Seductive and powerless
The number of ACC cases landing in my in-box and on my table is growing at an alarming rate. A recent discussion I had with a person affected by ACC's flip-flop attitude provided me with plenty of food for thought about how the corporation works.
This person told me it was seductive for him to become a long-term claimant when ACC reconsidered its initial decision to accept his claim for an operation for a work-related injury. In his first week off work he was impatient to get back, but as he faced delays in getting his case resolved, his motivation began to fade. ACC really needs to get an efficient assessment process in place for the benefit of all parties involved.
Currently, the statutory time frame for ACC to decide whether an applicant should receive cover under the Act is 21 days. If an applicant is not satisfied with ACC's decision they can lodge a review within three months of the original decision. ACC then has 10 working days to review their initial decision and if there is no further progress, an independent review is conducted. There is no specific time frame set down for having this hearing, but a decision must be issued within 28 days of it.
As at 30 May this year, 686 cases had been outstanding for two years or more, 759 cases for between one and two years, and 651 cases between six months to one year. So much for the $5.1 million taxpayer-funded ��Covered' advertising campaign that tells everyone they're covered! The Advertising Standards Authority rightly ruled that the simplicity of the television ad's message was misleading.
However, once a decision has been made at an independent hearing, this is not the end of the process. It can be appealed by both ACC and the applicant within 28 days of the review being made. As at 30 May, 761 cases are still outstanding after three years or more, 636 between two and three, 401 between one and two years, and 235 between six and 12 months. I find the number of cases outstanding to be ironic given that ACC was set up to remove the need for litigation!
The claimant I spoke to also went on to say he felt powerless after ACC went back on its initial decision to accept his claim for an operation. He said he dreaded every phone call and interview with ACC, and racked his brain to think of ways to convince ACC that he had a valid work injury claim. This person is far from alone. Every day I hear from people who feel powerless and frustrated. In one of the more serious cases, I am following up on a person who took their own life allegedly because of difficulty in receiving rehabilitation from ACC.
The ACC Minister recently fronted up to the Transport and Industrial Relations Select Committee to explain the department's planned spending for the next financial year. We were told about the new values being adopted by ACC and that it was treating people as people �V this is while both the Minister and CEO are still in denial about the way that ACC investigates claimants, despite worrying stories about investigations being exposed in the media.
Though the Minister says most of the claims referred to private investigators resulted in them being validated, the contracts with the investigators clearly say that 85% of referred cases should result in ways other than validation.
Only days after the select committee hearing we found out that ACC is conducting an inquiry into its fraud unit. The document outlining the inquiry was created by ACC on the 11 May, just days after the media exposed the way ACC investigates claimants. This inquiry includes reviewing contracts with private investigators.
It doesn't take much to put two and two together and see that even ACC realises it is falling short of the mark to treat people as people. The Minister and the CEO need to stop looking at this situation through rose-tinted glasses �V you can't have cultural change when it isn't reflected from the top.
