This question gets asked a lot at public meetings, hearings
and classes I attend or facilitate. I
can summarize one perspective with the following:
“Workers’ compensation is more about protecting employers than workers… It should be called the ‘Employer Protection Act’… It protects employers from being sued. It protects them from the real costs of injuries. It protects employers from having to look the families of the workers they have injured or killed in their eyes and be accountable for what happened.”
This rather harsh assessment is not without its
justifications. The exclusive remedy
workers’ compensation provides does protect employers from being sued by their
workers for work-related injuries and diseases; however, it also protects
workers from being sued by other workers.
There are some exceptions in some jurisdictions but this protection is
an essential element of almost every workers’ compensation system. More importantly, the no-fault, mostly
universal coverage offered by workers’ compensation systems provide timely
financial compensation and medical coverage in a way that fault-based systems
reliant on the Courts simply cannot.
Yes, the insurance does protect employers from the real
costs of injuries but only to the extent that the cost of injuries exceed the
cost of the insurance. That’s the nature
and purpose of insurance: to protect
against rare and costly adverse events.
It is also true that most of employers insured under a workers’
compensation policy in any given year will actually pay more for the insurance
than the costs of their actual losses.
Some people are surprised by this statement, but only until they think
about other lines of insurance. The cost
of my house insurance protects me from the real cost of a house fire but only
if I have one. Thankfully, my house is
still standing and the cost of my house insurance far exceeds the losses I have
had or will likely every have in a given year.
Just because workers’ compensation in a no-fault system and
protects an employer from suit does not mean the employer is not held
accountable. Firms with poor claim cost
records relative to their industry counterparts will likely face financial
consequences through experience rating (also called experience modification,
demerits, and surcharges in other jurisdictions). Put another way, firms who invest in safety
and develop a strong safety culture are likely to have fewer injuries with less
severity giving them a competitive advantage.
In addition to financial
accountability through higher premiums that may hurt competitiveness of poor
performing firms, more severe penalties add another layer of accountability in
many jurisdictions.
WorkSafeBC recently issued its annual listing of “administrative penalties” against employers
for violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation that put
workers at risk whether or not such violations actually resulted in real
injury. This form of accountability goes
beyond the financial accountability equal to the dollar value of the penalty,
it can also holds the employer accountable in the court of public opinion. One has only to look at the media coverage
related to penalties assessed by WorkSafeBC.
Who does workers’ compensation really protect? The obvious
answer is the worker. As an insurance
nominally paid for by the employer where the beneficiary of compensation is the
injured worker, workers’ compensation protects workers and their families from
the full financial loss that might otherwise occur as a result of work-related
injury. That protection amounts to
billions of dollars every year paid out to injured workers and their families
in Canada, the US, Australia and other countries with workers’ compensation
systems.
Often overlooked are the protections extended by workers’
compensation legislation to non-workers.
Spouses and dependents are often beneficiaries of workers’ compensation
in the event of a work-related fatality.
Beyond that, the healthcare paid on behalf of the injured worker protect
society (taxpayers like you and me) from medical and other healthcare costs
that might otherwise be externalized to government programs.
Workers’ compensation systems also impose a duty on the
insured employer to prevent injuries.
That duty, when embraced fully, becomes cultural but the duty to protect
workers extends protection to every other person in the workplace.
The prevention imperative of workers’ compensation to
directly protect workers also protects kids in schools, customers in malls, and
non-worker participants at or near the worksite. In a sense, workers’ compensation protects all
of us in one way or another making it an important element of social policy.
2 comments:
So in summary, worker's compensation does protect employers' welfare from employees suing them. I guess employees and their families benefit from this as well.
I think it works both ways. The employer is protected from being sued and the employee gets to claim some benefits out of the workers compensation insurance. So it is beneficial to both parties.
- SocialServicesLiability.com
Post a Comment