Page 2
Chapter 4: Seacare scheme performance 2003 – 2004
- 4.1 Seacare scheme performance overview 2003 – 04
- 4.2 Data sources used in this Annual Report
- 4.3 Methodology behind performance reports
- 4.4 Date of extraction of 2003 – 04 data
- 4.5 Seacare scheme performance relative to previous years
- 4.6 OHS positive performance indicators (PPIs)
- 4.7 Claims and injury management performance
- 4.8 Dispute resolution in the Seacare scheme
- 4.9 Rehabilitation/Return to work performance
- 4.10 Long tail claims
- 4.11 Insurance premiums data
4.4 Date of extraction of 2003 – 04 data
The date of extraction for 2003-04 claims data from the AMICA database is 14 July 2004. This
date of extraction means that employers were given until 14 July 2004 to lodge a copy of 2003 – 04 claim forms received by employers during 2003 – 04, with AMICA for data recording purposes. AMICA worked closely with employers to ensure that a copy of all claims lodged by employees in
2003 – 04 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 July 2004. AMSA data includes those accidents and dangerous occurrences (incidents) notified and reported to AMSA by 30 July 2004. Any accidents and dangerous occurrences which occurred in the financial year but which were
not notified or reported to AMSA by 30 July 2004
are not included.
The nature of on-board work combined with the type of equipment in use provides many challenges to seafarers to avoid the key injury mechanisms such as body stressing, falls and being hit by, or hitting objects.
4.5 Seacare scheme performance relative to previous years
4.5.1 The workers’ compensation (claims) data
Workers’ compensation claims data reported to AMICA pursuant to the Seafarers Act is summarised in Table 7 below.
Table 7: Seacare scheme – aggregated claims data for reporting purposes 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Note: Row 11 is highlighted as the data in this row are the most frequently used in the Tables and Figures that follow when reporting OHS performance in the Seacare scheme
Table 7 indicates that total claims reported to AMICA in 2003 – 04 have increased relative to the previous year (an increase of 25.3% over 2002 – 03), while claims accepted have also increased relative to 2002-03 (by 22.2%). However, this increase in total claims and accepted claims needs to be viewed in the context of an increase in the number of seafarers employed in the maritime industry covered by Seacare scheme legislation.
Four other important observations can be made from Table 7. First, the Seacare scheme has recorded no work related fatality in the five years to 30 June 2004. In fact there have now been nine successive years without a work related fatality in the maritime industry covered by Seacare scheme legislation.
Second, accepted claims which emanate from a workplace incident involving lost time (see Row 15 of Table 7) have not increased to the same extent as all accepted claims (an increase from 123 to 146 claims or 18.7%).
The explanation appears to be the higher number of minor injuries resulting in medical only claims where there was no lost time. The third observation is that there has been a significant decrease in claims occurring off duty while on board the ship, down from 18 to 9 claims (a 50% decrease).
Fourth, in 2003 – 04 a lower proportion of claims were advised to insurers in 2003 – 04 relative to
2002 – 03 – 102 or 56.04% of accepted claims were lodged with the employer’s insurer, compared to 94 o 63.09% in 2002 – 03. An employer decision to lodge a claim with the insurer does not necessarily mean it is a claim which exceeds (or is likely to exceed) the policy excess resulting in transfer of full management of, and payment of claims costs, by the insurer. Good claims management practice results in an employer notifying the insurer of a claim at an early stage, as it may later become a claim under the insurance policy.
Table 8 shows that employee numbers have risen to 3 933 in 2003 – 04, an increase of 17.2% over
2002 – 03. One explanation for the increase in employee numbers is that employers have reported increased shipping activity among companies servicing the offshore oil and gas sector over the past two years. The addition of a third TT Line service has also increased employee numbers.
Table 8: Seacare scheme – employee (seafarer) numbers and hours worked by seafarers 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Figure 1: Numbers of employees and accepted claims 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Figure 1 represents the increase in the number of accepted claims in 2003 – 04 after two years of reduced claims and the upward movement in the number of seafarers reported to the Seacare Authority in the Seacare scheme over the last five years.
Figure 2: Claim frequency rate (ratio of seafarers employed to claims lodged) 1999–00 to 2003–04
Figure 2 shows the claim frequency rate which is a ratio of seafarers employed to claims lodged, and indicates the number of seafarers employed for each claim lodged. Put another way, it shows the expectation of receiving a claim relative to seafarers employed. The lower the frequency rate the poorer is the performance on this measure. Figure 2 shows in 2003 – 04 there was one claim lodged for every 18.9 seafarers employed, a deterioration in performance after two years of improved performance.
4.5.2 Claims by sector
For the first time claims by sector are reported. Given the small number of operators in some sectors such as passenger vessels and aquaculture, these sectors have not been separately identified and are included in the bluewater sector. Nevertheless the data in Figure 3 below shows trends over time.
Figure 3: Accepted claims by sector 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Figure 3 shows that while claims emanating from the offshore sector have been increasing over the whole reporting period, there has been a significant increase in offshore sector claims over the past two years, probably reflecting the increased activity in the offshore sector. However, there also appears to have been
a significant increase in claims from the bluewater sector in 2003 – 04 relative to the previous year despite a relatively stable bluewater fleet.
4.5.2 The OHS (incident) data
The OHS incident data reported to AMSA pursuant to the OHS(MI) Act and regulations is summarised in Table 9.
Table 9: Seacare scheme – core OHS incident data and data on the operation of the OHS Inspectorate under the OHS(MI) Act 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Table 9 indicates that the total number of incidents reported to AMSA in 2003 – 04 (78) remained the
same as that reported in 2002 – 03. However, there was a lower number of dangerous occurrences, and as a consequence an increase in incidents that resulted in an incapacity to an employee (or employees) of five or more successive days, from 65 to 72 (an increase of 10.77%).
AMSA reviews all incidents reported and when considered necessary conducts an investigation pursuant to its investigation powers under the OHS(MI) Act. Ten investigations were conducted by AMSA in 2003 – 04 compared to 12 in 2002 – 03. Of the 10 investigations undertaken, six were in relation to incidents on bluewater trading vessels, three in relation to incidents on passenger vessels and one in relation to an incident on an offshore supply vessel. Five of the investigations related to dangerous occurrences.
(6) Incidents reported to AMSA include where the employee is incapacitated for five or more successive working days; where the employee sustains a serious personal injury; or a dangerous occurrence.
(7) A dangerous occurrence is where there is an incident at the workplace and resulted from operations that arose from an undertaking conducted by or for the operator of the workplace and could have caused death or serious personal injury or incapacity of an employee for five or more successive working days.
Table 10: Incident rate (OHS incidents as a proportion of seafarers) 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Note: The denominator (number of seafarers) is derived from Table 8 and represents seafarers employed under the Seafarers Act, not the FTE employee number reported under the OHS(MI) Act as reported in Appendix 4
Figure 4: Accepted compensation claims and incidents reported 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Figure 4 indicates that while the total number of incidents has plateaued in 2003 – 04, incidents involving an incapacity of five or more days duration, and accepted compensation claims, have risen over the year.
4.5.3 OHS performance – the injury incidence and injury frequency rate
The incidence of injury and frequency of injury (based on compensation claims data) are two nationally recognised high-level outcome indicators which provide a useful analysis of OHS performance and can provide a helpful indicator of trends in a scheme’s OHS performance. The injury incidence rate is derived from compensation claims per 1 000 employees while the injury frequency rate is derived from compensation claims per one million hours worked.
The injury incidence and injury frequency rates recorded in this part of the report are, unless otherwise indicated, based on accepted compensation claims (excluding journey claims and property only claims – see Row 11 of Table 7) as reported to AMICA through compensation claims data. Exclusion of journey and property claims aims to accurately reflect claims involving a workplace injury, even if there was no time lost.
The injury frequency rate reported in this report uses hours worked data collected from employers using the formula reported in section 4.2.3. This method produces a higher hours worked figure for 2003 – 04 compared to previous years because it is designed to more accurately reflect the 24 hour per day nature of seafaring work, and the fact that injuries occurring at any time while on board are potentially compensable. The decision to use this new data series emerged from comments made by employers that the divisor used by most employers in calculating the enterprise Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate (LTFIR) for seafarers is generally 24 hours. It is hoped that inclusion of the new data will provide injury frequency rate data which is more meaningful to employers.
The adjusted hours worked data where hours worked were adjusted to 12 hours and 14 hours for the bluewater and offshore fleets respectively are used for pre 2003 – 04 years.
The isolated nature of shipping activity poses large challenges to employers in seeking graduated return to work opportunities for injured seafarers
Figure 5: The Seacare injury incidence rate 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
The injury incidence rate is an OHS performance measure based on compensation claims per 1 000 employees, where claims are a proxy for injuries. Seacare uses all accepted compensation claims except journey claims and property only claims as the numerator in calculating the injury incidence rate.
Source: Seacare Authority and AMICA
Note: The compensation claims used to produce this Figure are all accepted claims except journey claims and property only claims Figure 5 indicates the number of injuries for each 1 000 employees. In 2003 – 04 there were 45.55 injuries for each 1 000 employees covered by the Seafarers Act. This incidence rate is high by national standards (the last published national average incidence rate across all schemes and all industries is 17, reported for 2001 – 02 in the 5th CPM report of November 2003). Further, the incidence rate in the Seacare scheme has increased in 2003 – 04 relative to 2002 – 03 (a 7.0% increase). The increase in the incidence rate indicates that OHS performance has deteriorated over 2003 – 04 and reverses a downward movement in the incidence rate evident in 2001 – 02 and 2002 – 03.
Figure 6: The Seacare injury frequency rate 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
The injury frequency rate is an OHS performance measure based on compensation claims per one million hours worked, where claims are a proxy for injuries. Seacare uses all accepted compensation claims except journey claims and property only claims as the numerator in calculating the injury frequency rate.
Source: Seacare Authority and AMICA
Note: The compensation claim data used to produce this Figure are all accepted claims except journey claims and property only claims
Figure 6 indicates the number of injuries for each one million hours worked. In the Seacare scheme in
2003 – 04 there were 12.72 injuries for every one million hours worked. This frequency rate is comparable with the national average of 10.2 (the last published national average frequency rate across all schemes and all industries, reported for 2001 – 02 in the 5th CPM report of November 2003).
The injury frequency rate has now been declining over the past three years and has improved considerably in 2003 – 04 relative to 2002 – 03.
Some care needs to be taken when comparing the 2003 – 04 frequency rate with previous years in that a new formula was adopted by Seacare for the employer calculation of hours worked in 2003 – 04 to account for the 24 hour nature of seafaring employment (see the methodological explanation at section 4.3.3). Had this new measure not been used, the frequency rate for 2003 – 04 would, in all probability, have been closer to the 2002 – 03 rate.
4.5.4 Meeting the OHS performance improvement targets for the maritime industry
The Seacare Authority adopted the national OHS performance improvement target for injuries in
2002, for application to the maritime industry. The target requires a 20% reduction in the injury incidence rate by 2006 – 07 (after five years) and a 40% reduction by 2011 – 12 (after 10 years). The year 2001 – 02 is the baseline year for measurement of progress against the targets. The Seacare Authority has adopted two measures of injury for assessing performance against the target. One uses the NOHSC data
set to define injuries, so Seacare can conduct national comparisons, while a second measure uses a Seacare scheme data set. The different defi nitions are:
Injury incidence rate 1: Using the NOHSC definition of injury
The NOHSC definition of injury includes all accepted workers’ compensation claims lodged
(in Seacare’s case, this means lodged with AMICA, the scheme data base manager) in the reference financial year that resulted in a fatality, permanent disability or temporary disability where there was
at least one week or more off work, (excluding journey claims). Injury claims in this case excludes disease claims except those coded (recorded by AMICA) as musculo-skeletal diseases.
Injury incidence rate 2: Using the Seacare definition of injury
The Seacare definition of injury includes all accepted workers’ compensation claims lodged
(in Seacare’s case, this means lodged with AMICA, the scheme data base manager) in the reference financial year that resulted in a fatality, permanent disability or temporary disability where there was any time off work, (excluding journey claims). Injury claims include all disease claims in the Seacare definition.
Table 11: Number of claims (injuries) in Seacare scheme for OHS target reporting 2001 – 02 to 2003 – 04
Table 12: Target incidence rates 2001 – 02 to 2011 – 12 using NOHSC and Seacare defi nitions of injuries
Figure 7: Seacare injury incidence targets 2001 – 02 to 2011 – 12
Source: Seacare Authority
Figure 7 shows that using the NOHSC data set to define injuries, the injury incidence rate in the Seacare scheme has remained constant over the two years since the baseline year of 2001 – 02. Had there been an average 4% reduction over 2002 – 03 and 2003 – 04 the injury incidence rate using NOHSC data would have been 28.33 in 2003 – 04 rather than 30.79.
Figure 7 also shows that using the Seacare data set to define injuries, the injury incidence rate declined by more than 4% in 2002 – 03 (13.93%) but that the rate of 45.55 after two years is a 2.4% reduction, rather than the 8% reduction expected after two years, which would have reduced the incidence rate to 42.94 rather than the actual rate of 45.55.
4.5.5 Analysis of injuries
The following sections disaggregate claims data, enabling a more detailed analysis of injuries.
Table 13: Nature of claims 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Two key observations can be derived from Table 13. First, it shows that there is a consistent pattern of claim types over time, and second, it confirms the analysis provided in other sections of the report that participation in rehabilitation programs is low in the Seacare scheme. It also shows the relatively small number of permanent impairment claims made in the Seacare scheme, although increasing.
Figure 8: Total claims by occupational grouping 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Source: AMICA
Figure 8 identifies the number of claims and trends across the four key occupational groupings. This figure shows a decrease in the percentage of claims lodged by engineers but an increase in the percentage of claims lodged by ratings and deck officers in 2003 – 04, relative to 2002 – 03.
The hazardous working environment requires a strong commitment by the industry to improve occupational health and safety
Figure 9: Accepted claims by age range 2003 – 04
Source: AMICA, Seacare Authority
Note: The employee age range data is derived from a sample of 19 employers covering 2 963 seafarers
Figure 9 shows that 41% of seafarers are 45 years or older and that those 41% contributed to 58% of claims in 2003 – 04. The age groups with the highest proportion of claims are the 35 – 39, 45 – 49,
50 – 54 and 55 and > 55. Of significance is the high number of claims in the 55 and > 55 age group. The data in this Figure indicates that the ageing of the Australian seafaring workforce has both compensation and OHS implications. The ageing of the workforce is an issue that will be considered by the Seacare Authority in 2004 – 05. Age and claims data for 2002 – 03 appears at Appendix 4 for comparative purposes.
Table 14: Location of person at time of injury 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Table 14 indicates that 173 or 95.1% (89.7% in 2002 – 03) of accepted claims occurred on duty (including journey claims and claims while studying) and that nine or 4.9% (10.3% in 2002 – 03) of accepted claims occurred off duty in 2003 – 04. The small number of off duty claims is significant in that anecdotal evidence has suggested that one factor creating higher premiums in the Seacare scheme is that the employer must insure the employee for 24 hours per day whilst on board. The low number of off duty claims suggests that this aspect of insurance cover should be having only marginal impact on premium rates.
Figure 10: Accepted claims by location on the ship 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Source: AMICA
Figure 10 shows that during 2003 – 04 there has been a significant increase in claims arising from injuries in deck spaces, reversing the pattern from 2002 – 03. The other major location of claims is machinery spaces and the galley.
The nature of shipping and the unpredictability of operating conditions will continue to influence the insurance risk and the cost of workers’ compensation
Figure 11: Accepted claims by body part 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Source: AMICA
Figure 11 indicates that the parts of a seafarer’s body most likely to be subject to injury are the trunk, upper limbs and lower limbs. In 2003 – 04 most injuries occurred to the trunk of the body, followed by upper and lower limbs of seafarers. Head and neck injuries appear to be declining over time.
Cargo loading and unloading from ships servicing offshore oil and gas facilities requires high quality safety management
Figure 12: Accepted claims by mechanism of injury 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Source: AMICA
Figure 12 shows that body stressing injuries were the most prevalent mechanism of injury in 2003 – 04, which continues a pattern evident in most of the past five years, and that this injury mechanism is at its highest level since 2000 – 01. Falls, slips and trips is the next most prevalent mechanism of injury, followed by being hit by a moving object and hitting objects with the body.
Figure 13: Accepted claims by injury/disease type 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Source: AMICA
Figure 13 shows that sprains and strains continue to be the major injury type and have risen again relative to 2002 – 03 and 2001 – 02. Fractures, hernias and burns have also risen relative to previous years.
For the first time the Seacare Authority reports on the breakdown between injuries and diseases (see Figure 14 below). There are many groups of diseases, such as diseases of the nervous system and sense organs eg deafness, and diseases of the digestive system eg hernia, some of which may usually be thought of as injuries.
Figure 14 Injuries and diseases as a proportion of accepted claims 1999 – 00 to 2003 – 04
Source: AMICA
Figure 14 shows that diseases form a relatively constant proportion of overall accepted claims, at around
15% (in 2003 – 04) to 25% (in 2001 – 02). OHS strategies which address disease risks as well as injury risks are required if overall injury performance in the Seacare scheme is to be improved.
Maritime employers are adopting better methods to minimise injury in circumstances involving heavy lifting in confined spaces