Approximately half of all motorcycles in NZ are rego exempt or rego expired right now

[Akzle]

Lets say they charged all those at fault irrespective of vehicle the top motorcycle rate of $550 how on earth would that bankrupt me or anyone else? I bet if they did that they would actually get more $550 premiums than they do now with so many motorcyclists putting their reg on hold. We should not really have to pay more for being at fault as they are already charging us an at fault premium now.

i expect to extrapolate it out. ie, each crash you're in it doubles. you're up to, what, 8? making your per-vehicle premium $14080

[Akzle]

So the fear of it doubling each time you crash is the reason why you don't want things to change then? I think with the pricing I suggested they would definitly collect more money than they do now. As there has been nothing in the media about such a thing happening you can continue to enjoy paying the somewhat discounted fee you do now irrespective of the number of crashes that you have. Such a system that I propose would actually provide an incentive for many to drive safer as well.

i'm not affeared of anything. I frankly don't care as it doesn't affect me.
All i do is control what i do. Y'know... The thing i actually have control over. Idiots walk among us, you can't legislate for that.
Vote akzle.

[old slider]

But we may end up with less of them on the road if they get penalised with hefty registration for behaving that way. We will never know though unless its tried.

I don't believe any of us go out to get injured on purpose, increasing ACC levies through rego is probably reducing accidents only by removing many motorcyclists from the streets over the winter months.

As in most things education is the best tool in the box. Some of us need compulsory rider education, but as in school, there are some who simply can not or wont be educated.

I love the bike, but being able to Rego my car for $88.68 per year vs the Bike rego dictates what gets parked up over the wetter, cooler months. I cry on those clear calm winter days.

[caseye]

I don't believe any of us go out to get injured on purpose, increasing ACC levies through rego is probably reducing accidents only by removing many motorcyclists from the streets over the winter months.

As in most things education is the best tool in the box. Some of us need compulsory rider education, but as in school, there are some who simply can not or wont be educated.

I love the bike, but being able to Rego my car for $88.68 per year vs the Bike rego dictates what gets parked up over the wetter, cooler months. I cry on those clear calm winter days.

100% agree with your education comment.

Me too. As in, I too cry on a clear , calm winters day, mostly cause I'm out on the bike thinking about all of my silly mates who have stayed at home, for fear of the rego Nazi's.

Hey was there an echo, (strange anomaly occurring in this thread,)??? Did someone here actually reply to IT???????????

[Moise]

Well, I've recently become an ACC "statistic". Not my fault and not sure how I could have avoided it. With medical costs, compo, etc will probably cost ACC $10k. Mine was a minor accident, I can see how they become very expensive.

Really, the problem is the no fault system. It's not just motorcyclists who are screwed by this, but employers have been able to kill and maim their staff with almost no consequences for decades.

The ACC scheme needs a major rethink, but I can't see it happening.

[Ocean1]

Well, I've recently become an ACC "statistic". Not my fault and not sure how I could have avoided it. With medical costs, compo, etc will probably cost ACC $10k. Mine was a minor accident, I can see how they become very expensive.

Really, the problem is the no fault system. It's not just motorcyclists who are screwed by this, but employers have been able to kill and maim their staff with almost no consequences for decades.

The ACC scheme needs a major rethink, but I can't see it happening.

Your boss murdered you?

Never mind, he probably didn't mean it.

[Scubbo]

B reg

[russd7]

Not my fault and not sure how I could have avoided it.

the number of times i see and hear that is amazing. would be interested to hear the full circumstances behind it.

what kind of work were you in

[Moise]

No, it was a motorbike accident. Sorry that wasn't clear.

The comments on workplace accidents are based on what I've seen and heard over the years. I'm sure that some employers weren't that concerned about health and safety because accidents were covered by ACC. It has changed in recent years though.

[Ocean1]

I'm sure that some employers weren't that concerned about health and safety because accidents were covered by ACC. It has changed in recent years though.

Well I'm certainly not that concerned about the health and safety of my employees. Since they made me responsible for their behaviour I stopped having any.

Which makes me responsible for unemployment I suppose.

[Moise]

You are wrong when you say work related injuries and deaths resulting from the fault of an employer do not get punished as there are court cases where fines of 10s of thousands of dollars are awarded to employees or their families. Maybe those at fault on the road who cause serious injury or death should be fined the same with the result being safer roads but ACC are just not bright enough to see it.

Really? You might want to compare the number of court cases with the rates of death and serious injury.

Things have changed post Pike River but it took all those deaths before the government took any serious action.

[old slider]

Really? You might want to compare the number of court cases with the rates of death and serious injury.

Things have changed post Pike River but it took all those deaths before the government took any serious action.

Health and safety has made huge inroads into our work related injuries, but I think they have become another empire building organisation. The huge fines placed on businesses mostly goes into their pockets.

I feel for employers, regardless of precautions placed workers are human and we make mistakes, rules and laws don't stop us from doing stupid shit aye.

Employers face huge obstacles taking a risk when employing staff, the employment relations courts are sucking huge amounts of money from businesses who are trying to survive and when some lazy prick finds it difficult to arrive at work never mind actually doing anything decides to go see a no win no fee employment lawyer the guy trying to earn enough to pay them wages, plus four weeks holiday, plus 11 stat days, 5 sick days and huge ACC levies and is often earning less than his staff gets shafted for another 10K fighting him.

[pritch]

employees who spot unsafe practises in the workplace having the ability to get an enforcement order for the unsafe practise to be stopped

I knew I shouldn't have taken a peek at your post.

That exact situation already exists. A "trained H&S delegate" can issue a Hazard Notice. The Hazard Notice rates as equal to a first warning from the Labour Dept. Only a seriously stupid employer would ignore one of those.

[Ocean1]

I knew I shouldn't have taken a peek at your post.

That exact situation already exists. A "trained H&S delegate" can issue a Hazard Notice. The Hazard Notice rates as equal to a first warning from the Labour Dept. Only a seriously stupid employer would ignore one of those.

Any employee, period has the right to question any work practice regarding safety.

Has done since the old Marine Dept was in charge of such shit.

Only, they had a far more realistic idea of who's fault any given accident was.

[pritch]

Any employee, period has the right to question any work practice regarding safety.

True. As far as it goes. These days employees are entitled to elect a H&S rep and there is training available for such. I did see that the Gubbermint was considering cutting some of the funding for training but I'm out of the system now so don't know the current situation.

If a serious safety concern were to arise, and after discussion, management and the trained H&S rep could not agree, the rep then has the option to issue a Hazard Notice. IIRC a copy of this would be sent to the Labour Dept but in the real world the rep would probably already be on the phone.

There were three levels of training available:
The first was about general workplace safety and the correct use of a Hazard Notice. Only H&S reps who have completed this course are permitted to issue a Hazard Notice.
The second course focussed on accident investigation.
The third was primarily about getting injured people back to work.

H&S reps are to be paid while attending these courses. An obstacle for the smaller employer, but a more positive way of looking at it might be that the employer benefits from having someone on the staff with that training.