ACC being opened up to competition (not bike related)

[oneofsix]

I've got a T shirt at home with 'Who's Next?' written on it. Quite a few of you guys have the same eh....

Now, did I hear somewhere during the run up to the last election that National were NOT going to open up ACC to competition? I may have this wrong but I thought that cunt John Key actually said it in an interview...?

Might be wrong, just wondered..

Oh and sorry for the 'C' word, having a cunt of a day already.....oops, I did it again...

And not sell any government assets ... this term. Next year, well probably before Christmas, under urgency and all that

[Winston001]

But, the most profitable part. Just more of the arsehole's mantra of "privatise profit - socialise losses"!

ACC doesn't make a profit. It is a social insurance scheme.

Which is why commercial insurers are lukewarm about the proposal. They need to compete with ACC but also make a profit.

...and it also falls nicely for the fat cat insurance corporate scumbag mates of this bastard government to chip in to the election fund to ensure National win.

Pigs at the trough....

Fat cat insurance companies eh? Like AMI, and Western Pacific Insurance? - which has collapsed by the way. AMI only continue because the govt has stepped in.

You may not have noticed but the number of insurance companies in NZ has shrunken markedly over the past 25 years. Its a tough game. They've disappeared all over the world.

[merv]

Seems to be the Nats answer to every problem is "cut government revenue" and give it to foreign corporations.

Yep I call it trying to shrink their way to success and how often has that worked for anyone? A big zero I'd say.

[AllanB]

I can't see many private insurance copmpanies being interested. It was tried a dozen or more years back and failed.

[Usarka]

It's not about the employees. They can go get fucked.

Hmmm, my understanding is that this also covers earning compensation to employees. And because they are covered by an insurance policy it removes their ability self insure..

Currently this is tightly regulated and legislated. Moving forward the current regulation and legislation will not be sufficient to protect them. So if Joe at your company loses his eyesight he may get shafted from the new insurance company with little legal protection and with no say in the policy you chose for him.

I'm normally the biggest advocate of "if you don't like the work find another job" but this has a potential negative impact on people far beyond the employee-employer relationship.

PS - last time this was done it cost companies more when labour changed it back again.

[saxet]

Seems to be the Nats answer to every problem is "cut government revenue" and give it to foreign corporations.

Yeah is'nt it funny how the main beneficiaries of Nats policies are big corporations, often Australian. Makes me wonder who their financial backers are.

[cowpoos]

I was reading this story in stuff:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/5087...C-says-insurer

I work in procurement so kind of understand how the market operates. This story got me thinking, maybe more insurers will bid then he gives credit? I fear that they will offer employers good rates compared to ACC but cut the services to match. Why should the employer care about what their staff are entitled too, they just find it a financial burden either way. Thoughts?

Doh - this thread title should have read; "ACC being opened up to competition", not privitisation. It may be a Freudian slip but any chance a mod could change it please??

when this exact same thing happened in 1998 I think??? the employer I was working for was with a private insurer...and when I 90% cut a finger off...they were awesome...everything was sorted fine...they were like are you sure you don't need more physio,etc,etc....paying me 80% of my wage within a week.

and then on 2 occasions over the years...dealing will ACC...fuck me they are a pack of useless wankers...absolute arseholes...I am totally for this...acc can't get fucked!!!

did I mention private insurer was MAJORLY cheaper for employer I was with?!!

[Winston001]

Yeah is'nt it funny how the main beneficiaries of Nats policies are big corporations, often Australian. Makes me wonder who their financial backers are.

This is New Zealand. The least corrupt country in the world. There has never been any evidence of financial support in return for contracts by any political party.

The two vaguely related scandals which come to mind involved Winston Peters lying about donations from Robert Jones, and the Labour Party receiving donations from a millionaire in Monaco.

By all means reject the ACC proposals - I do - but only rational arguments will change politicians minds. Consider the Wellywood sign as a pointer to what public opinion can achieve.

[spacemonkey]

This is New Zealand. The least corrupt country in the world. There has never been any evidence of financial support in return for contracts by any political party.

The two vaguely related scandals which come to mind involved Winston Peters lying about donations from Robert Jones, and the Labour Party receiving donations from a millionaire in Monaco.

By all means reject the ACC proposals - I do - but only rational arguments will change politicians minds. Consider the Wellywood sign as a pointer to what public opinion can achieve.

You forgot about National party and the Bretheren freaks.
At $1million it was also quite hefty.

[Str8 Jacket]

What would happen if say an employee had had an illness like cancer (in their history) and they had an accident where they were diagnosed with something that could also be caused by cancer and the insurer found out? Could they possibly try to wriggle out of treating the employee, could ACC then be claimed by the employee or is they fucked?

[Winston001]

What would happen if say an employee had had an illness like cancer (in their history) and they had an accident where they were diagnosed with something that could also be caused by cancer and the insurer found out? Could they possibly try to wriggle out of treating the employee, could ACC then be claimed by the employee or is they fucked?

Since about 1991 ACC has rejected claims for injury which are a consequence or result of a person's medical condition. I can think of an example right now - a man who suffered a crippling hernia injury and has never recovered. In fact he's now had more hernias. ACC originally accepted it as a work claim, then soon stopped cover saying he had a medical susceptibility to hernias.

It has been an ongoing issue for him since 1995 and to be fair, ACC have never closed the door entirely. And he's still covered for normal accidents. But I do think they are wrong in his case because the hernia was a direct result of lifting a sheep.

You can be certain that a commercial insurance company would look equally hard at this type of situation.

[spacemonkey]

How it would go?
Well here two case studies for ya;

Case 1
Flatmate of mine was working for NZ Post as a postie, NZ Post in order to get lower premiums signed up to something called "Terciary level" in return for the lower premiums the employer became legally liable for more of the recovery/treatment costs if it was work related.
When the flatmate developed a back problem NZ Post claimed it was from not work related and refused to pay anything. ACC Claimed it was work related and refused to pay anything.
The flatmate was stuck unable to work and unable to get any acc benefit to cover living costs or any physio for 6 months while those two argued the toss.

Case 2 Joel Storey
Like NZ Post Affco under the Talley family ownership had signed up to that same scheme.
Joel Storey was an employee at the Murapara freezingworks. In what proved to be a case of mistaken identity he was shot in the freezing works carpark while on a meal break, the bullet has left him paralised for life.
The Talleys refused to pay claiming it wasn't work related and started smearing Joel Storey's name in the media, ACC responded it was on company time inside the premises. Neither would pay for Joels treatment, leaving 18 year old Joel Storey totally up shit creek for something he had not caused and was a victim of.
There's a bit of guff on his story here...... http://publicaddress.net/hardnews/never-let-the-facts-/
The current police minister Anne Tolley looks like a lying misleading henchwoman for hire, even years later reading this still fills me with disgust for the Talleys.


This is what the "Open to competition" future holds.
Privatize (and move offshore) profits, socialise costs so the taxpayer foots the bill, that is what Nick Smith has lined up for all of you.

[mashman]

Bush Lawyer

What would happen if say an employee had had an illness like cancer (in their history) and they had an accident where they were diagnosed with something that could also be caused by cancer and the insurer found out? Could they possibly try to wriggle out of treating the employee, could ACC then be claimed by the employee or is they fucked?

I would assume that as the previous medical condition had not been disclosed at the time of signing the policy, it would void the policy and therefore cover? The employee would probably be shit oota luck in regards to assistance/cover, unless the boss stepped in, or ACC decided it was unfair and covered the employee injuries at the tax payers expense... BUT, ACC would have the right to go after the previous insurers and/or their representatives for some form of "misdiagnosis" judgement to recoup costs etc... which by the time the lawyers fees had been taken into account, would be pretty much be zero. Tax payer ends up footing the bill anyway? ... rort!

Wonder what'll happen to the $14 billion of ACC "reserves" under a system,like that ... cream!

[Brian d marge]

Had a little bit of exposure ( to put it mildly ) to ACC

95 % of people are just the simple hard workers of life , that have a family work hard and do their best. Some, a few are not of course!

but this is typical

[2] On 17 October 2003, Ms Sisson injured her right wrist while working at the Waitotara Freezing Works. There have been various descriptions of the accident, which seems essentially to have been a forceful impact between the ulna aspect of the right wrist against a steel bar. The incident caused swelling and pain and the appellant was admitted to hospital for emergency treatment. She obtained cover for a contusion of her right wrist and has had intermittent pain and occasional swelling ever since.


ACC was refused and this was the appeal



this is one could say typical ....and if you go private ( which we have here in Japan , its ok for day to day ....but you are screwed if you aint covered ,,,,example heart problems ......


Dont screw this up folks ........


Stephen

[Winston001]

Guys, the problems you highlight arise solely because ACC only covers injury by accident. If we had a true and complete public compensation system, sickness would also be covered. There wouldn't need to be any arguments.