WORKability 2: chapter 5
WORKability 2: SOLUTIONS
|
5 Strategies to address perceptions about occupational health and safety, disability discrimination and unfair dismissal laws
5.3 What are the possible risks associated with these laws?
5.3.1 Occupational health and safety risks - real and perceived problems
5.3.2 Disability discrimination risks - real and perceived problems
5.3.3 Industrial relations risks - real and perceived problems
5.3.4 Interaction between laws - real and perceived problems
5.4 How might these risks and concerns be addressed?
5.4.1 Government-sponsored personal and workplace assessments and risk management strategies
5.4.3 Engagement of State workers compensation authorities
5.4.4 Capacity building for employment service providers
5.5 Comments in further submissions to the Inquiry
5.6 Issues for further discussion
5.1 Introduction
WORKability I: Barriers noted that one of the main impediments to the employment of people with disability lies in employer concerns about increased exposure to legal and financial risks related to occupational health and safety, disability discrimination and unfair dismissal laws. [1]
The primary concern appears to be the belief that there are higher health and safety risks when there are people with disability in the workplace, and therefore greater exposure to workers compensation claims. While the Inquiry has not received any clear evidence that there is, in reality, a generally higher safety risk, the perception appears to be strong enough to have a significant impact on hiring decisions by employers.
Employers also seem concerned about increased exposure to legal action in the form of disability discrimination claims and unfair dismissal claims when hiring people with disability. As with health and safety risks, there is no evidence available to help distinguish between the perceived and actual risks associated with these types of claims.
The Inquiry recommended research to clarify the real financial and legal risks associated with employing people with disability.
Interim Recommendation 13: Occupational health and safety, industrial relations and disability discrimination laws
The Inquiry recommends gathering clear and practical information about the financial impact of, and legal risks created by:
(a) occupational health and safety laws;
(b) disability discrimination laws;
(c) industrial relations laws; and
(d) the interaction between those laws
on employers who hire people with disability.
The Inquiry also created a working group to commence the implementation of that recommendation and to identify other possible strategies for addressing this barrier to employment of people with disability.
This chapter discusses the outcomes of the working group and the comments contained in the Second Round Submissions regarding this issue.
5.2 Creating an expert working group to discuss the impact of occupational health and safety, disability discrimination and unfair dismissal laws
When WORKability I: Barriers was published, 10 organisations had already agreed to participate in the working group on work trials. The group expanded to include a barrister and representatives from the following 21 organisations:
- ACROD
- AMP
- Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry
- Australian Council of Trade Unions
- Australian Industry Group
- Centacare
- Department of Education and Training NSW
- Department of Employment and Workplace Relations
- Disability Council of NSW
- Disability Employment Action Centre
- Diversity Council of Australia
- Diversity@Work
- Employers Making a Difference
- IBM Australia
- National Employment Services Association
- NSW Disability Discrimination Legal Centre
- Office of the Australian Safety and Compensation Council
- People With Disability Australia
- Regional Disability Liaison Officer Western Sydney
- TAFE NSW
- Workcover South Australia.
The working group met on 6 September 2005 and then continued discussion through email.
The members of the working group confirmed the premise that the actual or perceived application of occupational health and safety, disability discrimination and industrial relations laws to people with disability operates as a serious impediment to an employer's willingness to hire.
The group tried to identify why these three areas of law create such a high barrier and develop ways to address these concerns.
5.3 What are the possible risks associated with these laws?
The group had difficulty in distinguishing between the real and perceived risks. This is most likely because, in practice, the impact of any perceived risks appears to be as great as the impact of any real risks. Further, the difference between perceived and real risks will vary depending on the specific disability, job description and workplace.
Nevertheless, the group tried to identify the prevailing concerns and developed the following lists.
5.3.1 Occupational health and safety risks - real and perceived problems
The group identified the following concerns regarding occupational health and safety regulations:
- prevailing assumption that people with disability are a higher safety risk than others, despite the absence of proof
- assumptions about an increased safety risk result in concerns about increased insurance premiums, despite the absence of proof State workers compensation authorities provide extremely poor information
- difficulties in accessing information and advice as to how to manage safety risks for anyone, including people with disability
- difficulties in identifying any additional risks created (or not) by a person's disability
- amount of time and cost involved in making adjustments for a person with disability to do a job properly and manage the risk appropriately
- perception that there is a non-delegable duty of care and that the duty is higher regarding employees with disability
- perception that risk must be completely eliminated for people with disability - 'zero tolerance' approach rather than 'reasonable and practical measures'
- difficulties in getting someone to say that the appropriate measures have been taken to provide a safe working environment
- even if it were possible to get 'sign-off' on a safe environment, it may not provide legal protection
- serious financial and personal liability consequences for any problem that arises
- failure of an employee to disclose a disability can mean that appropriate steps are not taken and liability is incurred
- confusion about the interaction between occupational health and safety legislation and disability legislation.
5.3.2 Disability discrimination risks - real and perceived problems
The group identified the following concerns regarding disability discrimination laws:
- confusion about the meaning of discrimination and a general lack of understanding about what discrimination laws require
- confusion about whether and when an employer can ask a potential employee whether he or she has a disability
- concern about the cost of making reasonable adjustments (even though the obligation may be no different regarding other employees)
- concern about whether measures to protect employees with disability may be regarded as unfair by other workers
- concern about whether adjustments made for employees with disability may deprive them of opportunities
- concern about the time involved in addressing any discrimination claims - be they justified or not
- little incentive to comply with legislation because consequences are light.
5.3.3 Industrial relations risks - real and perceived problems
The group identified the following concerns regarding industrial relations laws:
- concern about the increased prospect of an unlawful dismissal claim on the basis of an employee's disability
- concern about the time involved in addressing any unfair dismissal claims
- concern about differing treatment in unfair dismissal claims when they involve people with disability
- confusion about whether a failure to disclose a disability permits an employer to dismiss on the basis of false and misleading information
- concern about informed consent for employees with disability negotiating their own agreements
- concern about a possible increase in internal disputes due to friction involving employees with disability or differing treatment of people with disability.
5.3.4 Interaction between laws - real and perceived problems
The group identified the following concerns regarding the intersection of laws:
- concern about the complexity of interaction between laws
- confusion about the hierarchy between the laws in the event of conflict
- additional confusion caused by privacy legislation (for example, whether an employment services provider can disclose a disability to employers).
The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry provided some additional examples of the areas of risk about which employers may be concerned:
- personal risk with respect to recurrence of a condition, where an individual may be prone to such a recurrence. These include the recurrence of a depressive episode; psychological stress; bipolar condition; a schizophrenic episode; or physical condition (eg bad back, tendonitis);
- injury to an individual as a result of a person's disability that contribute to a work injury. Examples could include repetitive strain injury through adapting to work in instances of an individual with a bad back, missing limb or other physical disability; and other injuries to individuals or other workers as a result of practices associated with a persons disability;
- injury to the individual and/or to other employees as a result of behaviours associated with an episodic or acute recurrence of a condition, mental or physical;
- complications created where an employee has not fully disclosed their known condition to the employer, and the employer has not had the opportunity to make an appropriate analysis of risk and apply effective workplace adjustment;
- the additional cost of workplace adjustments including access, seating, toilet facilities, hours of work, and training of the person with disability and co-workers; and
- the extent of 'reasonable accommodations' under DDA and OH&S legislation.
Regarding industrial relations risks, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry adds that there is also concern about differing treatment in unfair dismissal claims by people with disability. Further there should be room for longer reasonable probationary periods for employees with disability.
5.4 How might these risks and concerns be addressed?
The group suggested that many of these concerns could be addressed through better understanding about the real impact of these laws, as opposed to the assumed impact of these laws.
The working group sought to identify ways to collect information that addressed employer fears regarding these laws. The group focussed more on the actual and perceived risks created by occupational health and safety and workers compensation requirements, than on the disability discrimination and unfair dismissal issues.
The group discussed the following five strategies, each of which are described in the sections below:
- government-sponsored personal and workplace assessments and risk management strategies
- government-sponsored program to cover the first year of insurance premiums, coupled with a data analysis project
- engagement of State workers compensation authorities
- capacity building for employment service providers
- awareness raising through 'myth buster' fact sheets, 'how to' information sheets and business-to-business promotion.
5.4.1 Government-sponsored personal and workplace assessments and risk management strategies
It appears that one of the main problems faced by employers is uncertainty about the appropriate steps to take in order to address personal and workplace safety risks (whether the employee has a disability or not).
Some members of the working group suggested that this uncertainty might be addressed by providing easy access to government-funded experts who can assist employers to identify what needs to be done to create a safe workplace.
Other members went a step further to suggest that the advice provided by such experts might be part of a 'certification' or 'compliance' model. While the idea behind this type of model is to ensure that the assessment carries the authority that employers are looking for, it was acknowledged that there may need to be some investigation regarding the legal barriers to 'certification'.
Workcover South Australia pointed to the checklists available on its website as a guide to what might be included in worksite assessments under this scheme.
Other participants made suggestions about who might be best placed to conduct the assessments, including:
- a party independent of government (to reduce employer sensitivity to compliance and regulation issues)
- employment services (to reduce the number of agencies involved in the employment process)
- government-funded consultants.
The Regional Disability Liaison Officer, Western Sydney, went into greater detail and suggested that the assessments should be conducted by an accredited service with the capacity to assess a workplace, identify strategies and implement any modifications necessary to ensure a safe work environment. Such a service must be able to demonstrate occupational health and safety awareness for the employee, employer and the organisation as a whole, irrespective of whether the employee is unskilled or highly skilled. The services could be an employment service, rehabilitation service or a newly created specialised service.
Several members of the working group expressed some concern that providing government-funded experts only for employees with disability may perpetuate the perception that they are an increased safety risk, despite the absence of evidence to this effect.
In view of this concern, the NSW Disability Discrimination Legal Centre suggested that a program to provide workplace assessments for employees with disability (and the model discussed in section 5.4.2 below) should be developed within the following parameters:
1. The object of the program should be to encourage improved and permanent opportunities in the workforce. This means that the program should be developed through active consultation with employers, employees and disability groups.
2. The program should be viewed as a transitionary step in changing community attitudes rather than a long-term solution to the problem. The program should be regularly reviewed and strive to make itself unnecessary.
3. The collection and dissemination of reliable data should be a primary focus of the program. This is a fundamental step in reducing stereotypes about the cost and risks associated with employees with disability.
The NSW Disability Discrimination Legal Centre also highlighted that there are already mechanisms in place to manage risks, including the development of Disability Action Plans as a means to ensure compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992. This may be a useful model in the occupational health and safety context.
The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR) is currently in the process of developing a one-stop-information-shop (see further Chapter 10). DEWR reports that it is considering the incorporation of a government-sponsored worksite assessment scheme for inclusion in its one-stop-information-shop. DEWR describes the possible worksite scheme as follows:
Worksites Assessment
It is envisaged that the worksite assessment would be organised through the Australian online information and advice service. This would complement the streamlining of the Workplace Modifications Scheme through the site from July 2006.
Potential Users
It is envisaged that worksite assessments would be available for new and existing employees with disabilities.
Existing employees may include people who have returned to work after an accident or injury, or existing employees whose needs or job requirements have changed.
Potential Services Offered
The worksite assessment could provide a mechanism for identifying strategies to manage OHS risks for the employer. The assessment could include the employee's work fit and the need for workplace or job-task modification. It is envisaged that this assessment could form part of the workplace modifications worksite assessment.
Benefits of Worksite Assessments
Worksite assessments would assist employers take appropriate steps to manage OHS risks when employing people with disabilities.
The Regional Disability Liaison Officer, Western Sydney, commented that the 'Potential Users' under such a scheme should also include:
- existing employees whose job may not have changed, but who disclose their disability at a later point in time
- students with disabilities and post secondary education providers who may face occupational health and safety concerns in the context of field trips and work placements
- apprentices and trainees with disability and their employers.
5.4.2 Government-sponsored program to cover the first year of insurance premiums, coupled with a data analysis project
Employers Making a Difference and the National Employment Services Association proposed a three-year pilot project which aims to simultaneously provide an incentive for employers to take on employees with disability and an opportunity to prove - or disprove - whether or not the perceived risks are in fact real.
The main features of the project are:
- the government would cover the first year of insurance premiums as an incentive to employers to hire people with disability. For example, where the premium is calculated as a percentage of salary, that amount is covered by government
- all businesses and individuals participating in this program would be part of a data collection project that tracks the impact of an employee with disability on workplace safety and insurance premiums.
A diagrammatic model of the project can be found at the end of this chapter in Appendix 5A.
The stated goals of this project are to:
- eliminate the perception of risk (and any real risk) by providing a government-funded scheme to cover workers compensation insurance for jobseekers with disability. Employers Making a Difference and the National Employment Services Association suggest that this coverage would apply to clients of government-funded employment services only
- systematically collect and analyse large quantities of information about any workers compensation claims, with a view to informing the debate about occupational health and safety risks
- educate on risk assessment and reduction. The data collected would provide a solid basis for an education programs aimed at both employment service providers and employers.
Some working group participants suggested extending the government-sponsored workers compensation coverage to the full tenure of a person's employment and/or extending the project to 10 years to obtain more accurate and comprehensive data.
Workcover South Australia suggests that its RISE program might be of some assistance in developing a project of this kind. [2]
Once again, some members expressed concern that the 'insurance holiday' might perpetuate the perception that employees with disability cost more, despite the absence of evidence to this effect. Nevertheless, there was general support for a project like this given its triple purpose of providing incentives to employers, collecting reliable information and educating employers and the community about any risks on the basis of that information.
The parameters suggested by the NSW Disability Discrimination Legal Centre in relation to the worksite assessment program above (see section 5.4.1), also apply to the development of this project.
5.4.3 Engagement of State workers compensation authorities
The working group noted that State workers compensation authorities are often the primary source of information for employers regarding occupational health and safety. It is therefore vital that they have appropriate information about the way occupational health and safety legislation does - and does not - impact on people with disability. They also need to understand the interaction between occupational health and safety and disability legislation.
The group suggested that Workcover authorities across Australia be encouraged to promote a positive model of managing health and safety, including for people with disability. In particular the group emphasised that authorities should not just concentrate on the 'stick approach' to managing health and safety.
Further, the authorities themselves should be better informed about whether or not there are different risks associated with disability. If there are additional risks they should know how to manage those risks. If not, they should debunk the prevailing belief that people with disability are a higher safety risk than anyone else.
One strategy of building this expertise is that used by Workcover South Australia, which engages a consultative committee - the Disability Focus Group - dedicated to developing an occupational health and safety and disability strategy. The detailed strategy of this focus group can be found on Workcover South Australia's website. [3]
5.4.4 Capacity building for employment service providers
The working group noted that employment service providers are often the gateway to the workplace for people with disability, and a major source of information for both employees and employers.
Education and training needs to be provided to employment service providers to improve understanding of occupational health and safety risks, obligations and management strategies. The group stressed that the goal would be 'capacity building', not just providing information via kits and websites.
Workcover South Australia has already developed some training programs and materials which might assist employment agencies in the area of occupational health and safety. [4] These materials were developed in consultation with its Disability Focus Group.
One member of the working group commented that if professional personal and workplace assessments are incorporated into the operations of employment service providers, this may have a direct and positive impact on the capacity of those services to provide advice to employers.
The Regional Disability Liaison Officer, Western Sydney, suggested that capacity building would also be useful for private employment agencies, employment services, rehabilitation services, post secondary vocational education and training institutions, and services associated with apprenticeships and traineeships for people with disability.
5.4.5 Awareness raising through 'myth buster' fact sheets, 'how to' information sheets and business-to-business promotion
The working group discussed the need for a general awareness-raising campaign for all parties involved in the employment process, and the community more generally. The three types of materials suggested were:
- 'Myth-buster' pamphlets: ten to twelve points including, for example, information that disability is not a factor in the calculation of insurance premiums. These pamphlets could include case studies.
- 'How-to' ensure a safe working place : information sheets setting out key principles and information about 'how to' comply with the various laws. These should also include case studies.
- Business-to-business promotion of the benefits of hiring people with disability : this needs business leaders to outline the financial and business benefits that come from hiring people with disability and provide success stories.
The working group again emphasised that it is insufficient to just produce information, there must be a way to ensure understanding. Thus, any new literature should be accompanied by a long-term multifaceted approach to education - including media and business champions. Information must be easily accessible and broadly disseminated. Positive experiences of employers should be widely promoted.
The education campaign should be comprehensive, clear, accurate and energetic. At the same time the campaign should be cognisant of the possibility that it might inadvertently foster unhelpful stereotypes.
Various participants provided starting materials for the development of user-friendly fact sheets:
Workcover South Australia has produced various forms of useful material including an occupational health and safety welfare kit for employment placement agencies, [5] employers [6] and employees [7] , a safe work checklist, [8] occupational health and safety training kits, [9] workplace injury management resources [10] and an occupational health and safety claims management checklist for employers. [11]
The Australian Industry Group refers to information available on JobAble about 'Common Employer Concerns' [12]
The NSW Disability Discrimination Legal Centre refers to its publication Using Disability Discrimination Law in New South Wales and offered to help develop further materials. [13] The NSW Disability Discrimination Legal Centre also highlights the following priorities:
- The rights and obligations of employers and employees in disclosing disability and the relevance of privacy laws
- Assessing and identifying the real occupational health and safety risks that apply to all employees in the workplace
- Achieving transparent and balanced negotiation and consultation between employers and employees regarding reasonable adjustments in the workplace
- Creative response to making reasonable adjustments and debunking the myth that such adjustments lead to financial hardship.
The Regional Disability Liaison Officer, Western Sydney, provided information that could be adapted into simple information sheets and refers to a website that discusses disclosure of disability in the employment context. [14]
5.5 Comments in further submissions to the Inquiry
Second Round Submissions also contained several suggestions about addressing the 'fear factor' associated with the occupational health and safety, disability discrimination and unfair dismissal risks.
The Australian Industry Group stresses that the best approach is to focus on education and awareness for employers rather than regulation:
The interaction of OHS, disability discrimination and industrial relations requirements does indeed pose a barrier to the employment of people with a disability, whether this is based on perceived risks, or actual risks. Schemes like the availability of Government-funded consultants offering assistance to employers and employees with disability, is a sensible suggestion to encourage increased engagement of people with disability. [15]
Regarding occupational health and safety, the Australian Industry Group provides some statistics suggesting that the risks are not as high as some might believe them to be:
With regard to occupational health and safety, Ai Group is supportive of education campaigns to demystify preconceptions in relation to the safety levels of employees with disability. While care needs to be taken with aggregate data in view of the wide occupational variations in claims, some preliminary research suggests that people with disabilities may be statistically less likely to be involved in workplace accidents [16] . One study found that 98% of employees with a disability have a better or similar accident record compare to their co-workers without a disability. These campaigns should also engage state workers compensation authorities and promote greater understanding of the relationship between disability and workers compensation claims. Further preliminary research suggests that only 4% of employees with a disability claimed for workers compensation, compared with 14.7% claimed by employees without disabilities. [17]
Vision Australia and Blind Citizens Australia note that visually impaired and blind people are often retrenched due to perceived occupational health and safety concerns. They warn against any strategy that may perpetuate rather than eliminate the myths about occupational health and safety risks. [18]
One individual with disability suggested that the government should cover the first three months of workers compensation premiums to combat this barrier. [19]
On disability discrimination, People With Disability Australia suggested a greater focus on how occupational health and safety and unfair dismissal fits within the rights framework set up by the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA). People With Disability Australia also recommended the development of clearer DDA compliance and decision-making models, as follows:
Recommendation 7: An appropriate authority must be charged with responsibility for developing readily implementable Disability Discrimination Act compliance program models that can be provided to small-medium sized employers free of charge, along with the services necessary to support implementation of such programs including information, support, training and face to face assistance.
Recommendation 8: An appropriate authority must be charged with responsibility for developing readily implementable Disability Discrimination Act compliant human resources decision-making models for effective and procedurally fair decision-making processes in recruitment, retention, return-to-work and termination. Such models may be provided to small-medium sized employers free of charge along with the services necessary to support implementation of such models including information, support, training and face to face assistance. [20]
Regarding unfair dismissal, Australians for Disability and Diversity Employment referred the Inquiry to laws in the United Kingdom where the onus is on the employer to refute a breach of unfair dismissal in the case of an employee with disability. [21]
5.6 Issues for further discussion
The suggestions described above have not been endorsed by the working group as a whole or the Inquiry. Rather they reflect the results of preliminary discussions on the issue.
The Inquiry suggests the following steps regarding the five strategies discussed above.
1. Government-sponsored personal and workplace assessments and risk management strategies
The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR) should provide updates to the working group and keep the following factors in mind when developing its worksite assessment model:
- participants of the working group may be willing to offer some assistance and suggestions to DEWR in the development of this model
- not all employers seeking a personal and worksite assessment will access the Workplace Modifications Scheme (WMS)
- while the occupational health and safety service may be aligned with the WMS it should not be part of it - some modifications may not require funding from WMS
- some employers may be seeking some certainty as to the legal effect of carrying out the suggestions made by a personal and workplace assessor (for example, through certification)
- it may be useful to provide lists of agencies that can provide personal and workplace assessments so that employers can seek assistance independently of government
- guidance as to the issues that will be addressed by the personal and workplace assessment (for example, checklists that may be used by assessors).
2. Government-sponsored program to cover the first year of insurance premiums, coupled with a data analysis project
The first draft model project designed by Employers Making a Difference and the National Employment Services Association should be further developed. Some of the areas needing clarification include:
- identifying a government agency to manage and fund the project
- developing a strategy for promoting participation in the project
- determining how workers compensation cover will be provided (Comcare? State workers compensation authorities? Reimbursement of any increased premiums paid to private insurers?)
- identifying the specific data sought, the method for collecting it and the way it will be analysed
- identifying the types of risk management models that might be trialled within the project
- determining who will be eligible to participate in the project (for example, all people with disability starting or moving to a new job? All people with disability who have been out of the workforce for a certain period of time? All people with disability who seek employment assistance from Job Network or Disability Open Employment Services ? Will all employers be eligible or just employers under/over a certain size or in certain industries? Will there be limitations on the number of participants?)
- determining the design and funding for the education scheme to accompany the project.
In order to develop a comprehensive design for this project it may be useful to gather a small group, including DEWR, to address these and other issues. This group might include Workcover authorities, employer representatives, Disability Open Employment Service representatives, educational authorities involved in work placements and DEWR.
3. Engagement of State workers compensation authorities
The Inquiry suggests that DEWR convene a roundtable with all State workers compensation authorities to discuss and document:
- Workcover SA's disability strategy
- the disability strategies of other State authorities
- the need for State workers compensation authorities to develop a clear operations and education (internal and external) strategy regarding employees with disability
- linking those authorities to DEWR's one-stop-information-shop (see Chapter 10).
It may also be worth including representatives from the disability and employment services sectors in these discussions.
4. Capacity building for employment service providers
The Inquiry suggests the following steps:
- develop a short- and long-term capacity building strategy for employment service providers using the Workcover SA program and materials as a starting point. This should be a collaborative effort including employment service peaks, individual employment services, State workers compensation authorities and disability peaks
- consider the incorporation of professional worksite assessments into the range of services for which employment services are funded
- provide comprehensive occupational health and safety information geared to assisting employment service providers and employers on a one-stop-information-shop. This information could include training materials.
5. Awareness raising through 'myth buster' fact sheets, 'how to' information sheets and business-to-business promotion
The Inquiry suggests the following steps to begin implementing this suggestion:
- identify business champions through employer peak bodies and engage those businesses in employer-to-employer promotion
- develop simple materials regarding occupational health and safety, disability discrimination and unfair/unlawful dismissal to form the basis of a broad information campaign
- develop an awareness raising strategy that involves the following bodies (both as the object of the campaign and as participants):
- State workers compensation authorities
- employer bodies
- employer champions
- Commonwealth government agencies
- employment service providers
- unions
- disability community groups
- community legal services
- include all information on DEWR's one-stop-information-shop and coordinate with any information campaigns associated with that initiative (see Chapter 10).
- State workers compensation authorities
5.7 Recommendation regarding occupational health and safety, disability discrimination and industrial relations laws
The main goal of the working group was to develop strategies to address employer perceptions that the risks associated with occupational health and safety, disability discrimination and unfair dismissal laws are unacceptably high.
Interim Recommendation 13 has been amended to reflect outcomes of the working group process as follows:
Recommendation 13: Occupational health and safety, industrial relations and disability discrimination laws
The Inquiry recommends development of the following strategies to address concerns about the potential financial impact of, and legal risks created by, occupational health and safety laws, disability discrimination laws, industrial relations laws, and the interaction between those laws, on employers who hire people with disability:
(a) government-sponsored personal and workplace assessments (which also recommend risk management strategies);
(b) a government-sponsored trial program that simultaneously covers insurance premiums and ensures the collection, analysis and dissemination of reliable data about the true impact of those laws on employers;
(c) engagement of State workers compensation authorities in disseminating information and developing disability employment strategies;
(d) capacity building for employment service providers; and
(e) a multifaceted awareness raising campaign through 'myth buster' fact sheets, 'how to' information sheets and business-to-business promotion.
The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission intends to continue working with the working group to ensure ongoing development of these ideas (see further Chapter 12).
Appendix 5A
EMPLOYERS MAKING A DIFFERENCE / NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT SERVICES ASSOCIATION
DRAFT PILOT PROJECT TO MOTIVATE EMPLOYERS AND COLLECT RELIABLE DATA
ON OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFTEY RISKS
Jobseeker
|
Employment Service Provider ( Job Network or Disability Open Employment Services) has material that addresses:
|
Proposed government-funded 'Employer Premium Package'
|
|
Employer
|
||
[2] For further information about the RISE program see: http://www.workcover.com/InjuryClaims/R ISE/RISE/riseScheme.htm
[3] For information about the Disability Focus Group see:
http://www.workcover.com/AboutUs/AccessEquityProgram/FocusGroups/aeFocus Disability.htm . For information about the Access and Equity Strategic Plan see: http://www.workcover.com/NR/rdonlyres/48E36619-F673-4CA6-ACBC-B2C70156F…
[5] http://www.workcover.com/NR/rdonlyres/31BB10E2-860F-4ECC-874C-BE22F38B5E08/0/aeOHSWKitPlacementAgency.pdf
[6] http://www.workcover.com/NR/rd onlyres/78EE786D-B10F-4926-836A-0B992A52293F/0/aeOHSWKitEmployerinformation.pdf
[7] http://www.workcover.com/NR/rdonlyres/B479CC0E- E4E8-4A86-A2C0-14731B533EE8/0/aeOHSWKitParticipantsBooklet.pdf
[8] http://www.workcover.com/NR/rdonlyres/E3D9BB76-D386-4A81-BC50-196F310D165B/0/aeSafeWorkChklst.pdf
[9] http://www.workcover.com/NR/rdonlyres/AFA87141-BB9D-4714-998C-65BE616D36A7/0/aeOHSWKitTrainerNotes.pdf
[10] http://www.workcover.com/NR/rdonlyres/F0179BF2-38AC-4095-93DB-8318D3F0EEE4/0/aeDiverseWor kforce.pdf
[11] http://www.workcov er.com/NR/rdonlyres/4941C619-444E-4155-9E70-11656EAEC01F/0/aeOHSClaimsChecklist.pdf
[15] Submission 143, Australian Industry Group.
[16] JobAble, Common Employer Concerns, available at: http://jobable.gov.au/handy_tips/general_common_employer_concerns.asp
[17] JobAble, Common Employer Concerns, available at: http://jobable.gov.au/handy_tips/general_common_employer_concerns.asp referred to in Submission 143, Australian Industry Group.
[18] Submission 147, Vision Australia; Submission 141, Blind Citizens Australia.
[19] Submission 157, Name Withheld.
[20] Submission 153, People With Disability Australia.
[21] Submission 144, Australians for Diversity and Disability Employment.
