Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By David Lennon
If an employee suffers a musculo-skeletal injury from a workplace accident and subsequenly pays for treatment from a physiotherapist or Osteopath, would it be reasonable for an employer to refund those costs without necessarily admitting liability?
I am thinking of a scenario where neither negligence or breach of statutory duty have been alledged, and an employee is not looking for any other form of compensation, other than the relatively modest costs of a few sessions with an osteopath, from which both employer and employee would benefit.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Bernie Woods
David, I wouldn't see any major issues with that. My organisation has in-house facilities and would offer these post accident (and many other cases for that matter). I don't believe it confers any acceptance of negligence or breach of statutory duty and from a moral viewpoint would seem the right thing to do.
Bernie
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Karen Todd
David,
Could you maybe take it one step further and appoint a company approved physio and pay for ALL sessions employees have?
Having an in-house physio has a profound impact on absence rates - people come into work after weekend sports injuries to have physio. If the physio wasn't there they would probably just lie up at home. However, few have the luxury of an in-house physio so using the services of a local one would be the next best thing.
You would need to authorise people to go to the physio first, so you know why people are going for physio, but early intervention by a physio could reduce absence later and also help those who have been out long term make a return to work.
Karen
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By marianne mcdougall
I fully support the idea of having in house medical provision, physiotherapy and the like as there are clear benefits for all parties. However, a word of warning - we have been caught out in the past with tax liability. The HSE have a detailed leaflet "TAX RULES
AND THE PURCHASE OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SUPPORT" . This doc explains that "where an injury or condition derives solely and directly from the employee carrying out his duties, e.g. a firefighter receiving employer financed treatment for burns or stress in tackling a fire, or for other accidents or conditions which derive solely from the employee carrying out his or her job, the cost of the treatment would not be chargeable" - in other circumstances it is!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Laurie
Make sure your insurance company is aware of any such arrangement
Laurie
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Shane Johnston
While I would love to set up such a service, I am somewhat restricted in doing so. Firstly I am a civil servant and as such this service would be seen as a perk .... we are not allowed perks, afterall "tax payers" money would have to pay for it. Instead when we injure an employees back, and he pays out of his own pocket and asks for some contribution from his empolyer, and the employer can't give him the money... he instead makes a claim for his injury and the costs incured ... and when he wins the claim, where does the money come from ... you guessed it the tax payer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.