Employment question

not motoring I know, but less likely to get muppets who dont know answering in here!

person A has been employed as a casual employee for a year, in that time they have ever done less than a 35 hour week.

On Monday, they do themselves an injury in the course of performing their duties at work.
They go home from work early because of it, and go straight to a medical professional.

The medical professional thinks the person should take a week or so off work to let the injury heal and prevent it from getting worse.

Is person A entitled to ACC, i.e. 80% of their usual pay for the days they are off!
if so, is there a stand down period with no money!

ACC will cover medical costs, Employer has to pay 1st week.
Note top of second column on this

http://www.acc.co.nz/PRD_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_claims_care/documents/publications_promotion/wpc086817.pdf

so in this situation, person A will not have any stand down period, and will get 80% of their usual pay!

ACC pays 80% of your pre-incapacity weekly earnings. This will be paid as follows:

ACC will not pay you for the first week of incapacity. If your injury occurred at work, your employer will pay you for this week.
After the first week ACC will take over. For the first four weeks of support your payments are calculated using your actual earnings from the last four weeks before your incapacity.
After the first four weeks of ACC support, payments are based on your actual earnings from the 52 weeks before your incapacity.
If your actual earnings cannot be calculated ACC can make advance weekly payments. These can be paid until your actual earnings details are available.

http://www.acc.co.nz/making-a-claim/what-support-can-i-get/ECI0028

This is going back a few years and I'm not sure if it's changed. but when I fractured my wrist (putting me out of work) I had to be out of action for 1 week before I could claim that 80%. It seems there is/was a stand down period, I guess to stop people abusing that part of the system.
For what it's worth, I hope that helps. but don't go away yet, I'm sure someone will have a definitive answer

edit - too late, you've already got a definitive answer :)

It's not quite a definitive answer wrt "casual" work.If you've been doing 35 hour+ weeks as a "casual" for a year, even if the injury happened outside of the workplace, you're still entitled to sick leave (and holidays etc).
Reading between the lines of the OP, I expect that the employer is trying to evade paying the first week compo because the worker was a "casual" despite the accident happening in the workplace. If so - that sucks.
If there's 35 hours per week work, and that had gone on for a year, the position is not "casual".

It's not quite a definitive answer wrt "casual" work.If you've been doing 35 hour+ weeks as a "casual" for a year, even if the injury happened outside of the workplace, you're still entitled to sick leave (and holidays etc).
Reading between the lines of the OP, I expect that the employer is trying to evade paying the first week compo because the worker was a "casual" despite the accident happening in the workplace. If so - that sucks.
If there's 35 hours per week work, and that had gone on for a year, the position is not "casual" at all, and if there's not an employment contract (even for fixed term tec) in place, the employer is potentially liable to get whacked for redundancy etc when the position is terminated.

hey, no they arent trying to evade it at all. Person A simply didnt know what the rules are, and cannot really afford to be off work, and was considering going to work even though they are hurt because they didnt know if they were going to get income.

They are likely to only be off for a week or so, so not long term or major, but a week without pay for person A would make their life quite tough so they were trying to figure out what happens in their situation.

thanks for your help, person A is around home at the moment and is looking somewhat relieved!

Also, correct me if i am wrong, but if person A has never done less than 35 hours per week, they are not casual.

You're not wrong, and it doesn't matter even if the hours are less - IIRC if they've been "casual" for 6 months, then they're "permanent".
The employer is probably exposing themselves to risk (PG, redundancy claim etc etc) if there isn't an employment contract in place setting this out as a "permanent part-time" position.

Interesting pints to ponder there, thanks you guys, will pass that on

Remember the days before ACC we had workers compensationifyou had an injury outsde work them you gotnothing . So if you broke your armon weekendyouwent to work & had a "fall' so could get compo.

Employment question

Related Topics