Chapter 4: Seacare scheme performance reports
Chapter 4: Seacare scheme performance 2002-03
- 4.1 Seacare scheme performance highlights 2002–03
- 4.2 Data sources used in this Annual Report
- 4.3 Methodology behind performance reports
- 4.4 Date of extraction of 2002–03 data
- 4.5 Seacare scheme performance relative to previous years
- 4.6 Seacare scheme OHS and workers' compensation performance relative to other schemes/industries
4.1 Seacare scheme performance highlights 2002–03
The Seacare scheme continues to demonstrate improved performance on nearly all key indicators, relative to previous years. Its performance relative to other schemes and other industries with high injury risk profiles has also improved. The highlights of Seacare scheme performance reported in this annual report include:
- the number of workers' compensation claims reported to AMICA in 2002–03 has again fallen in aggregate and fallen relative to the number of seafarers — resulting in an improved claim rate. Similarly, accepted claims have also fallen;
- improved reporting saw more incidents reported to AMICA relative to the previous year:
- – incident reports are critical to enable
AMSA to effectively perform its investigation role as the Inspectorate under the OHS(MI) Act;
- – incident reports are critical to enable
- Seacare scheme OHS performance, measured by Seacare scheme injury incidence rates and injury frequency rates, continues to improve relative to previous years:
- - based on several approaches to measuring injury frequency, the frequency rate has once again fallen relative to the previous year;
- - based on several approaches to measuring injury frequency, the frequency rate has once again fallen relative to the previous year;
- Seacare scheme OHS performance, measured by the CPM injury incidence and injury frequency rates, continues to improve relative to previous years, relative to other schemes, relative to the national average and relative to other industries with high injury risk factors:
- - but there is still significant opportunity for improvement;
- - but there is still significant opportunity for improvement;
- the scheme has completed another year without a work-related fatality;
- days lost per seafarer have declined significantly in 2002–03;
- the increase in Seacare scheme premium rates reported in previous years has appeared to ease and there appears to be a greater degree of stability and consistency in the approach to premium setting by insurers which may be assisting to stabilise premium rates under the Seafarers Act;
- the dispute rate is declining;
- the scheme is characterised by a large number of long tail claims, though the duration of long tail claims is less than might be expected in a continuing benefits scheme;
- legal costs in the scheme remain high; and
- rehabilitation and return to work performance remains problematic.
4.2 Data sources used in this Chapter
The primary source of data used for reporting on Seacare scheme performance, including OHS performance, is workers' compensation claims data. The workers' compensation claims data used in this report is derived from claim forms lodged by employers with AMICA, irrespective of whether the claim is covered by the employer's insurance policy. As there is no statutory obligation on an injured seafarer to lodge a workers' compensation claim form if injured, it is recognised that not every injury results in a claim being made on the employer. Further, not all claims lodged by employees with employers are forwarded to AMICAby the employer, or to the employer's insurer.
It is nationally recognised that compensation claims data is the most reliable available data for outcomes reporting on both occupational health and safety, as well as compensation and rehabilitation, performance.
4.2.1 Compensation claims data
Compensation claims data used in this report is collected and recorded by the AMICA, which operates under the auspices of the Australian Ship owners Association (ASA). AMICA receives data on claims lodged with an employer by employees, irrespective of whether the claim is lodged with an insurer, subject to the employer forwarding a copy of the claim form to AMICA.
The significant insurance excesses, which are a feature of workers' compensation insurance policies under the Seafarers Act, mean that employers are often directly liable for the initial costs of the claim. Employer excesses range from zero to $100 000 or more (majority in the range $5 000 to $25 000). Where the claim cost falls within the excess, the employer generally maintains responsibility for managing the claim, rather than the insurer. However, increasingly, employers are advising insurers on claims at an early stage, as part of improved claims management and injury management practice.
The claims data used in most tables and figures in this report are accepted claims, which excludes claims which are pending, in dispute, withdrawn or rejected. As some pending, disputed or rejected claims from previous years become accepted during the following year, they are reported the following year as accepted claims. This explains the variations in accepted claims in the tables reporting claims each financial year.
4.2.2 Occupational health and safety incident data
Compensation claims data used in this report is complemented by data on accidents and dangerous occurrences collected and recorded by AMSA in its capacity as the OHS inspectorate under the OHS(MI) Act. Incidents are reported to AMSA where there is an accident that causes the death of, or serious personal injury to, any person, or where an accident causes an employee to be incapacitated from performing work for a period of five successive days or more.
Shipping operators covered by the OHS(MI) Act are required by the OHS(MI) Act and regulations to notify an accident or dangerous occurrence to AMSA within four hours and to report in detail on those notified accidents and dangerous occurrences within 72 hours. The initial notification is known as the OHS incident alert and the follow up report as the OHS incident report.
4.2.3 Seacare Authority data
The Seacare Authority maintains responsibility for collecting and recording data on the number of employees covered by Seacare scheme legislation (sometimes also referred to as the population or exposure data) and on hours worked by employees. Employee numbers and hours worked data is collected quarterly through the Authority's Employee and Ships Details (ESD) on-line reporting system. Annual employee numbers are derived by adding the four quarter totals and dividing by four, while hours worked are aggregated each quarter to arrive at an annual total.
The employee data collected through ESD reporting seeks to record all employees who worked for the employer during the year, irrespective of the period of employment or hours worked by the employee (this data is not adjusted to a full time equivalent). This methodology was chosen because each employee is potentially a workers' compensation (or injury) statistic. The hours worked data used in this report is based on adjusted data — adjusted to 12 hours for the blue water sector and 14 hours for the offshore sector for each day the seafarer is on board.
The Authority also collects ship details, for example, the number of days a ship is operational over the year, and ship berth details.
4.2.4 Comparative Performance Monitoring report data
Comparative performance data used in this report is extracted directly from the 5th national Comparative Performance Monitoring (CPM) report, which reports up to and including the 2001–02 financial years, i.e. it is one year behind this report in its data sets. The CPM report is published by DEWR, under the auspices of Workplace Relations Ministers' Council (WRMC).
4.2.5 Australasian Return to Work Monitor data
Some return to work data used in this report is derived from the ARTW Monitor 2002–03. The ARTW Monitor establishes a national benchmark for measuring RTW and durability of RTW across Australian and New Zealand (NZ) workers' compensation schemes. In 2002–03 the ARTW Monitor summarises the findings of a survey of 30 injured seafarers.
4.3 Methodology behind performance reports
4.3.1 Coverage
In some previous years the Authority's annual report has recorded employee numbers in two parts. Part A represented the total of all Australian seafarers where the employer conformed with the provisions of the Seafarers Act, while Part B represented the number of seafarers on ships which were, at the time, thought to be specifically covered by the Seafarers Act. The seafarers included in Part A were described as seafarers serving on ships where the entitlements and benefits of the Seafarers Act are applied through an industrial award or agreement. These seafarers, wholly in the offshore sector, were considered, up until the 1998–99 annual report, to be excluded from coverage by the Seafarers Act. In each year up until 1998–99 the higher figure or Part A figure was nevertheless used as the basis of reporting in the annual report.
At the time of preparation of the 1998–99 annual report, legal advice on the implications of the Tiwi Barge decision in the Federal Court for Seafarers Act coverage was not conclusive. Nevertheless, a decision was taken that the 1998–99 annual report should only report on employees who were considered to be clearly covered by the Seafarers Act. As a result, the lesser (Part B) figure was used in the 1998–99 annual report.
This meant that some employees on ships in the offshore sector were excluded for reporting purposes. However, to maintain the time series data for comparative purposes, the 1998–99 annual report included an Appendix 4 which sought to maintain time series data using the higher (or offshore included) employee figure.
As the legal advice on the Tiwi Barge decision now indicates that employees on ships in the offshore sector are potentially covered by the Seafarers Act, the pre 1998–99 time series tables were restored in 1999–00, without the need to qualify the data. It also means that only one employee figure was necessary for the 1999–00 and subsequent annual reports. This pattern continues in this report.
4.3.2 Employee numbers
Up until and including the 1999–00 annual report, the methodology used to obtain employee numbers data was as follows. The Authority obtained a quarterly written return from each employer identifying its ships, the number of crewed berths on each ship and the days the ship was operational over the quarter. The berth details were then multiplied by the percentage of the year the ship operated which was then multiplied by the crew to berth ratio (CBR — obtained from the Bureau of Transport Economics — BTE) multiplied by the number of ships. This calculation revealed an annual employee figure. In the case of the 1999–00 annual report data, the crew to berth ratio was the average of the figures provided by the BTE for the September and December quarters 1999–00, after which the BTE discontinued production of the CBR.
Following the change to company-based employment from 1998, the basis for reporting on employee numbers has changed. Employee and hours worked data used in the 2000–01 and 2001–02 annual reports, and in this report, is an aggregation of the quarterly data provided to the Authority in the ESD report by Seacare scheme employers, which represents the actual number of seafarers employed by each employer covered by the Seafarers Act.
Seafarers engaged on Floating Production Storage and Offloading Facilities (FPSOs) are included in the employee numbers because there are (short) periods when the operations of such ships clearly falls within the application provisions of the Seafarers and OHS(MI) Acts eg when delinked from the riser to avoid a cyclone or when in transit — noting that for the majority of the time the operations of such ships generally fall outside the application of Seacare scheme legislation. A very small number of claims made by employers of seafarers on FPSOs are included in claims data in this report.
Seafarers engaged on dredges, while the dredge is working inshore (within12 nautical miles) will not generally be covered by the Seafarers Act unless the ship is the subject of a section 8Aor section 8AA declaration under the Navigation Act. Workers' compensation claims reported to AMICA which occurred on dredges operating inshore are not included in claims statistics in this report.
4.3.3 Compensation claims data
Readers should note that the explanation for different compensation claims figures applying to previous years and used in this annual report when compared to previous annual report data is that some claims which were accepted at the extraction date in previous years have since been rejected, withdrawn or are in dispute. They are therefore now either included or excluded. For example, this report identifies the 2001–02 total claims accepted figure at 152 whereas it was reported as 147 in the 2001–02 annual report — five claims have since been accepted.
4.4 Date of extraction of 2002–03 data
The date of extraction for 2002–03 claims data from the AMICA database is 14 July 2003. This date of extraction means that employers were given until14 July 2002 to lodge a copy of 2002–03 claim forms received by employers during 2002–03, with AMICA for data recording purposes. AMICA worked closely with employers to ensure that a copy of all claims lodged by employees in 2002–03 was forwarded to AMICA and included in the database by the extraction date to ensure a high degree of reliability of the claims data.
The date of extraction for AMSA incident data is 30 August 2003. AMSA data includes those accidents and dangerous occurrences (incidents) notified and reported to AMSA by 30 August 2002. Any accidents and dangerous occurrences which occurred in the financial year but which were not notified or reported to AMSA by30 August 2002 are not included.
Comparative data used in this report is obtained from the 5th CPM report. The CPM report covered the period up to and including 2001–02. The date of extraction for the 2001–02 year in the CPM report is 30 November 2002. In other words, compensation schemes, including the Seacare scheme, had five months to make adjustments to data, for example, to include pending or rejected claims, for CPM reporting purposes, in contrast to the two week period (i.e. to 14 July 2003) for 2002–03 data used in most sections of this report. The longer adjustment period available for CPM reporting purposes makes only marginal difference to AMICA figures reported for the Seacare scheme because of the high quality of data base management under AMICA.