| Compensation under threat Workers are facing an onslaught by the government on their ability to claim compensation. There are three proposals to strip us of our rights being considered at the moment. Compensation for injury or illness The first proposal will make it much more difficult to get compensation after an injury or illness caused by work. When someone gets injured or develops an illness because of the negligence of their employer most people would agree that they should be entitled to compensation. After all that is why employers have to have insurance by law. The government seems hell-bent in making it as hard and expensive to claim as they possibly can. It claims the law has to change because the compensation culture is out of control and this making employers 'risk averse' because they fear being sued. In a speech on health and safety in January this year the Prime Minister said 'The chain of blame-recrimination-compensation is spiralling out of control.' The truth is of course very different. Most workers are reluctant to claim damages after an illness or injury caused by their employer. Claims by workers against their employers after an injury or illness have been falling steadily for over ten years. Government statistics from the Compensation Recovery Unit of the DWP show that employer liability claims have fallen from 219,183 in 2000/1 to 81,470 in 2000/11. The number of personal injury claims for employer's negligence has fallen by a staggering 63 per cent over the past ten years. It has also been estimated at only 1 out of every 10 workers who are injured or made ill at work actually make a claim for compensation. Despite this, the government is to press ahead with the reforms to civil claims, including personal injury claims, which were proposed last year by Lord Justice Jackson. These proposals, contained in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill, will seriously damage access to justice for many working people and could prove to be disastrous for those people seeking compensation because of an injury at work caused by the employers' negligence. Union members will be among the millions who are deprived of the ability to claim compensation, or who will lose damages. As many as 25 per cent of injury claims will not be brought. Those that proceed might lose up to 25 per cent of damages for the success fee and further substantial reductions for required legal expense insurance. When legal aid was cut right back in 1999, mechanisms were put in place to ensure all reasonable legal costs could be claimed by the winning party, to protect access to justice especially for those on a low or modest income. These included recoverable legal expense insurance premiums and union self insurance premiums and additional sums by way of a success fees. This also meant successful injured claimants were able to keep in full their compensation from negligent defendants. The government now intends to legislate so that these additional sums can no longer be recouped, seriously restricting access to justice, particularly for those on lower/middle incomes. Many people will no longer be able to obtain representation, particularly for low value or complex cases. However, although a claim of ý3,000 or ý4,000 may be considered to be low value by the government, it is not low value to a cleaner who earns ý6 an hour and represents four months' wages. Even if representation can be obtained many on a low/middle income may decide not to claim, being unable to fund disbursements upfront or due to concerns about their costs risk. Those able to press on will face deductions from their damages. Unions and advice centres who presently provide free legal services to their members will often find this is no longer possible. There will also be other effects. By reducing the threat of litigation in workplace accidents and diseases, health and safety at work will be undermined. The money taken from claimants and their representatives won't benefit the treasury, but the big insurers will gain a windfall. Britain pays out much less out on civil compensation, as a proportion of its GDP, than any other major European country apart from Denmark, and a third that of the USA. Trade unions also want to see fewer compensations claims, but that is because we do not want workers to have any reason to claim. If the government did more to force employers to stop breaking health and safety laws there would be far fewer injuries and illnesses caused by work and there would be far fewer claims. Compensation after an attack at work However, the government is not stopping there. It is also proposing to slash the payments you can get under the criminal injuries compensation scheme. These payments are certainly not huge - often around a thousand pounds, but they can be claimed by workers who have been the victim of violence as a result of their work, such as shop workers or security staff who are assaulted. Tube workers who have had to cope with the trauma of a suicide jumping in front of their train have also benefited. That is now to change. In a consultation document issued this week the government says it wants to remove around 17,000 victims of violent crime every year from the scheme, including those with injuries like a smashed hand or an injury to the knee that is serious enough to require surgery. In addition many of those who still qualify will find the compensation cut, so even people with minor brain damage face a cut in their payments. Compensation for unfair dismissal Finally the government wants to make it more difficult, and expensive, to get compensation if an employee is unfairly dismissed, victimised for being a safety representative or if the employer refuses to agree to safety representatives training. While chief executives seem to manage to get huge sums of compensation when they are sacked or resign after poor performance, lesser mortals have only been able to look on with envy. However when workers are sacked unfairly they have at least been able to rely on their unions and, as a last resort, an employment tribunal. The government wants to either stop that or make it more expensive. As well as wanting to extend the time you have to have been working for your employer from one year to two years for you to be able to make a claim for unfair dismissal to an employment tribunal they plan to charge for the pleasure of seeking any form of justice. Applicants will be obliged to pay the costs of an unfair dismissal claim. These will only be refunded if the employee wins. The government is proposing to charge ý200 to lodge a claim and ý1,000 for a hearing, They have given another option of an upfront fee of ý500 to access the tribunal that can rise to ý1750 if the employee is claiming more than ý30,000 in compensation. These charges will apply even to groups who are not subject to a qualifying period such as a worker claiming victimisation for activities they carried out as a union health and safety representative or raising health and safety as an issue. However, it is not only dismissal and victimisation claims that will be affected. For example, the only way that a health and safety representative can seek to challenge a refusal by their employer to give them time off for training is by taking a case to an employment tribunal. The representative will now be charged for trying to get the training they need to help their fellow workers. It is not a coincidence that all these proposals are coming together. The government has been lobbied about a non-existent 'compensation culture' by insurance companies who are happy to take insurance premiums but have taken a series of court cases to try to stop them paying out when things go wrong, including several aimed at asbestos victims. The coalition government is also hell-bent on removing as many employment rights as it can, so expect more to come. What you can do! The TUC is organising a Day of Action to defend health and safety. This will be held on 28 April 2012, which is International Workers Memorial Day when we traditionally remember the dead and fight for the living. Never has that message been more important than now. Let's ensure that we make it clear that we want clear commitments and action from those who should be protecting us. Join any events in your area on that day and demonstrate that we will not give up our right to a safe workplace. TUC website www.tuc.org.uk/wmd Workers Memorial Day 28 April 2012 Remember the dead - but fight for the living |