NOHSAC Report

Estimates

Costs calculations are derived by first estimating the total number of incidents (cases) of workplace injury and disease in 2004–05, and then applying the methodology from NOHSC18 together with the ACC and other New Zealand average cost data to estimate total costs. The first step involves estimating the number of uncompensated cases, which is addressed in the following section.

4.1   Uncompensated Cases and the “N” Matrix  

A number of sources are relevant when estimating the number of uncompensated cases of work-related disease and injury in New Zealand in 2004–05.

Piecing together these pieces of information and the compensation data from the previous chapter, a matrix was derived of a “base case” scenario for 2004–05 of the number of incidents by disease and injury, cross-tabulated to severity, derived in turn from a “low” (best) case scenario and a “high” (worst) case scenario.

The conceptual approach is summarised in Table 4.1.

TABLE 4.1 Conceptual framework for estimating the number of incidents
COMPENSATED UNCOMPENSATED TOTAL
Injuries ACC data Derived as residual Factored up based of average of a minimum from Driscoll et al1 and a maximum from Australian estimates
Disease ACC data Derived as residual Estimated from attributable fractions1
Total ACC data Vertical sum and horizontal residual Vertical and horizontal sum

Two final points should also be made:

The resulting estimate of the total number of incidents in 2004–05 is 305,150 (256,894 to 353,407), with the severity and injury/disease sub-categorisations estimated as shown in Table 4.2.

Comparisons with Australia  

These findings suggest that, in New Zealand, the number of compensated workplace incidents is about 83% of the total, compared to 69% in Australia, which bears out the general view that, across the board, access to compensation is relatively good.

However, excluding the relatively large number of the least severe incidents in both countries reveals that only 81% of the remaining incidents are compensated in New Zealand, compared to 87% in Australia, which also seems to bear out the anecdotes (eg, in relation to relatively poor access to compensation for more severe conditions such as cancer). Moreover, while the estimates from Driscoll et al1 are the best currently available, it should be noted that they appear very conservative, and thus in our view there is considerable risk that the number and proportion of uncompensated cases (particularly for disease) in New Zealand is in fact higher than the estimates presented in this report.

Moreover, in making comparisons between the two countries, it must be noted that the overall per capita rates of occupational injury and disease appear much higher in New Zealand than in Australia – some 15% of the workforce relative to around 4% per annum respectively.

TABLE 4.2 Estimated workplace incidents, by severity and disease/injury, 2004–05
TOTAL CASES COMPENSATED UNCOMPENSATED TOTAL
1. Less than 7 days 230,546 45,839 276,386
2. Full return to work 15,494 3,112 18,606
3. Staged return to work 6,222 1,247 7,469
4. Partial return to work 215 44 259
5. No return/permanent disability 30 7 37
6. Fatality 64 886 950
7. Other 1,241 203 1,444
Total 253,812 51,338 305,150
INJURY
1. Less than 7 days 218,515 42,589 261,104
2. Full return to work 14,270 2,781 17,051
3. Staged return to work 5,768 1,124 6,893
4. Partial return to work 191 37 229
5. No return/permanent disability 11 2 13
6. Fatality 42 58 100
7. Other 1,097 164 1,261
Total 239,894 46,756 286,650
DISEASE
1. Less than 7 days 12,031 3,250 15,282
2. Full return to work 1,224 331 1,555
3. Staged return to work 454 123 576
4. Partial return to work 24 6 30
5. No return/permanent disability 19 5 24
6. Fatality 22 828 850
7. Other 144 39 183
Total 13,918 4,582 18,500