuryorillness

classicationusedinthissurveywasbasedontheTOOCSnatureofinjurycodes.Theclassicationofhowwork-relatedinjuryorillnessoccurredwasbased

ontheTOOCSmechanismofinjurycodes.

Type of work-related Injury or illness

Burns

Electricalburns,chemicalburns,coldburns,hotburns,frictionburns,

combinationburnorburnsnotelsewhereclassied

Chronic joint or muscle condition

Arthritis

DisordersofthejointsDisordersofthespinalvertebraeandintervertebraldiscs

Disordersofmuscle,tendonsandothersofttissues(e.g.OccupationalOveruse

SyndromeandRepetitiveStrainInjuryifthisistheonlydescriptiongiven)

Acquiredmusculoskeletaldeformities(e.g.atfeet,malletnger,hammertoe)

Crushing injury

Internalinjuryofchestabdomenandpelvis

Injurywithintactskinsurfaceandcrushinginjury(e.g.bruises,haematomas)

Traumaticamputationincludinglossofeyeball

Cut/open wound

Openwoundnotinvolvingtraumaticamputation(e.g.brokentooth,cuts,

punctures,dogbites,tearingawayofngernail,seriouswoundscontainingglass,

metalorotherforeignbody)

Fracture

Breakingofabone,cartilage,etc.

Sprain/strain

Sprainsandstrainsofjointsandadjacentmuscles

Acutetraumasprainsandstrains

Sprainsandstrainsofcartilage

Dislocations

Stress or other mental condition

Stress,anxietyordepression

Nervousbreakdown

Effectsofwitnessingtraumaticevents

Effectsofinvolvementinahold-up

Victimofharassment

Hyperventilation(hysterical,psychogenic)

Hystericalsymptoms

Phobias

Obsessionalandcompulsivesymptoms

Shorttermshock


36/42


Supercial injury - covers minor injuries such as:

Needlestickpuncture

Abrasions,grazes,frictionburnsorblisters

Scratchinjuryfromaforeignbodyineye

Splinterorotherforeignbodyinplacesotherthaneye

OtherResponsesthatcouldnotbeincludedintooneofthecategoriesabovesuchas

asthma,cancer,concussionorheartattack

How work-related injury or illness occurred

Fall from a height

Afallfromgroundleveltobelowgroundlevel

Landingawkwardlyafterajumpfromaheight

Fallingoffananimal

Afalldownstairsetc.

Fall on same levelAllslips,trips,stumbles,stepsandjumps,evenifafalldoesnotfollow

Fallsofshortdistancessuchasoffacurborintoagutter

Fallsupstairs

Fallwithnofurtherdescription

Hitting, being hit or cut

Hittingstationaryobjectsormovingobjects(e.g.cuttingoneselfwhileusinga

knifeorothertool)

Rubbingandchangfromwearingfootwearorclothes,usingtoolsorhandling

objects

Beinghitbyfallingobjects

Beingbittenbyananimal

Beingbittenbyasnake

Beingtrappedbymovingmachineryorequipmentorbetweenstationaryand

movingobjects

Exposuretomechanicalvibration(e.g.fromchainsaws)

Beingassaultedbyapersonorpersons

Lifting, pushing, pulling, bending

Muscularstresswhilelifting,carryingorputtingdownobjects

Singleormultipleevents

Liftingorcarryingresultinginstressfractures

Repetitivemovement,highmuscleloadingMuscularstresswhilehandlingobjects

Singleormultipleevents

Pushingorpullingobjects

Throwingorpressingobjects

Stressfracturesfromhandlingobjects

Continuallyshovelling

Climbingladderscausingupperandlowerlimbinjuries

Muscularstresswithnoobjectsbeinghandled

Bendingdown,reaching,turningandtwistingmovementswherenoobjectsare

beinghandled

Stressfractureswithoutobjectsbeinghandled(e.g.fromrunning)Continuallytwistingneckwithnoobjectbeinghandled


37/42


Repetitive movement

Occupationaloveruseandrepetitivemovementoccurrences

Prolongedstanding,workingincrampedorunchangingpositions

Workingincrampedorunchangingpositions

Prolongedstandingcausingvaricoseveins

Exposure to mental stressExposuretoatraumaticevent

Exposuretoworkplaceoroccupationalviolence(e.g.victimofassaultor

threatenedassaultbyapersonorpersons,beingavictimoforwitnessinghold-

upsetc.)

Beingavictimofsexual,racial,orotherverbalharassment

Workpressure(e.g.mentalstressarisingfromworkresponsibilities,conictwith

peers,performancecounselling)

Attemptedsuicide

Othermentalstressfactors

Otherinthispublicationincludes:

Vehicle accident

Anyaccidentorincidentonaprivateroad,farm,minesiteorfootpathinvolvinga

vehiclewherethemostseriousinjuryissustainedasaresultofthataccidentor

injury

Avehiclecatchingonreaftertheaccident

Anyaccidentorincidentinafactory,mineorcarparkinvolvingafallfroma

movingvehicle

Thoseresponsesthatcouldnotbeincludedintooneofthecategoriesabove

suchascontactwithhotfood/drink/beverages,exposuretoextremeweather,

jumpingonobjects,struckbylighteningorsunburn

Long term exposure to soundLongtermexposuretoworkshoporfactorynoise,sharpsuddensounds,orlow

frequency(subsonicpressure)sounds

Contact with a chemical or substance

Singlecontactwithchemicalorsubstance

Immediateallergicreactionstoasubstance

Splashwithacid

Causticorcorrosivesubstancesintheeyes

Contactdermatitis

Swallowingchemicalsubstances

Exposuretosmokefromabushre,chemicalreetc.

Long term contact with chemicals or substances

Acquiredallergicreactions

Slowpoisoning,aswithleadorotherheavymetals

Longterminhalationofdustorbres,aswithasbestosbres

Exposuretocigarettesmoke

Insectandspiderbitesandstings

Contactwithpoisonouspartsofplantormarinelife(e.g.blueringedoctopus,

bluebottles,stoneshetc.)

Otherandunspeciedcontactwithchemicalorsubstance


38/42


39/42


Technical Note

Thework-relatedinjuriesstatisticswerecompiledfromdatacollectedinthe

MultipurposeHouseholdSurvey(MPHS)thatwasconductedthroughoutAustralia

inthe200910nancialyearasasupplementtotheABSmonthlyLabourForce

Survey(LFS).ThepublicationLabour Force, Australia(cat.no.6202.0)containsinformation

aboutsurveydesign,scope,coverageandpopulationbenchmarksrelevantto

themonthlyLFS,whichalsoappliestotheMPHS.Italsocontainsdenitionsof

demographicandlabourforcecharacteristics,andinformationabouttelephone

interviewingrelevanttoboththemonthlyLFSandMPHS.

TheconceptualframeworkusedinAustraliasLFSalignscloselywiththe

standardsandguidelinessetoutinResolutionsoftheInternationalConference

ofLabourStatisticians.Descriptionsoftheunderlyingconceptsandstructureof

Australiaslabourforcestatistics,andthesourcesandmethodsusedincompiling

theseestimates,arepresentedinLabour Statistics: Concepts, Sources and

Methods(cat.no.6102.0.55.001).

COLLECTION METHODOLOGY

ABSinterviewersconductedpersonalinterviewsbyeithertelephoneorat

selecteddwellingsduringthe200910nancialyear.Eachmonthasampleof

approximately1300dwellingswereselectedforthemainMPHSsample,and

approximately1300to1400additionaldwellingswereselectedfortheextra

MPHSsample.Inthesedwellings,aftertheLFShadbeenfullycompletedfor

eachpersoninthehousehold,ausualresidentaged15yearsandoverwas

selectedatrandomandaskedtheadditionalMPHSquestionsinapersonal

interview.InformationforthissurveywascollectedusingComputerAssisted

Interviewing(CAI),wherebyresponsesarerecordeddirectlyontoanelectronicquestionnaireinanotebookcomputer.

SCOPE

ThescopeoftheLFSisrestrictedtopeopleaged15yearsandoverand

excludesthefollowing:

membersofthepermanentdefenceforces;

certaindiplomaticpersonnelofoverseasgovernments,customarily

excludedfromcensusandestimatedpopulationcounts;

overseasresidentsinAustralia;and

membersofnon-Australiandefenceforces(andtheirdependants).Inadditionthe200910MPHSexcludedthefollowing:

peoplelivinginveryremotepartsofAustralia;and

peoplelivinginnon-privatedwellingssuchashotels,university

residences,studentsatboardingschools,patientsinhospitals,residents

ofhomes(e.g.retirementhomes,homesforpeoplewithdisabilities),

andinmatesofprisons.

The200910MPHSwasconductedinbothurbanandruralareasinallstates

andterritories,butexcludedpeoplelivinginveryremotepartsofAustralia.

Theexclusionofthesepeoplewillhaveonlyaminorimpactonanyaggregate

estimatesthatareproducedforindividualstatesandterritories,exceptthe

NorthernTerritorywheresuchpeopleaccountforaround23%ofthepopulation.


40/42


SAMPLE SIZE

TheinitialtotalsamplefortheWork-RelatedInjuriestopicincludedintheMPHS

200910consistedofapproximately38655privatedwellinghouseholds,whichis

approximatelydoublethestandardMPHSsample.Ofthe32760privatedwelling

householdsthatremainedinthesurveyaftersampleloss(e.g.households

withLFSnon-response,noresidentsinscopefortheLFSorwork-related

injuriestopic,vacantorderelictdwellingsanddwellingsunderconstruction),

approximately88%werefullyrespondingtotheMPHS.Thenumberofcompleted

interviewsobtainedfromtheseprivatedwellinghouseholds(aftertakinginto

accountthescope,coverageandsub-samplingexclusions)was28554(14205

forthemainsampleand14349fortheextrasample).

ESTIMATION METHODS

Weightingistheprocessofadjustingresultsfromasamplesurveytoinferresults

forthetotalinscopepopulation.Todothis,aweightisallocatedtoeachsample

unit,which,fortheMPHS,caneitherbeapersonorahousehold.Theweightisa

valuewhichindicateshowmanypopulationunitsarerepresentedbythesample

unit.Therststepincalculatingweightsforeachunitistoassignaninitialweight,whichistheinverseoftheprobabilityofbeingselectedinthesurvey.Theinitial

weightsarethencalibratedtoalignwithindependentestimatesofthepopulation

ofinterest,referredtoasbenchmarks.Weightsarecalibratedagainstpopulation

benchmarkstoensurethatthesurveyestimatesconformtotheindependently

estimateddistributionofthepopulationratherthanthedistributionwithinthe

sampleitself.

Thesurveywasbenchmarkedtotheestimatedcivilianpopulationaged15years

andoverlivinginprivatedwellingsineachstateandterritory,excludingthe

scopeexclusionslistedabove.Theprocessofweightingensuresthatthesurvey

estimatesconformtopersonbenchmarksbystate,partofstate,ageandsex,

andtohouseholdbenchmarksbystate,partofstateandhouseholdcomposition.Thesebenchmarksareproducedfromestimatesoftheresidentpopulation

derivedindependentlyofthesurvey.

RELIABILITY OF THE ESTIMATES

Estimatesinthispublicationaresubjecttosamplingandnon-samplingerrors:

Samplingerroristhedifferencebetweenthepublishedestimateandthe

valuethatwouldhavebeenproducedifalldwellingshadbeenincludedinthe

survey.

Non-samplingerrorsareinaccuraciesthatoccurbecauseofimperfectionsin

reportingbyrespondentsandinterviewers,anderrorsmadeincodingandprocessingdata.Theseinaccuraciesmayoccurinanyenumeration,whether

itbeafullcountorasample.Everyeffortismadetoreducethenon-sampling

errortoaminimumbycarefuldesignofquestionnaires,intensivetrainingand

supervisionofinterviewers,andeffectiveprocessingprocedures.

COMPARABILITY WITH MONTHLY LFS STATISTICS

DuetodifferencesinthescopeandsamplesizeoftheMPHSandthatofthe

LFS,theestimationproceduremayleadtosomevariationsbetweenlabourforce

estimatesfromthissurveyandthosefromtheLFS.


41/42


42/42

Inquiries

Forfurtherinformationregardingthecontentsofthepublicationcontact:

TheData&AnalysisSection

Safe Work Australia

(02)61219256

Documents

Who Did and Did Not Receive Workers Compensation 2009-10 (1)