I don't report LTI's - its a terrible measure. And totally pointless.

If you have to do something I suggest a proportional response. Put absolutely minimal effort into the trivial things. And put maximum effort into things that can be realistically 'catastrophic" (however you choose to define that.)

While I don't record LTI's I do record productive time lost. It might be through injury (work related or non work related), sickness, bereavements, general absence etc. Its mainly just an academic exercise of interest - but I loose a huge amount more productive time due to non-work injuries than I do work ones.

Excellent book Rebecca. Thanks for writing it.

It should be on everyone's bookshelf and well thumbed!

I will try to keep my views on the utterly disgraceful actions of Pike River, NZOG, OSH and EPMU under control.

I'm not sure I see the relationship between the two.

For simple qual recording most payroll systems have a Qual tab.

Within my system I have a Qual tab but I don't use it. I prefer the "Competency" tab as it has a bring up date so I can but a review date on the relevancy of the qual..

I can only conclude that this SARS / Covid in fact is a very low risk thing.

If it was anything other than that the various employers in the chain would be taking appropriate and significant risk management steps and MBIE would be in boots and all enforcing our legislation.

All I seem to be reading is "PPE this" and "PPE that" for this "tricky" work related risk.

Imagine if a Worksafe Inspector came to my place. "Oh I see you have a tricky piece of dangerous plant" "That's Ok Sir, I've issued PPE"

I'm not sure I would call it a "good discussion".

I surprised myself by reading as far as
"The council's chief executive, Stephanie O'Sullivan, said random and pre-employment drug testing was only a small part of what the council did to improve health and safety in the workplace.

The council would undertake proactive education and the drug testing could catch something before it happened, she said.

It might also help people recognise they had a problem."

There is so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin.

Very much situational specific.
For example I may have a person live 5 minutes away and another 1 hour away. An "8 hour away from work break" statement doesn't work.

Wendy. We don't know what we don't know.

I guess it is for the nurses to discern from us the problems they can help solve.

In the mean time I use them for the problems I know about.

Amy. While Sharknado is an excellent film (perhaps out done by Birdemic - and never to be out done by The Room) Marvel are the highest grossing franchise with around $18b, followed by Star Wars, Harry Potter, James Bond, Lord of the Rings etc.

At best they might be looking at $45m in gross revenues for whole franchise (these movies only have a production budget of $2 - $3m each).

I am left wondering about Kylees intentions

.

If the claim is accepted all claim costs, including earnings compo get put against your employer account experience rating. Depends on how big your company is and how big an issue it is.

In principle I say to staff expect me to challenge an ACC claim if I don't see the incident in the Accident Book. Gives them a wee incentive to report stuff.

I have no time for malingerers who try to fob off their non-work claims onto the employer. So I will challenge any claim I dont think belongs on my account. Mainly because I like to have a clean a record as possible. So if Worksafe or Immigration or whoever comes a knocking they don't get the idea we are a reckless employer. Consequently I pretty much always only have to deal with genuine work claims. Though I am about to cast an eye over a carpal tunnel claim just lodged by an employee who left 8 months ago.

The Experience Rating part doesn't actually bother me. The impact isn't enough of an incentive to get me excited.

I also don't work on "assumptions" - a doctors view is key.

Also there is a difference between pain and an injury.

Sarah
Pregnant women are pretty robust critters. You'll likely find tiredness the biggest issue (other than pregnancy related issues) so keep the lines of communication open and adjust work processes accordingly.

Helen
ACC will send you a blue letter headed "Employee Claim"

Down the bottom it give you the option to call 0800 222 096 if you disagree the claim is work related.

They will send you a form on why you disagree. They won't take your word for it. You will need a medical specialist opinion. Attach the arthritis diagnosis and see how you go.

I assume there was a specific event in your Injury register that points to something that caused the sprain? If so it is worth an investigation to see if that was indeed a probable cause

Safety within the Team is taken very seriously. From the design of the boats
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/99087919/team-nz-investigate-virtual-safety-option-around-foil-on-radical-new-americas-cup-boat

To collisons
https://emirates-team-new-zealand.americascup.com/en/news/416_SAFETY-TRAINING.html

For me the bigger issue is why is he still off work and not on a light duty rehab. That hairline fracture in the neck had better be quite serious. I would have thought a max of about 50 consecutive days.

My money is on him thinking how to race a boat.

Either someone is having a larf or we should be very afraid.

I'm against pre-employment testing as well. But best we leave that for another day.

Steve, I'll take a bit of an issue with "Testing for impairment is difficult"

It really isn't that hard. And its a stepped approach. And an approach where you preferably get the person to admit they have a problem rather than you invasively testing for what might not be a problem - drugs in a system does not = impairment.

Firstly we are basically creatures of habit. What we do today we'll do tomorrow. So the first thing managers need to look for is a break in that pattern. Lateness for work, slowness of output, lower quality. Down to things like hand eye coordination, balance, movement etc. These give an opportunity to start a chat.

At the chat you can observe pupil size. (Dilated pupil may be indicative of cannabis related impairment) And are eye movements smooth and focussed. Do they move uncontrolled. The eyes are truly the window to the (impaired) soul.

If you want to dig a little deeper you can ask them to focus on an object in front of their face and you move the object around and see what the eyes do. Or you just move your own body around a bit and see how the persons eyes react.

This can be done by anyone - the purpose is just to form an initial view on which to base the next step.

If you are cheeky you could ask them to stand on two legs, ask them to tilt their head back close their eyes and once they reckon 30 seconds has passed bring their head forward and stay "stop". If they wobble or can't follow the instructions you have a clue.

I would much sooner we had a "just cause" for taking action against someone. There should be a reason why we interfere with a person. Drug testing should be last resort.

Rather than drug testing I would much sooner we focussed on formal Impairment Training that covered things like constriction and dilation of pupils, eye convergence and the Romberg Balance test. For those into compliance, or risk adverse in terms of unions, PG etc then a "certification" course would be handy. I'd sign up for that.