Why work injury payouts differ

The following article was published in the Straits Times on 17 Sep 2010.

Why work injury payouts differ
Straits Times, Sep 17, 2010

Photo caption: The Government regularly reviews the compensation caps under Wica. -- ST PHOTO: SAMUEL HE

WORKERS injured due to a lapse by their employer may have to go to the courts if they expect full compensation from their bosses.

That is because the expedited, out-of- court compensation process under the Work Injury Compensation Act (Wica) does not consider whether or not the employer was at fault.

And so, to be fair to employers, their liability is capped, said Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Manpower Hawazi Daipi in Parliament yesterday.

He said the Government will regularly review the compensation caps 'to keep in step with changes in wages and medical expenses'.

After the last review in 2008, the amounts were increased by between 22 per cent and 26 per cent.

He was responding to a question by MP Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) on a Bangladeshi construction worker who was paralysed from the waist down after an accident in 2008. The worker rejected the $182,000 compensation recommended under Wica and went to court for more.

In June this year, the court ordered his employer to pay him $910,000.

Mr Hawazi said this sizeable disparity came about because the two systems - Wica and the common law - were 'based on different principles'.

While the courts award compensation under the common law by apportioning blame, Wica is meant to expedite the process, and orders a payout 'as long as the claimant can show his injury arose out of and in the course of employment'.

Mr Hawazi said 75 per cent of claims under Wica were settled within six months of the accident.