Excuse for not joining rehab program rejected

An employee must have a reasonable excuse for refusing to participate in a workplace rehabilitation program – merely being dissatisfied with it is not an acceptable reason for non-compliance.


The Administrative Appeals Tribunal of Australia (AATA) found that it appeared that an employee’s main reason for refusing to participate was her preference to work four days per week instead of five.


Her case was also undermined by surveillance footage that indicated that she had exaggerated her symptoms, and some credibility issues with the evidence of other witnesses.

Facts of case


Catrina Oliver was employed as an executive assistant by the Department of Social Services (DSS). She was awarded workers’ compensation for inflammatory and sprain-type injuries, including carpal tunnel syndrome, to her left wrist. Over three years, she had surgery and several attempts to return to work, before taking maternity leave. Several different rehabilitation providers were used during this time.


The DSS referred her to an occupational physician, who reported that her condition was unlikely to resolve in the foreseeable future, but there were no objective medical reasons why she could not return to full-time work. The physician prepared a return-to-work plan that included graduated return to full-time work hours over three months, plus ergonomic adjustments to her workplace, limits placed on lifting weights and keyboard use, and use of voice-activated software. 


Ms Oliver claimed that the program was unsuitable because it caused her “unbearable pain and constant stress and anxiety”. She requested a new program that included the alternative of working four days per week instead of five, but the DSS refused. She requested that Comcare’s decision be reviewed, but it found in the employer’s favour, so she appealed to the AATA.


She claimed that the pain amounted to a reasonable excuse for refusing the program and that the voice-activated software was of limited help to her because of workplace background noise and its limited task capability. 


However, surveillance footage of the employee performing activities outside work, such as putting her children into her car with both arms, indicated that she was not suffering severe pain and had exaggerated her symptoms. The nature of her complaints about the program suggested that her real motive was a preference to work four days per week, which would also assist her childcare arrangements.


Comcare claimed that the medical evidence showed that its proposed rehabilitation program would not increase the level of pain when combined with the other proposed support measures.


The AATA questioned the credibility of some of Ms Oliver’s evidence and that of her witnesses.

Decision


The AATA found that the employer’s rehabilitation program was reasonable, based on a suitable assessment of Ms Oliver, appropriate and compliant with legislation. This finding took into account each of the following: potential to reduce future compensation payable, cost of the program, benefits to Ms Oliver’s employment, the potential psychological cost of not providing the program, the relative merits of alternative actions, and her attitude towards the program. Therefore, she was obligated to undertake the program.


The AATA’s decision was based mainly on the evidence in relation to her ongoing level of pain, as there was limited evidence available in relation to the “stress” claim.


The AATA upheld a previous decision to suspend her entitlement to workers’ compensation payments until she took part in the employer-provided rehabilitation program. 


The bottom line: A tribunal does not have to establish the reason why an employee chooses not to participate in an employer-provided rehabilitation program. Therefore, the employer’s claim in this case that the employee wanted a four-day week to suit her childcare responsibilities did not have to be considered. The tribunal has to decide whether the employee had a reasonable excuse for refusing to participate. The employee’s excuse has to be objective, not just rational. In this case, there was strong evidence that the employee had no reasonable reason for refusing the employer’s program, she just preferred her alternative of working fewer days per week.

Decision


Contact Us

Zenergy News

Directors' duties for psych risks unpacked in new report
April 23, 2025
The WHS obligations of company directors include taking reasonable steps to understand the psychological hazards in their workplaces, and this is a "personal" prosecutable duty, a new guide for directors warns. Directors' obligations include establishing that their organisations and their management "are equipped with appropriate resources and processes to eliminate or minimise these risks to the extent that is reasonably practicable", the guide by the Australian Institute of Company Directors and law firm King & Wood Mallesons says. Most of any organisation's work to address psychosocial hazards will be "driven by management", given the complexity of the risks and the deep operational knowledge required to guide action, it says. "The board plays a supporting role in constructively challenging these efforts and maintaining oversight of how effective psychosocial risk management contributes to broader organisational culture and leadership." Under Australia's national model WHS laws – adopted by all jurisdictions other than Victoria, which has similar legislation – officers have a duty to exercise due diligence to confirm their organisation is meeting its WHS obligations. (See section 27 of NSW's version of the laws, for example.) This duty is a "personal duty, meaning [officers] can be prosecuted for failing to meet their due diligence obligations", the guide says. "Prosecution typically requires proof that the officer failed to take reasonable steps to comply with their duty, assessed in the context of the organisation's overall safety and health management system," it says. These due diligence obligations apply to paid directors, and are "recommended" for volunteer directors, who can be prosecuted in limited circumstances. "While non-executive directors have not been the focus of WHS regulators to date, this can change, and regulatory expectations are rising," the guide notes. According to the 12-page document , company boards and governance play a crucial role in ensuring psychosocial risks are managed effectively. Directors must oversee management's efforts at identifying and implementing control measures, set expectations and confirm that the necessary frameworks are in place. "This includes seeking information, reviewing board reports, assessing organisational culture, and challenging management where needed to strengthen risk controls," the guide says. Examples of how boards should address the workplace factors that create psychosocial risks include: Overseeing how managers monitor the risks associated with work design by drawing on complaints data, employee surveys, and absence and turnover rates, and engaging regularly with management to assess risks and evaluate measures; Confirming that management is complying with the positive duty to eliminate workplace sexual harassment, and obtaining regular reports on key behavioural risks involving code of conduct breaches and harassment cases; Setting expectations for management to provide workers with practical assistance and timely consultation in the event of organisational change and restructures, which can create significant stress; Engaging with management to review how it is addressing remote work risks, and ensuring there they have a clear policy to guide them in determining when remote arrangements are appropriate; and Overseeing how HR and performance management processes are managed, and confirming that investigation procedures are fair, workers have access to appropriate support, and outcomes are handled as consistently as possible. Governing WHS Psychosocial Risks: A primer for directors, by the Australian Institute of Company Directors and King & Wood Mallesons, April 2025 This article has been reproduced with permission from OHS Alert, and the original version appears at www.ohsalert.com.au.
April 7, 2025
Zenergy recently hosted Women in Safety, a special networking event dedicated to fostering collaboration in the health, safety, and wellbeing sector. Held on March 20, 2025, at The Winery, Surry Hills, this event provided a relaxed and welcoming atmosphere where professionals gathered to exchange insights, share experiences, and build meaningful connections. With attendees from diverse industries—including construction, logistics, corporate sectors, and more—the event highlighted the vital role of women in shaping safer workplaces across Australia.
March 25, 2025
Podcasts have become a dominant force in the world of media, revolutionising how we consume information and entertainment and the WHS, Environment & Sustainability is no different! As the podcast industry continues to expand, listeners are discovering a wealth of benefits, from educational insights to fostering community connections. In this article, we share some of the leading podcasts and why they’ve become a growing part of modern WHS, Environment & Sustainability consumption. Here are some of the leading podcasts that every WHS, Environmental, and Sustainability professional should tune into:
March 24, 2025
Colin Hansen, WHS Director John Holland - M7M12 Project
March 3, 2025
Zenergy invites you to be part of the prestigious 2025 Australian Workplace Health & Safety Awards (AWHSA) —a national platform dedicated to recognising outstanding achievements in workplace health and safety. These awards celebrate individuals and organisations that are making a real impact in fostering safer, healthier work environments.
February 28, 2025
Australia has enacted mandatory sustainability reporting requirements, effective from 1 January 2025, through the Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Market Infrastructure and Other Measures) Act 2024. These regulations mandate that large entities disclose climate-related financial information as part of their annual reporting obligations.
More Posts