ACCforum: Tail Entry And Exits - Monthly Branch Rank - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Tail Entry And Exits - Monthly Branch Rank

#21 User is offline   flowers 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 25-March 04

Posted 10 January 2008 - 01:09 PM

Wonder what the figures for 2006 were and 2007 will be a doozy they exited me again and this time they have had a doctot who did a report sixyears ago reverse critical comments and now 16 years afrter the accident ACC say my disabiliteis that I have had since the accident were pre existing on the basis of years of tainted reports in the face of people who kmew me before the accident and after.
Now back on taxpayer expense and ACC have effectively transferred ongoing charges for home help,and podiatry which I had re-awarded in the courts, and other necessary services they have avoided supplying, along with a total lack of rehabilitation other than on paper, to the tax payer, and effectively written off another longterm liability from the fund I was and still am compulsorily paying for.
Sux eh.
Perhaps a citizen tax and levy payer should sue acc for fraudulently exiting people for pecuniary gain as happened to unum? in the states
sux and gight on christmas as well.
Malicious, money hungry, buggers!
0

#22 User is offline   flowers 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 25-March 04

Posted 10 March 2008 - 07:11 PM

Quote

My real concern about the "Albert" case is that it demonstrates our system of government is incapable of fixing its own mistakes.


not so much incapable, as unwilling to, methinks.
And that beggars the question; WHY?
0

#23 User is offline   jocko 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 05 January 2010 - 01:48 PM

exitexitexit. After a period of comprehensive retraining. yeah right
0

#24 User is offline   Moeroa 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 940
  • Joined: 20-November 09
  • LocationWellington Central City

Posted 24 February 2010 - 12:46 PM

View Postjocko, on Jan 5 2010, 03:48 PM, said:

exitexitexit. After a period of comprehensive retraining. yeah right


What's changed?
2

#25 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 30 March 2012 - 03:52 PM

Time for ACC to take stock: [A Edition]
Sunday Star - Times [Wellington, New Zealand] 10 Nov 2002: A; 10.

OUR stories over the past weeks on problems that ail the Accident Compensation Corporation have struck a chord with the public. There was an overwhelming response to our original investigation and we have now received more than 200 letters and emails from disgruntled clients, or "stock" as they were referred to in one ACC paper, a tell-tale term if ever there was one.

The ACC points out that in any organisation which deals with more than a million and a half claims a year there are bound to be those who are disgruntled. There will always be people trying to rip off the system and we accept that. Similarly, ACC must accept that not all its clients are malingerers and face up to the fact that it has a problem in its dealings with them.

We found a thread running through the complaints we received which strongly suggests a problem within the culture pervading ACC. People have felt bewildered, disgruntled and ultimately hard done by in their dealings with ACC and its subsidiary, Catalyst. They have an impression that there is a relentlessness involved in the process that will, sooner rather than later, discard them without their pains and problems being solved.

There have even been legal threats from the corporation involving our naming of management people in its structure - people with whom the public eventually have to deal. We are not talking here of those who work on the ground floor with claimants off the street, but managers, those who make the decisions that affect people's lives.

In our latest revelation, we report that ACC case managers get bonuses for "exiting" patients from the scheme, under a "tail management" plan where those who manage claims which are more than a year old get performance incentives based on an "exit rate". In other words, there is an incentive to shuck off people from the system before their injuries are cured. While ACC says it reflects more importance being placed on rehabilitation rather than compensation, it smacks of a "clearing the decks" philosophy. A bonus for parking wardens to write out a certain number of tickets is positively benign in comparison.

An indication of the corporation's attitude manifested itself when ACC initially denied any responsibility over the document detailing such incentives, which was prepared in November, 1998, for then ACC minister Murray McCully. But it finally had to own up to responsibility when we presented a letter signed by McCully confirming the corporation had produced the paper.

This highlights an obstructive reaction that is totally unacceptable in most government organisations, but especially in one such as ACC. Its communication and dealings with the public should be transparent. We will endeavour to see that they become so.

Copyright Independent Newspapers, Ltd. Nov 10, 2002
0

#26 User is offline   MadMac 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 179
  • Joined: 26-December 04

Posted 11 August 2012 - 03:28 PM

:wub: Hi everyone ...



Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ...




;)
0

#27 User is offline   Campy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1386
  • Joined: 15-May 10
  • LocationAuckland Regional super city

Posted 11 August 2012 - 06:03 PM

http://fmacskasy.wor...mplete-cock-up/

View PostCampy, on 11 August 2012 - 06:02 PM, said:

ACC – A Complete Cock-up
22 June 2012 .Posted Image

.

Revelations unearthed and made public by the Green Party, that ACC paid bonuses to their staff to ‘bump’ long-term clients from their books comes as no surprise. Only the most naive would still believe that everything was hunky-dory at ACC.

See: ACC bonus pay for claimant cull

Faced with the revelations, ACC Minister, Judith “Hugs’n'Crushes” Collins belatedly admitted that ACC staff are paid bonuses, and tried to justify the payments as “a good thing” because ‘it gets the clients back to work’.

Yeah, right.

Nice spin, Minister.

Then ACC’s departing chief executive Ralph Stewart chipped in, rejecting accusations that bonuses were made to bump clients of ACC’s books,

No one can leave ACC until they are rehabilitated. There are two clear steps. The rehabilitation step’s first, leaving the scheme second – it’s not the other way around.”

See: ACC claimants removal motive denied

Let me put this as delicately as I can: bullshit.

This blogger is aware of at least one person in the late 1990s, who was bumped from ACC’s books and onto a WINZ invalids benefit, after a work-related back-injury. ACC actually paid for the client to be flown from Dunedin to Auckland, to be “assessed” by one of ACC’s “independent” consultants.

Result; she was taken off ACC’s books and made a WINZ “client”.

If anyone wonders why the numbers of invalids and sickness beneficiaries have risen in past decade – whilst ACC’s long-term clients have reduced – wonder no more. This is where invalids/sickness beneficiaries have come from.

This is backed up by a 2007 report on ACC clients removed from ACC’s books, showing 46% were out of work, with nearly 25% on the unemployment benefit.

See: Long-term ACC client list pruned

.

WINZ Beneficiaries

.

http://fmacskasy.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/benefit-numbers-at-7-3-percent-unemployment.jpg?w=600

Actual MSD figures

.

ACC long-term clients

.

http://fmacskasy.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/figure-17-acc-long-term-claims-and-costs-2005-2011.gif?w=600

Source

.

The woman in question received no rehabilitation and her back injury persists to this day. “No one can leave ACC until they are rehabilitated” – therefore rings hollow in this blogger’s mind.

It is a bit rich for Ralph Stewart to be rejecting that bonuses were made to reduce long-term ACC clients – whilst at the same time admitting,

Mr Stewart said long-term claimants have dropped by about 1200 since November, to about 10,400-10,500, but denied he was put in the job to move on claimants.

He said only 20 percent of staff incentives relate to rehabilitation.”

This is the same man who,

  • oversaw ACC’s accusations of extortion levelled against Ms Pullar and laid a complaint with the Police;
  • during the police investigation had listened to Bronwyn Pullar’s taped conversation of a meeting held between ACC staff; Michelle Boag; and herself;
  • and yet stayed silent at a subsequent media conference that the taped conversation actually proved Pullars innocence!
.

http://fmacskasy.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/john-judge-ralph-stewart-acc-press-conference-nz.png?w=600&h=329ACC Chief Executive Ralph Stewart and Chairperson John Judge

.

Aside from the very real possibility that ACC’s executives may be guilty of the crime of wasting Police time (see: The Jackal: ACC’s false police complaint against Bronwyn Pullar), why on Earth should we believe anything that escapes Ralph Stewart’s mouth?

Ralph Stewart is not averse to mis-representing facts when his suits his agenda. He has already demonstrated that his word cannot be taken at face-value.

The evidence is compelling: ACC is mis-using Corporation funds to pay it’s staff bonuses to push long-term clients off its books.

Next question: what is Judith Collins going to do about it?

.


*
.

Additional

ACC minister put pressure on bosses to make complaint – Labour

TV3 Sixty Minutes: The Eye of the Storm

Gordon Campbell on the incentive payments at ACC

.




2

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users