What do we think of ACC fining Affco millions for shooting

**JimO** · 20th September 2007, 20:27

What a complete crock of shit, guy has a break to smoke a joint when he should be working, sitting in car in carpark with other retard gets shot by opposition gang member. Acc fine company because it was work related

**Drum** · 20th September 2007, 20:32

It's bollocks. What more can you say?
There's an election coming up.

**dino3310** · 20th September 2007, 20:33

thats our fucked up system for ya

**idb** · 20th September 2007, 20:36

ACC is a 'no fault' system.
It wasn't the guy's fault that he was mixed up with a bad crowd and prone to bad habits...but in this day and age everything that happens must be someone's fault...so there you are!

**Lil_Byte** · 20th September 2007, 20:39

Originally Posted by jimjim

What a complete crock of shit, guy has a break to smoke a joint when he should be working, sitting in car in carpark with other retard gets shot by opposition gang member. Acc fine company because it was work related

Where did you find this - I want to find it so I really can understand how f**ked up the system is

**scumdog** · 20th September 2007, 20:44

Originally Posted by Lil_Byte

Where did you find this - I want to find it so I really can understand how f**ked up the system is

Was in Tuesdays ODT I think.

**inlinefour** · 20th September 2007, 21:06

Originally Posted by jimjim

What a complete crock of shit, guy has a break to smoke a joint when he should be working, sitting in car in carpark with other retard gets shot by opposition gang member. Acc fine company because it was work related

Firstly, ACC are not fining the company, ACC does not have such powers to fine anyone. I actually agree with ACC expecting the company to pay up, provided that the employer has it's own work cover, it would be up to that provider to come to the party, as it clearly was in work time, even if he was ducking out when he should have not been. Where I was working, we are covered by another provider while we work. I did not see the article on the telly, nor know all the details, but I do know that if ACC can, they will decline cover. However in this instance, there might be grounds for doing so and I also know that if you challenge a decision, because of being entitled, ACC back down. However this is all about entitlement and I'm also sure that ACC would not have done this if the bloke was entitled. This is probably just another case of the media making another storm in a teacup, without providing all the facts, yet again...

My biggest thing with ACC is that they do not cover those with medical problems. There was a few in Burwood Spinal Unit that was paralysed due to a medical probem and they recieved nothing from ACC. I would hate to be on the wrong side of that line in the sand. Thats something that makes me appreciate the ACC system, in my situation.

**Meanie** · 20th September 2007, 21:07

ACC is just like every other fucked up gov department Rob from us poor hard working class to keep themselves rich.............. Fuck them i say At least a leach has its uses

**McJim** · 20th September 2007, 21:14

Er.....why don't they fine the fella that pulled the trigger? Can't find him? That's not my fuggin' problem or that of the company whose car park it happened in!

**Finn** · 20th September 2007, 21:18

Originally Posted by McJim

Er.....why don't they fine the fella that pulled the trigger?

Because he is the "real" victim here.

**JimO** · 20th September 2007, 22:05

Originally Posted by inlinefour

Firstly, ACC are not fining the company, ACC does not have such powers to fine anyone. I actually agree with ACC expecting the company to pay up, provided that the employer has it's own work cover, it would be up to that provider to come to the party, as it clearly was in work time, even if he was ducking out when he should have not been. Where I was working, we are covered by another provider while we work. I did not see the article on the telly, nor know all the details, but I do know that if ACC can, they will decline cover. However in this instance, there might be grounds for doing so and I also know that if you challenge a decision, because of being entitled, ACC back down. However this is all about entitlement and I'm also sure that ACC would not have done this if the bloke was entitled. This is probably just another case of the media making another storm in a teacup, without providing all the facts, yet again...

My biggest thing with ACC is that they do not cover those with medical problems. There was a few in Burwood Spinal Unit that was paralysed due to a medical probem and they recieved nothing from ACC. I would hate to be on the wrong side of that line in the sand. Thats something that makes me appreciate the ACC system, in my situation.

i have to dissagree with you, how is it the employers fault that one of their workers was shot in a carpark when he shouldnt have been there by a criminal who also shouldnt have been there. Its not like the employee hurt himself on a dodgy machine, personal responsibilaty has to come in here the employee was also indulging in a illegal act at the time of his shooting. I have absolutly no problem with ACC paying out to anybody injured at work or in a accident, medical problems arnt a accident but should also be covered by the vast amount of taxpayer dollars that are payed into the health system.

**Finn** · 20th September 2007, 22:19

AFFCO have said they won't pay. ACC can't make them so AFFCo will win - end of story.

It's funny seeing all the cracks finally emerging from an incompetent Government where idiology gets in the way of common sense.

ACC is way too top heavy. In clear cases like John, it can work fine and that's what it's paid to do. But so many pricks are on it because the Government promotes it. I guess it helps lower the unemployment figures. However, what other country advertises ACC. I mean come on you flightless birds.

**peasea** · 20th September 2007, 22:37

Originally Posted by jimjim

What a complete crock of shit, guy has a break to smoke a joint when he should be working, sitting in car in carpark with other retard gets shot by opposition gang member. Acc fine company because it was work related

This is quite fair;

Anyone standing in a carpark should be free to wear gang regalia, smoke pot and do fuck all, it's what this nation is all about. The person with the gun has got it all wrong and I retract any (and all) posts relating to guns being pointed at losers.

AFFCO should be ashamed of itself for not providing a bullet-proof environment for all its workers, whether they be gang members or illegal immigrants. All employers should supply a bunker for a marae and a full armament for organised retalliation.

It's the kiwi way.

**inlinefour** · 20th September 2007, 22:39

Originally Posted by Finn

AFFCO have said they won't pay. ACC can't make them so AFFCo will win - end of story.

It's funny seeing all the cracks finally emerging from an incompetent Government where idiology gets in the way of common sense.

ACC is way too top heavy. In clear cases like John, it can work fine and that's what it's paid to do. But so many pricks are on it because the Government promotes it. I guess it helps lower the unemployment figures. However, what other country advertises ACC. I mean come on you flightless birds.

Although jimjim did not read my post properly and I cannot be bothered taking the time to explain it to him. Makes me wonder about the point of this thread really, as if he can't get an important point I raised on my post. How can jimjim get it right for this thread in general and if hes expecting to get the facts just from the media, he just might be expecting too much.

But hey, makes a nice change from "mod bashing". As you were people, but I think you might be basing your opinions from something not based on a factual account (I have come to expect this from these sorts of programs, guess it all boils down to ratings, even if the truth get ommitted), but more along the lines that will get an emotional response from its viewers. Which to a large extent, is pretty much whats happening on this thread.

**peasea** · 20th September 2007, 22:40

Originally Posted by inlinefour

Firstly, ACC are not fining the company, ACC does not have such powers to fine anyone. I actually agree with ACC expecting the company to pay up, provided that the employer has it's own work cover, it would be up to that provider to come to the party, as it clearly was in work time, even if he was ducking out when he should have not been. Where I was working, we are covered by another provider while we work. I did not see the article on the telly, nor know all the details, but I do know that if ACC can, they will decline cover. However in this instance, there might be grounds for doing so and I also know that if you challenge a decision, because of being entitled, ACC back down. However this is all about entitlement and I'm also sure that ACC would not have done this if the bloke was entitled. This is probably just another case of the media making another storm in a teacup, without providing all the facts, yet again...

My biggest thing with ACC is that they do not cover those with medical problems. There was a few in Burwood Spinal Unit that was paralysed due to a medical probem and they recieved nothing from ACC. I would hate to be on the wrong side of that line in the sand. Thats something that makes me appreciate the ACC system, in my situation.

Ya fuckin what?
he should have been working. If he'd been doing what he was being paid for he wouldn'a been shot FFS.

Show me to the gene pool please.