ACCforum: Australia New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

Australia New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations The new criteria includes a SKILL category

#1 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

  Posted 01 August 2008 - 08:10 PM

Of special interest is the level of skill required for each of these occupations. 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5.
For example if you were a tradesman plasterer with a skill level of 4 and your rehabilitation was in the computer service industry the reunification would need to take you out to level 4 in that new occupation otherwise he would be less than rehabilitated.

When rehabilitating ACC cannot downsize your skill level when funding rehabilitation into a new occupation.

Remember to read the information at the beginning of this document so as to understand how to read the individual occupations. This is something that even the ACC occupational assessors frequently fail to do which is one of the main reasons why they failed to choose relevant occupations. The occupation descriptions are the foundation from which a more complete description must be built up regarding each individual. Failure to accomplish this task when producing occupational reports is a failure to produce a proper report.


SCOPE OF THE CLASSIFICATION

CONCEPTUAL BASIS OF ANZSCO

ANZSCO is a skill-based classification used to classify all occupations and jobs in the
Australian and New Zealand labour markets.

To do this, ANZSCO identifies a set of occupations covering all jobs in the Australian and
New Zealand labour markets, defines these occupations according to their attributes and
groups them on the basis of their similarity into successively broader categories for
statistical and other types of analysis. The individual objects classified in ANZSCO are
jobs.

In ANZSCO, occupations are organised into progressively larger groups on the basis of
their similarities in terms of both skill level and skill specialisation.

The conceptual model adopted for ANZSCO uses a combination of skill level and skill
specialisation as criteria to design major groups which are meaningful and useful for
most purposes. The eight major groups are formed by grouping together sub-major
groups using aspects of both skill level and skill specialisation. In designing the major
groups, intuitive appeal and usefulness in both statistical and administrative applications
were also important considerations.

The skill level criterion is applied as rigorously as possible at the second level of the
classification, the sub-major group level, together with a finer application of skill
specialisation than that applied at the major group level. Each sub-major group is made
up of a number of minor groups.

Minor groups are distinguished from each other mainly on the basis of a finer application
of skill specialisation than that applied at the sub-major group level. Within minor
groups, unit groups are distinguished from each other on the basis of skill specialisation
and, where necessary, skill level.

CONC E P TU A L MODE L

The structure of ANZSCO has five hierarchical levels - major group, sub-major group,
minor group, unit group and occupation. The categories at the most detailed level of the
classification are termed 'occupations'. These are grouped together to form 'unit groups',
which in turn are grouped into 'minor groups'. Minor groups are aggregated to form
'sub-major groups' which in turn are aggregated at the highest level to form 'major
groups'.
These are the same hierarchical levels that are used in ASCO Second Edition and NZSCO
1999.

OVER VIEW OF ANZSCO STRUCTURE

The scope of ANZSCO is all occupations and jobs in the Australian and New Zealand
labour markets undertaken for pay or profit, including jobs occupied by people working
for themselves.

ANZSCO is not designed to cover work not undertaken for pay or profit, for example
voluntary work. However, this does not preclude ANZSCO from describing such
activities. Occupations that are wholly illegal in New Zealand and all States and Territories of
Australia are excluded from ANZSCO.

Virtually all unit groups are at one skill level. There are only eight unit groups which
contain occupations at more than one skill level. In all but two of these unit groups, the
vast majority of jobs classified to the unit group are at one skill level only. Data stored at
unit group level can therefore be aggregated by skill level with a high degree of validity.
Within unit groups, the distinction between occupations amounts to differences between
tasks performed in occupations. All occupations are at one skill level.

As a result, data classified at the major group level will provide only a broad indication of
skill level. Data at the sub-major group level will provide a satisfactory indication of skill
level for many analytical purposes. Data classified at the unit group level will provide an
accurate indication of skill level. Unit groups can, therefore, be aggregated by skill level
to provide an indicative measure of occupations classified by skill level.



The new ANZSCO is 9Mb which will follow in the next posting.

Attached File(s)


0

#2 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 01 August 2008 - 08:21 PM

ANZSCO 9Mb
0

#3 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 02 August 2008 - 01:51 PM

Allan you forgot that ACC has always had the legislation to upslill the injured. You forgot to tell every one that even with the legislative changes ACC and the assessor will not look at up skilling unless the up skilling is placed in writing.

There is a lot more in dealing with being Vocational Rehabilitated than having these job sheets. If it is done right ACC will only carry it out once, only have one IRP plan, but will modify the plan and then vocational independent you again.

I suggest that Allan might want to direct people to other threads that deal with the matter.
0

#4 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 02 August 2008 - 02:17 PM

Doppelganger the skill rating of each type of occupation indicates the measure of a person's worth. For example the skill level of tradesperson would have a higher skill level than most therapists. Of course the skill level will challenge a lot of people's preconceived ideas regarding the social status of the job.

It will come as no surprise to us to find that ACC case managers through to technical claims officers are at the lower end of the scale. Obviously someone at this very low end of the scale is not qualified to determine the competency required to achieve the skill levels above them. Naturally we should be looking very closely at the skill level of the occupational assessor as the legislation requires a criteria to be achieved. What is the criteria?

Hopefully that skill rating will put an end to the arrogance that exists within the industry.


Skill level is defined as a function of the range and complexity of the set of tasks performed in a particular occupation. The greater the range and complexity of the set of tasks, the greater the skill level of an occupation.

Skill level is measured operationally by:
�� the level or amount of formal education and training
�� the amount of previous experience in a related occupation, and
�� the amount of on-the-job training required to competently perform the set of tasks required for that occupation.

In general, the greater the range and complexity of the set of tasks involved, the greater
the amount of formal education and training, previous experience and on-the-job
training required to competently perform the set of tasks for that occupation.

Formal education and training refers to the level and amount of education and training
required for competent performance of the tasks required in an occupation. It is
measured in terms of educational qualifications as set out in the New Zealand Register of Quality Assured Qualifications.

Previous experience refers to the time spent gaining work experience in related
occupations or activities required for the competent performance of the tasks in an
occupation. It is measured in months or years.

On-the-job training refers to the amount of training required after commencing work in
an occupation for competent performance of the tasks in that occupation. It is measured
in months or years, and may be undertaken at the same time as formal training.
ANZSCO does not measure the skill level of an individual, rather it refers to the level of
skill that is typically required to competently perform the tasks of a particular
occupation. Skill level is an attribute of occupations, not of individuals in the labour force
or of particular jobs. It is irrelevant whether a particular individual working in a job in a
particular occupation has a certain amount of training or a particular level of competence
or not.

ANZSCO assigns occupations to one of five skill levels. In determining the skill level of
each occupation in ANZSCO, advice was sought from employers, industry training
bodies, professional organisations and others to ensure that the information is as
accurate and meaningful as possible.

Skill level 1
Occupations at Skill Level 1 have a level of skill commensurate with a bachelor degree or
higher qualification. At least five years of relevant experience may substitute for the
formal qualification. In some instances relevant experience and/or on-the-job training
may be required in addition to the formal qualification.

Skill level 2
Occupations at Skill Level 2 have a level of skill commensurate with one of the following:
�� NZ Register Diploma or AQF Associate Degree, Advanced Diploma or Diploma.
At least three years of relevant experience may substitute for the formal qualifications
listed above. In some instances relevant experience and/or on-the-job training may be
required in addition to the formal qualification.

Skill level 3
Occupations at Skill Level 3 have a level of skill commensurate with one of the following:
�� NZ Register Level 4 qualification
�� AQF Certificate IV or
�� AQF Certificate III including at least two years of on-the-job training.
At least three years of relevant experience may substitute for the formal qualifications
listed above. In some instances relevant experience and/or on-the-job training may be
required in addition to the formal qualification.

Skill level 4
Occupations at Skill Level 4 have a level of skill commensurate with one of the following:
�� NZ Register Level 2 or 3 qualification or
�� AQF Certificate II or III.
At least one year of relevant experience may substitute for the formal qualifications listed
above. In some instances relevant experience may be required in addition to the formal
qualification.

Skill level 5
Occupations at Skill Level 5 have a level of skill commensurate with one of the following:
�� NZ Register Level 1 qualification
�� AQF Certificate I or
�� compulsory secondary education.
For some occupations a short period of on-the-job training may be required in addition
to or instead of the formal qualification.
In some instances, no formal qualification or on-the-job training may be required.

Predominant Skill Levels

1 Managers 1,2
2 Professionals 1
3 Technicians and Trades Workers 2,3
4 Community and Personal Service Workers 2,3,4,5
5 Clerical and Administrative Workers 2,3,4,5
6 Sales Workers 2,3,4,5
7 Machinery Operators and Drivers 4
8 Labourers 4,5


By incorporating a skill level there is now an objective criteria which overcomes the ACC previous subjective approach to vocational rehabilitation. By utilising skill levels we cannot possibly have ACC claiming a 747 pilot is rehabilitated simply because he is able to work as a car park attendant. Obviously a 747 pilot has a higher skill level and will need to be retrained up to that skill level in an occupation does not compromise the injury.

Clear example where the ACC are wrong is when they listed me in group 1 level 1 as a CEO/managing director when my proper category is group 2 level 1. But it would not have been unreasonable to rehabilitate me to group 1 as level 1 by funding me through an MBA so I could become a CEO/managing director
0

#5 User is offline   Medwyn 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 01-November 05

Posted 02 August 2008 - 02:35 PM

 Alan Thomas, on Aug 2 2008, 02:17 PM, said:

Doppelganger the skill rating of each type of occupation indicates the measure of a person's worth. For example the skill level of tradesperson would have a higher skill level than most therapists. Of course the skill level will challenge a lot of people's preconceived ideas regarding the social status of the job.

It will come as no surprise to us to find that ACC case managers through to technical claims officers are at the lower end of the scale. Obviously someone at this very low end of the scale is not qualified to determine the competency required to achieve the skill levels above them. Naturally we should be looking very closely at the skill level of the occupational assessor as the legislation requires a criteria to be achieved. What is the criteria?

Hopefully that skill rating will put an end to the arrogance that exists within the industry.
Skill level is defined as a function of the range and complexity of the set of tasks performed in a particular occupation. The greater the range and complexity of the set of tasks, the greater the skill level of an occupation.

Skill level is measured operationally by:
�� the level or amount of formal education and training
�� the amount of previous experience in a related occupation, and
�� the amount of on-the-job training required to competently perform the set of tasks required for that occupation.

In general, the greater the range and complexity of the set of tasks involved, the greater
the amount of formal education and training, previous experience and on-the-job
training required to competently perform the set of tasks for that occupation.

Formal education and training refers to the level and amount of education and training
required for competent performance of the tasks required in an occupation. It is
measured in terms of educational qualifications as set out in the New Zealand Register of Quality Assured Qualifications.

Previous experience refers to the time spent gaining work experience in related
occupations or activities required for the competent performance of the tasks in an
occupation. It is measured in months or years.

On-the-job training refers to the amount of training required after commencing work in
an occupation for competent performance of the tasks in that occupation. It is measured
in months or years, and may be undertaken at the same time as formal training.
ANZSCO does not measure the skill level of an individual, rather it refers to the level of
skill that is typically required to competently perform the tasks of a particular
occupation. Skill level is an attribute of occupations, not of individuals in the labour force
or of particular jobs. It is irrelevant whether a particular individual working in a job in a
particular occupation has a certain amount of training or a particular level of competence
or not.

ANZSCO assigns occupations to one of five skill levels. In determining the skill level of
each occupation in ANZSCO, advice was sought from employers, industry training
bodies, professional organisations and others to ensure that the information is as
accurate and meaningful as possible.

Skill level 1
Occupations at Skill Level 1 have a level of skill commensurate with a bachelor degree or
higher qualification. At least five years of relevant experience may substitute for the
formal qualification. In some instances relevant experience and/or on-the-job training
may be required in addition to the formal qualification.

Skill level 2
Occupations at Skill Level 2 have a level of skill commensurate with one of the following:
�� NZ Register Diploma or AQF Associate Degree, Advanced Diploma or Diploma.
At least three years of relevant experience may substitute for the formal qualifications
listed above. In some instances relevant experience and/or on-the-job training may be
required in addition to the formal qualification.

Skill level 3
Occupations at Skill Level 3 have a level of skill commensurate with one of the following:
�� NZ Register Level 4 qualification
�� AQF Certificate IV or
�� AQF Certificate III including at least two years of on-the-job training.
At least three years of relevant experience may substitute for the formal qualifications
listed above. In some instances relevant experience and/or on-the-job training may be
required in addition to the formal qualification.

Skill level 4
Occupations at Skill Level 4 have a level of skill commensurate with one of the following:
�� NZ Register Level 2 or 3 qualification or
�� AQF Certificate II or III.
At least one year of relevant experience may substitute for the formal qualifications listed
above. In some instances relevant experience may be required in addition to the formal
qualification.

Skill level 5
Occupations at Skill Level 5 have a level of skill commensurate with one of the following:
�� NZ Register Level 1 qualification
�� AQF Certificate I or
�� compulsory secondary education.
For some occupations a short period of on-the-job training may be required in addition
to or instead of the formal qualification.
In some instances, no formal qualification or on-the-job training may be required.
By incorporating a skill level there is now an objective criteria which overcomes the ACC previous subjective approach to vocational rehabilitation. By utilising skill levels we cannot possibly have ACC claiming a 747 pilot is rehabilitated simply because he is able to work as a car park attendant. Obviously a 747 pilot has a higher skill level and will need to be retrained up to that skill level in an occupation does not compromise the injury.



Once again you set yourself up as the sole arbiter and fountain of knowledge. This time the ANZSCO.

What formal qualifications do you have to interpret the code and what knowledge do you have to implement it?

As Dopple has so rightly pointed out, quote"There is a lot more in dealing with being Vocational Rehabilitated than having these job sheets"

Several pearls of wisdom for you:

Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.

We must learn our limits. We are all something, but none of us are everything.

The aim of education is the knowledge not of fact, but of values.

0

#6 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 02 August 2008 - 04:39 PM

Medwyn could you kindly remove your posting as it does not address the issue of the thread. If you want to criticise me personally I would suggest you do that on the thread provided. What you are doing is called blogging which is socially unacceptable
0

#7 User is offline   Spacecadet 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 24-January 07

Posted 02 August 2008 - 05:23 PM

 Medwyn, on Aug 2 2008, 02:35 PM, said:

Once again you set yourself up as the sole arbiter and fountain of knowledge. This time the ANZSCO.

What formal qualifications do you have to interpret the code and what knowledge do you have to implement it?

As Dopple has so rightly pointed out, quote"There is a lot more in dealing with being Vocational Rehabilitated than having these job sheets"

Several pearls of wisdom for you:

Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.

We must learn our limits. We are all something, but none of us are everything.

The aim of education is the knowledge not of fact, but of values.

Sounds fine to me?
0

#8 User is offline   freefallnz 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 29-June 04

Posted 02 August 2008 - 06:26 PM

Quote

When rehabilitating ACC cannot downsize your skill level when funding rehabilitation into a new occupation.

The Draft of the new legislation stated.

"Requirement For occupational assessor to take into account pre-incapacity earnings.

Occupational assessors are not currently obliged to take into account a claimant's pre-injury earnings during any occupational assessment.

The Bill requires occupational assessors to consider a claimant's pre-incapacity earnings when identifying suitable work-types in occupational assessments.

This will help to ensure that jobs identified for claimants during assessments reflect a claimant's previous earnings, where this is possible."

Not having seen the New Act in its final form I would suggest caution when interpreting as law; anything based on older documentation.
0

#9 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 02 August 2008 - 06:34 PM

I would tend to think that if we were to be mindful of the fact that legislation requires occupational assessors to be independent that they then can't be dependent upon ACC criteria when assessing work task competency and portability from one occupation to another. Notwithstanding that if there is any shortfall in earnings from a new occupation ACC are required to make up the difference by way of abatement of earnings as person has not rehabilitated until they achieve earnings parity.

Anything that requires an occupational assessor to consider something without providing the occupational assessor with criteria is really just an exclusion clause disadvantage in the claimant rather than providing an advantage.

It is very unlikely that new legislation will act to prejudice an injured person's rights as this would be in violation of various human rights by diminishing injured people to a lower status of citizenship subsequent to cancelling our right to sue. It takes away accountability from not only the person who caused the injury but the wider community which is against the principles of the ACC act in the first instance. The Acts Act prevents the possibility of the ACC act creating within itself contradictory legislation. With this in mind I think we can safely rely on the original fairness of the ACC act and argue that point of law whenever it is appropriate so as we are not seduced into any kind of misunderstandings promoted by propaganda.

The new skill category does a long way towards assisting an assessor to comprehend be worth of an individual in relation to the value of the skills in considering relevant to another occupation.
0

#10 User is offline   Medwyn 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 01-November 05

Posted 02 August 2008 - 06:34 PM

 Alan Thomas, on Aug 2 2008, 04:39 PM, said:

Medwyn could you kindly remove your posting as it does not address the issue of the thread. If you want to criticise me personally I would suggest you do that on the thread provided. What you are doing is called blogging which is socially unacceptable



Short answer NO I wont remove what I consider to be true quote " you set yourself up as the sole arbiter and fountain of knowledge. This time the ANZSCO"

As for the quotes. I stand by them as you have shown the world that a little knowledge used unwisely can corrupt a good Forum.

As for getting you, I'm not against you, just your reasoning and so called expertise from all manner of subjects when in reality you are just a conduit for information and fllod the net with it.

Cant you bloddy see, it's not you, but what you say, post, ridicule, disparage etc that pisses people off.

If you create enough threads maybe you could weave a noose as that's what you are putting around your neck with all your pontifications to the courts.





.
0

#11 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 02 August 2008 - 06:55 PM

Medwyn could you kindly remove your posting as it does not address the issue of the thread.

If you want to criticise me personally I would suggest you do that on the thread provided.

What you are doing is called blogging which is socially unacceptable
0

#12 User is offline   Medwyn 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 01-November 05

Posted 02 August 2008 - 07:15 PM

 Alan Thomas, on Aug 2 2008, 06:55 PM, said:

Medwyn could you kindly remove your posting as it does not address the issue of the thread.

If you want to criticise me personally I would suggest you do that on the thread provided.

What you are doing is called blogging which is socially unacceptable

On one thing I agree , you are the expert on blogging and are socially unacceptable.
0

#13 User is offline   Spacecadet 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 24-January 07

Posted 02 August 2008 - 09:26 PM

 Medwyn, on Aug 2 2008, 07:15 PM, said:

On one thing I agree , you are the expert on blogging and are socially unacceptable.

Agreed. However Thomas's social unacceptability is due to his personality disorder.
0

#14 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 03 August 2008 - 12:05 PM

IT is more important what you do with the information that having the spread sheets

Legislation requires that you have experence in the jobs that they choose or that a new occupation is choosen that Vocational Rehabilitation will be given and gained.

getting ACC staff to apply legislation is the object of the exercise and providing information on how that may be obtained is more important. May be Allan will now post the links to the other threads that already show the way.
0

#15 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 03 August 2008 - 05:29 PM

Doppelganger ACC legislation prevents ACC staff from exercising their own discretion on what information is relevant to any particular occupation. Legislation requires ACC to commission an independent occupational assessor. The assessor cannot generate information that is different from the information generated by the stats department which has found its way into the ANZSCO with such information as key experience requirements are listed.

In regards to the expansion of the education, experience and skill information requirements for occupational assessments or transporting individual work task competencies from one occupation type to another there are now some very powerful software tools containing vast quantities of data.

The software programs are similar to what I was involved with from 1990-1997 of which the ACC claimed was the basis for my working even though this business plan was in my IRP. My research in this area which includes personal involvement with New Zealand Department of Statistics in the production of this information, various political figures, immigration social welfare and ACC themselves is extensive.

My personal observations of the ACC occupational assessors, by sitting in on assessment meetings, leads me to believe that they are virtually incompetent and in reality directed by the ACC to the extent that occupations chosen as something of a lucky dip.

Doppelganger as things stand now the ANZSCO information is the foundation legal document. From there any occupation has ceased needs to be extrapolated from that document. This is achieved in exactly the same way as statistics department staff gave the information. The statistic staff have summarised the information we're ACC claimants and occupational assessors should be reporting on the entire foundation information and not the summaries of it. This means each occupational identified by the assessor needs to be researched back through the same sources of information statistics department staff relied upon, employers, employees, trade unions etc.
0

#16 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 11 June 2017 - 11:51 AM

In keeping with the spirit of the site to further the knowledge base of all New Zealand is concerning ACC entitlements would consider the most valuable information to be the proper interpretation of vocational rehabilitation into a new occupation. Of course vocational rehabilitation isn't simply utilising the residual qualification and skill and experience of a claimant into a new job simply by relabelling as this is not rehabilitation but rather some kind of "sideways" promotion with a different job title and probably less pay.

Vocational rehabilitation involves assisting a claimant achieve employment in occupation has a similar skill level and of course earn capacity. The same skill level might require additional education in situations whereby the existing qualification only permits skilled work in an occupation of which the claimant physically is no longer capable. More often than not this will involve a more sedentary type work activity. For example a plasterer might need to become a computer programmer as the skill level is similar. I do not see much focus on the true nature of what is a skill level. To understand that we need to look at the criteria the legislation has laid down by using the Australia New Zealand standard classification of occupation was describes the nature of skill.

It seems to me that if the ACC has not provided the correct information so as the average New Zealander facing these situations has a clear expectation that there is something wrong and we need to do it ourselves.
0

#17 User is offline   anonymousey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2420
  • Joined: 04-April 06

Posted 11 June 2017 - 12:38 PM

 Alan Thomas, on 11 June 2017 - 11:51 AM, said:

... For example a plasterer might need to become a computer programmer as the skill level is similar....


Could you please clarify this example further with more detail Alan?
0

#18 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 11 June 2017 - 01:20 PM

 anonymousey, on 11 June 2017 - 12:38 PM, said:

Could you please clarify this example further with more detail Alan?


Although my understanding has withstood the rigours of judicial enforcement requiring the ACC is obedience I don't think that is going to be enough for you.
As you historically argue with everything I say about the source material I would strongly urge you to go to that source material. This will remove the possibility of any contention and disharmony.You would need to examine the proper interpretation of "skill" which is a word that the ACC have been historically ignoring. The criteria is skill equivalency. For example if you could no longer work as a computer programmer ACC could have you reskill as a plasterer. This would mean of course that you would remain on ACC entitlements for the duration of the apprenticeship wwhich I believe takes a longer time than qualifying as a programmer yet the skill level is rated as the same. Of course there are people that suffer from self perception and therefore stigmatise various professions and occupations.
0

#19 User is offline   anonymousey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2420
  • Joined: 04-April 06

Posted 11 June 2017 - 01:31 PM

 Alan Thomas, on 11 June 2017 - 01:20 PM, said:

As you historically argue with everything I say about the source material I would strongly urge you to go to that source material. This will remove the possibility of any contention and disharmony.


I am not sure of the link, website, or document that you are specifically using to the source material which describes the skill levels for a plasterer OR a skill level for a computer programmer Alan ..

If you could provide the link so I can check the New Zealand Qualifications Framework correlations as a primary logic step then correlating the transferable skills which you appear to dismiss as *sideways promotions* might demonstrate the similarities & differences between your perspective & criticisms ... and those of ACC and of course other international authorities as connected

I am pleased that you have been able to offer an example Alan as I hope that using such an illustration to communicate your point of view will bring additional areas visible for meaningful discussions ...

ps please remember that it is vital for any and all healthy communication and professional debate to consider diametrically opposed platforms Alan

If you google debating exercises within schools and communities perhaps we will be able to progress beyond your defensiveness AND discuss the highlighted issue etc etc
0

#20 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 11 June 2017 - 01:45 PM

This thread is about the legislated requirement criteria to measure capacity to earn in a new occupation. That information is to be found in the Australia New Zealand standard classification of occupations of which there is a URL at the beginning of this thread.. The ACC legislation required the ACC to address this issue but on the meantime to use what was the New Zealand standard classification of occupations and then transferred to the Australia New Zealand standard classification of occupations. The standardised classification of occupations carries the same international number set and as such are recognised as being international in every respect. With regards to qualification that is only one small portion of a capacity to earn and as such is given its correct portion to determine the relevance of qualification.

I have no interest in describing an example that I cited but would be more than happy to assist researching individual claimants particular needs for purposes of addressing any dispute with the ACC concerning this subject. With regards to matters of opinion, the Reliance upon the classifications themselves are not open to debate as they are effectively creatures of legislation. These classifications have been produced by those who are properly qualified and experienced to address the foundation material. However further refinements with regards to description would need to come from the individuals within the industries who have relevant qualifications and experience to have a right of an opinion.

ACC occupational assessors are required to be both qualified and experienced to determine the viability and capacity of a person to generate preinjury earnings at the same skill level after a period of vocational rehabilitation. That vocational rehabilitation must generate the appropriate qualification and provide the relevant experience in order to generate the actual skill level which needs to be measured by the assessor.. I'm yet to see any occupational assess of the ACC possessing the collection of elements to produce a legitimate occupational assessment.

What we need to be doing this thread is to determine with precision the criteria by which the occupational assess employed by the ACC to produce a report needs to have. We would then be able to provide that assessor with the criteria they must make the report by and of course if they do not then directly address the assessor rather than get embroiled in any kind of judicial remedy under the ACC legislation. In other words if an ACC occupational assess produces a false document for pecuniary advantage to the ACC without knowing it to be true they make themselves subject to a criminal prosecution in the form of insurance fraud.
0

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