ACCforum: Video - The Right To Sue - ACCforum

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Video - The Right To Sue Assignment - June 1996

#1 Guest_wxyz_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 06 July 2004 - 11:56 PM

The Right To Sue

Assignment June 1996

They said all this eight years ago, What is said is very much relevant today.

Very Informative video, recommended viewing for all.

Remember the horrendous DOC failure of Cave Creek?, one surviivor reports ACC contribution is $40 a week.
another, medical error - their only assistance was a funeral grant.

You should watch this video, wouldnt it be nice if tv1 were to repeat this and other good historical media reports.
Featuring:

ACC Architect Sir Owen Woodhouse
Lawyer Grant Cameron " The current ACC Scheme is a very mean scheme"
John Miller " The amounts are low meagre and mean"
Hazel Armstrong
umm err ahh Acc Minister Doug err Kidd
Bill Birch
Ross Wilson, Coalition on ACC
Max Bradford

Quote

Sir Owen Woodhouse:  " worries that those not in the workforce are getting a raw deal" " Sixty dollars a week is derisary"
other quotes:

"We gave up the right to Sue, at least thats the theory"

" and tonite we hear a damning indictment of the ACC from its Architect Sir Owen Woodhouse"

" And its not just the victims that are complaining, theyve been joined now by a chorus of lawyers, employers, unionists and insurers who all say ACC is ruined"


Low level Independance Allowance payment rates
" Mean Miserable Scheme"


Now think about the Vietnam Veterans, timberworkers, asbestos sufferes - acc are giving them practially nothing in 2005. another investigative report like this would be good to compare the scheme since 1996.

Engineers Union " Get Mad Get Even, Return the Right to Sue."
Posted Image

video length 27 minutes. 5.92Mb .WMV windows video file.

The Right To Sue Video - click here to download

Attached File(s)


0

#2 Guest_IDB_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 08 July 2004 - 11:58 PM

This video is worth watchin...
0

#3 User is offline   flowers 

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

Posted 09 July 2004 - 10:27 AM

Hmm.
The link does not appear to work and the link on the donated videos leds back to this page?????

*link is now fixed* :)
0

#4 User is offline   fightback 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 03-November 04

Posted 03 November 2004 - 07:08 PM

hi does someone have an original tv recording of this video that can be borrowed?
0

#5 User is offline   fairgo 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 290
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 04 November 2004 - 09:41 AM

Sad sad sad...... all being said 8 years ago.... what do we have to do in this country to get people to listen?? I have just received a copy of all the submissions made on the IPRC ammendment bill. The Engineers Union echo many of our concerns also... fingers crossed for an inquiry....
0

#6 User is offline   MadMac 

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

Posted 11 December 2006 - 07:16 PM

:wub: Hi everyone ...

:D Interesting ...

;)
0

#7 User is offline   freefallnz 

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

Posted 12 December 2006 - 08:23 AM

Interesting... Isnt it

I'll also be keeping a watch on the following case.. Which could set a precedent..

"Five high school students seriously injured when an out-of-control schoolbus ploughed into them at Auckland's Rangitoto College will seek six-figure..." - Herald 06 December 2006
0

#8

  • Group: Guests

Posted 21 February 2008 - 03:37 PM

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story....jectid=10493629
Key fights off wage report claims as attacks continue




Key’s denial on wages lacks credibility
Thursday, 21 February 2008, 11:20 am
http://www.scoop.co....0802/S00334.htm
Press Release: New Zealand Government


"

Quote

http://groups.msn.com/XtraNewsCommunity2/g...661464288051015
It is hard to believe Key would be dumb enough to advocate a drop in wages in New Zealand, though his explanation that he was talking about wages in Australia is a bit bizarre.

But this does have sinister aspects when you consider the performance of the last National government. Thanks to the Employment Contracts Act, the Nats managed to stretch the wage gap between Australia and New Zealand from under 20% to nearly 30% by the end of the 1990s. For five of the nine years they were in power the real value of wages in New Zealand acually dropped....

The Nats have been very quiet this time about their industrial relations policies. Working people considering voting National should ponder whether the the Business Round Table and the Employers Federation are beavering away somewhere writing ECA Mk II.

lest we forget what National did to the average worker with the Employment contracts act vote wisely this year
0

#9 User is offline   Gloria Mitchell 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 98
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 22 February 2008 - 02:11 AM

View Posteyespy, on Feb 21 2008, 04:37 PM, said:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story....jectid=10493629
Key fights off wage report claims as attacks continue
Key’s denial on wages lacks credibility
Thursday, 21 February 2008, 11:20 am
http://www.scoop.co....0802/S00334.htm
Press Release: New Zealand Government
"
lest we forget what National did to the average worker with the Employment contracts act vote wisely this year



The new Labour govt in Australia has just thrown out "work choices" the Employment contracts they brought in over here.....wages here are shitloads higher than NZ.....checkout chicks from highschool get more money hourly than many well seasoned workers in NZ.....e.g resthome workers...and thats a very hard job.

They're also not likely to lower wages when there are more jobs than workers.

Gloria
0

#10 User is offline   freshrain 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 20-October 07

Posted 22 February 2008 - 06:51 AM

I believe that if National wins in Nov the poorest, weakest, and most disadvantaged will be kicked even harder in NZ.

Not that I'll be voting Labour (I haven't for ages). I just dont think we should be naive about the possible alternatives

IMHO
0

#11 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 22 February 2008 - 08:43 AM

I agree with you Freshrain.

We still have the right to not vote. The disafected get counted as well and that gives the buggers a kick up the punjab.

Have lived and worked in Australia for a while. Yes the wages are better, but then it costs heaps to go to the beach for a sunday drive, if you dont live near it. petrol might be cheaper, but running your car around those distances in Aussie is not cheap. Not to mention registration etc.

I had to travel two hours a day to go to work and study. Then supposed to have a life as well. No time left, let alone energy.

Not that I wouldnt go back if I had a house with air conditioning.

Cheers
Mini
0

#12 User is offline   freshrain 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 20-October 07

  Posted 22 February 2008 - 10:27 AM

View PostMINI, on Feb 22 2008, 08:43 AM, said:

I agree with you Freshrain.

We still have the right to not vote. The disafected get counted as well and that gives the buggers a kick up the punjab.

Have lived and worked in Australia for a while. Yes the wages are better, but then it costs heaps to go to the beach for a sunday drive, if you dont live near it. petrol might be cheaper, but running your car around those distances in Aussie is not cheap. Not to mention registration etc.

I had to travel two hours a day to go to work and study. Then supposed to have a life as well. No time left, let alone energy.

Not that I wouldnt go back if I had a house with air conditioning.

Cheers
Mini





Sounds a bit like Auckland, but not so expensive to live :) ...........
0

#13 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 22 February 2008 - 12:15 PM

I had my disability while there and while it was a neat place to live. On the outskirts of Brissie, half way down to the coast. I prefer here for being able to get around easily and the medical is not bad here either. I am as good as they can get me, so I have to learn to live with my inability to do some things.

At least the w/c and i/a are sorted now. Just a couple to go and I will be finished. After seven years what a relief that will be.
0

#14 User is offline   Not Waddie 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 24-December 07

Posted 22 February 2008 - 12:46 PM

Mini, or look at it another way, you have almost completed work experience as an advocate.
0

#15 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

  Posted 22 February 2008 - 06:41 PM

Not Waddie

You offering me a job?????
0

#16 User is offline   Not Waddie 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 24-December 07

Posted 23 February 2008 - 09:36 AM

Mini, not yet, but if you wish to come over to the dark side you can let your local CAB(s) know you are available as an advocate. ACC will contribute to the cost of representation in mediation and reviews and I am guessing that will mean at no end cost to your clients. Then your people can talk to my people.
0

#17 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

  Posted 23 February 2008 - 11:01 AM

Hi Waddie

ACC support group have this covered up here. I was committee member for a few years, so know how it works. But not my thing really. When it comes to the tuffies everyone scatters and I like something with a bit of grit.

However if I was to win one coming up shortly it could mean a lot of letter drops to your clients and a lot of others and you would be so busy making them money you wouldnt have time to come and talk about Hector.

People who have assisted me in the past, yourself included will be in on this, be assured of that. Your kindness to all on site will be rewarded.

Moving away from that big case, I had a bit of a glick yesterday, in that the dirty rotten buggers down dunedin IA Unit, only backdated til May 2007. Why that date I have no idea. This means another decision, therefore another review and probably appeal. I already have an appeal in for this one. In that they using incorrect incomplete documentation to make decision etc and timeliness. So most of the issues are covered in the revoked decision review, appeal. But this still have outstanding errors nothing has been done about etc.

This new Review should only have the one issue being the backdating issue.

I could probably put a hold on the Appeal at Justice and wait for the backdating one to catch up, then join them together. The Judge has allowed me to do this previously.

I just cant seem to figure out which is the best way to attack it. Drop the first appeal against the first (revoked) decision and start new Review with all issues covered. (Likely the Judge would ask why I didnt complain about the delay at the time, which has happened before, but I had/have complained). OR

Keep the appeal going and tag the other one on if need be, letting Justice know that I need more time.

They get so messy and I am so sick and tired of doing this stuff by myself. There is not much fun not having the 'devils advocate' to argue with, before making a decision.

Any ideas thankfully received.

Cheers
Mini
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • 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