Peacetime Injured Short-changed
(by Ray Brown 19 Nov 07)
The men and women of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) who are incapacitated during peacetime service such as humanitarian work, long exercises, Mission Rehearsal Exercises (MRE’s) and those performing their normal duties in Australia are being short changed under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA).
The intention of the MRCA was to combined the best of the Veterans Entitlement Act 1986 (VEA) and the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (SRCA) and have a single military specific compensation scheme.
What in fact occurred was two schemes were constructed under the auspice of one Act, that being the MRCA 2004.
Under the VEA there was/is no difference in financial compensation for impairment between war-like, hazardous and peacetime service. If you are assessed at 20% impairment you will receive $56.46 p/f regardless of type of service.
This includes Special Rate, TTI and all general rates. The only reduction is for those who have coverage under the SRCA as well, known as dual eligibility, and have their VEA payments offset due to a lump sum received under the SRCA.
Under the SRCA, payments are not payable fortnightly but as lump sums for Permanent Impairment (PI). Add to that Non Economic Loss (NEL) and a claimant has a maximum $200,771.68. This amount is available to public servants.
Under the Defence Act 1903 there is a Severe Injury Adjustment (SIA) where the person has suffered 80 or more impairment points. This is currently $62,412.52 bringing the maximum to $263,184.20 as at 15 November 2007.
So the VEA was/is military specific and the SRCA was/is a public servant civilian compensation scheme, thus giving the impression that peacetime service was/is equivalent to civilian work. This has caused much angst amongst many veterans and veterans organizations who say the government is trying to make defence service equate to police, fire service etc. This perception has brought about a discussion paper ‘Drift to the Civil Norm’.
This paper points out the large differences between civilian and defence employment.
During the drafting of the MRCA a number of organizations including the VVFA and RDFWA argued for a difference in permanent impairment payments depending on whether it was war caused or peacetime service.
The majority of ESO representatives of the Working Group drafting the MRCA called for like compensation for like impairment.
The draft release in fact differentiated not only war and peacetime caused impairments but widows as well by $100,000.00. The arguments ensured and the widow’s payment was erred on the higher amount for war and peacetime widows equally.
Depending on whether the service injury is suffered or the disease is contracted on warlike/non-warlike service or peacetime service, different compensation amounts result for the same impairment and lifestyle rating until 80% impairment in which the payments and some benefits are the same.
If the claimant has conditions under warlike and peacetime service then a calculation is used to determine an impairment rating based on both tables used in GARP M.
Compensation for severe impairment has been enhanced for all types of service with the maximum permanent impairment payment being $267.83 per week and the maximum lump sum being $350,964.43.
The Explanatory Memorandum (EM) to the MRCA explains that the outcomes in terms of compensation for those whose injury or disease results from warlike or non-warlike service approximate amounts payable under the VEA.
Likewise, the EM states that for peacetime service the results approximate amounts payable under the SRCA.
As stated at the start of this article the MRCA is two schemes under the same Act. The onus of proof is the same as the VEA in which warlike/hazardous service has the Reasonable Hypothesis and peacetime service has Balance of Possibilities.
The EM explains why there is a difference which begs the question, Why didn’t we just amend the VEA and the Defence Act and maintain the status quo of VEA and SRCA?
Does anyone really think that a peacetime serviceman with 50% impairment suffers less that his war service counterpart with 50%? Someone does since the peacetime serviceperson gets $125.88 p/f less.
But I’ve left the biggest insult to last.
A serviceperson who has an impairment of 50% due to peacetime service will receive fortnightly payments that are less to a serviceperson with 30% due to warlike service.
For Example.
Sgt Green is involved in counter-terrorist (CT) training in Brisbane and is injured during the exercise. His injuries are assessed and he receives an impairment rating of 50%. Sgt Green accepts this as a fortnightly pension of $159.10.
Cpl Smith who is deployed to Afghanistan suffers injuries whilst preparing his vehicle for a 3 day patrol. After being assessed Cpl Smith receives an impairment rating of 30% and a fortnightly payment of $166.06.
So what we have is a serviceman who is 20% more impaired receiving less compensation due to an ill conceived concept.
Would those who wanted this difference been happy if their son or daughter was Sgt Green?
Peacetime Injured are Short-changed
In response to a letter regarding the amount of compensation payable in the new scheme dated 6 September 2000, the then Minister for Veterans Affairs Bruce Scott MP via Brad Fallon his advisor stated:
“The proposed new military compensation scheme will not discriminate against the person injured in peacetime. It will apply to all Australian Defence Force (ADF) service and ensure that all members of the ADF who are injured or killed are treated equitably for compensation purposes irrespective of where the member was serving. The only difference will be that those members with warlike and non-warlike service will enjoy the more beneficial standard of proof for claims made in relation to that service” and also stated “The purpose of introducing a new scheme is to ensure the current arrangements are simplified and are designed to recognise the special nature of military service.”
So what happened? The new scheme does discriminate, its complex in calculating payments and treats peacetime service as equivalent to civilian work.
The current compensation calculation system must be rescinded and one impairment payment be used as is the case in the VEA.
Table 1 shows the comparison between peacetime service and warlike service under the VEA and MRCA.
Any questions to be directed to Ray Brown 02 9833 8485.
Table 1
VEA / MRCAWarlike / Peacetime / Difference / Warlike / Peacetime / Difference
Special Rate / Total / $938.00 / $938.00 / $0.00 / $938.00 / $938.00 / $0.00
Intermediate Rate / Total / $631.30 / $631.30 / $0.00
War Widows / Total / $562.90 / $562.90 / $0.00 / $562.90 / $562.90 / $0.00
EDA / Total / $495.40 / $495.40 / $0.00
General Rate / 100% / $322.80 / $322.80 / $0.00
95% / $306.66 / $306.66 / $0.00
90% / $290.52 / $290.52 / $0.00
85% / $274.38 / $274.38 / $0.00
80% / $258.24 / $258.24 / $0.00 / $535.66 / $535.66 / $0.00
75% / $242.10 / $242.10 / $0.00
70% / $225.96 / $225.96 / $0.00 / $455.85 / $412.46 / $43.38
65% / $209.82 / $209.82 / $0.00
60% / $193.68 / $193.68 / $0.00 / $376.56 / $289.26 / $87.32
55% / $177.54 / $177.54 / $0.00
50% / $161.40 / $161.40 / $0.00 / $284.98 / $159.10 / $125.88
45% / $145.26 / $145.26 / $0.00
40% / $129.12 / $129.12 / $0.00 / $225.52 / $125.88 / $99.64
35% / $112.98 / $112.98 / $0.00
30% / $96.84 / $96.84 / $0.00 / $166.06 / $92.66 / $73.38
25% / $80.70 / $80.70 / $0.00
20% / $64.56 / $64.56 / $0.00 / $118.92 / $66.42 / $52.50
15% / $48.42 / $48.42 / $0.00
10% / $32.28 / $32.28 / $0.00 / $29.73 / $33.22 / $26.24