{"id":51526,"date":"2020-08-11T13:29:06","date_gmt":"2020-08-11T03:29:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/?p=51526"},"modified":"2020-08-12T07:25:48","modified_gmt":"2020-08-11T21:25:48","slug":"fsc-responds-to-worker-rehabilitation-warning","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/2020\/08\/11\/fsc-responds-to-worker-rehabilitation-warning\/","title":{"rendered":"FSC Responds to Worker Rehabilitation Warning"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Life insurers want to accelerate the speed at which someone on an IP claim can get back to work and that is not something the industry should apologise for, according the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.fsc.org.au\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">FSC\u2019s<\/a> Senior Policy Manager for Life Insurance,<strong> Nick Kirwan<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>He was responding to a statement from insurance law firm, Maurice Blackburn Lawyers, which warned that insurers\u2019 renewed calls for greater involvement in worker rehabilitation is part of a push to expand their powers so fewer claims will need to be paid out.<\/p>\n<p>Kirwan told <em>Riskinfo<\/em> that in one respect what the law firm is saying is right. \u201cThey are saying this is a way to reduce claims costs and in a way it is. And that is a good thing.\u201d<\/p>\n<figure id=\"attachment_51533\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-51533\" style=\"width: 150px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><a href=\"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/files\/2020\/08\/Nick-Kirwan.jpeg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-51533\" src=\"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/files\/2020\/08\/Nick-Kirwan.jpeg\" alt=\"\" width=\"150\" height=\"180\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-51533\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Nick Kirwan &#8230; the industry should not apologise for wanting to get someone back to work earlier&#8230;<\/p>\n<p><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>As an example Kirwan pointed to someone who might be on an Income Protection claim, who doesn\u2019t have health insurance and is on a waiting list for a knee operation but can\u2019t pay for it privately &#8211; perhaps a &#8216;tradie&#8217; who can\u2019t work until the knee is fixed.<\/p>\n<p>In this scenario the life insurer is paying this person a certain amount per month while they are on the waiting list, so if the insurer could get them back to work three months earlier by paying for the knee operation itself (which could be cheaper than the three months of payout) then it is a win-win all round.<\/p>\n<p>Kirwan says the person gets back to work sooner, everyone else in the risk pool wins and there is less risk of that person going onto state welfare benefits after a prolonged period off work, which means the taxpayer wins too.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWho loses out by getting that person back to work sooner? The life insurer wins as does the person involved, it\u2019s difficult to see a loser in any of that.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Kirwan says the industry should not apologise for wanting to get someone back to work earlier.<\/p>\n<p>He says this type of example would be aimed at people who would otherwise slip through the net between not having health insurance, a long waiting list and having used up their Medicare allowance.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cFor these people life insurers would like the option to say &#8216;in your case it makes sense for us to help you\u2019.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>However he was also at pains to point out that life insurers to do not want to dictate what sort of treatment people should, or should not, have.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIf someone is on a waiting list it is for the treating physician to decide on the treatment; it is not for the life insurer to get involved and we do not want to be involved.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>He reiterates this is about accelerating the treatment people need.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Life insurers do not want to become health insurers<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>\u201cLife insurers do not want to become health insurers \u2013 it is about filling in the gaps for anyone who slips through. We are not suggesting life insurers should have any say in what treatment people need and any change to legislation should make that clear.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Maurice Blackburn\u2019s Principal, <strong>Josh Mennen<\/strong> says in the statement that the FSC has &#8220;&#8230;revived its old campaign to change the law so insurers only need to pay the medical bills of a sick worker instead of paying the entire insurance claim\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt\u2019s deeply troubling that the FSC is seeking to re-agitate this issue at the peak of a pandemic crisis which is devastating the employment prospects of all Australians, but particularly those living with injury and illness,\u201d Mennen adds.<\/p>\n<p>He says it\u2019s irresponsible to suggest that an insurer should be calling the shots on claimants\u2019 medical treatment plans in an attempt to get them back into a severely diminished job market.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWhat insurers should be instead focusing on is the ongoing and timely payment of legitimate claims so that disabled consumers can afford the medical and other support they need \u2013 and without the inappropriate interference of an insurer in those therapeutic relationship,\u201d the statement says.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Life insurers want to accelerate the speed at which someone on an IP claim can get back to work and that is not something the industry should apologise for, according the FSC\u2019s Senior Policy Manager for Life Insurance, Nick Kirwan. He was responding to a statement from insurance law firm, Maurice Blackburn Lawyers, which warned [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":24,"featured_media":51536,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-51526","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-general"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51526","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/24"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=51526"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51526\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/51536"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=51526"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=51526"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=51526"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}