The partnership approach to injury management > A shared approach yields better outcomes

Disability prevention is an organisation-wide responsibility.

Employees and supervisors are the two key groups involved with return to work but they do not exist in a vacuum. RTW coordinators, unions, area or department managers, human resources, co-workers and senior staff can and should provide support and input as appropriate. When employees and management work together, outcomes are improved.

•	Employees in need of assistance receive more effective support. A team approach finds better solutions for complex problems.

•	There is a more streamlined process for dealing with the occasional person who does not comply with the spirit of return to work.

•	Policy documents developed collaboratively – taking advantage of employee and union knowledge – are more likely to be relevant and responsive to the site’s needs.

•	Policies and procedures developed collaboratively are more likely to be followed by workers.

•	The RTW coordinator is freed up to focus on strategic improvements to the injury management system.

A shared approach only works in an environment of mutual trust. Whether trust develops or not depends upon what occurs – ie what is done by each of the key players. The alternative to a shared approach is an approach based on mistrust and suspicion.

These two approaches are contrasted:

Organisation A A shared approach is lacking	Organisation B A shared approach occurs
New claims are met with frustration or suspicion.	There is little claim disputation. Claims are accepted unless there is there is an unusual situation or significant reason to dispute the claim.
Employees perceive the organisation is out to protect corporate profits or managements' position.	Employees consider they will be listened to if problems are reported. Workplace modifications will be dealt with appropriately.
Employees consider the organisation is out to protect itself, and they need to do the same	Supervisors and employees work together.
Employees have a low threshold for lodging claims, sensing a need to protect themselves.	Supervisors have learnt their support and input pays off, as return to work progresses rapidly and smoothly when the employee is involved and works with the supervisor.
Supervisors and management consider employees lodge claims easily, and a significant proportion are challenged.	Claim rates are lower.
Supervisors and management consider the most effective way to keep a lid on costs is to challenge dubious cases.	There are few difficulties in dealing with doctors.
Return to work duties are provided, but return to work programs often progress slowly.	The organisation ensures employees get high quality medical care and delays are avoided.
Return to work duties are provided, but return to work programs often progress slowly.	Employees believe the organisation will look after them if they have an injury.
Doctors are difficult to deal with, tending to follow the employee's lead.	Employees with non-compensable health conditions are cared for in a similar way within workplace rehabilitation endeavours.
Claims management results in higher rates of claim disputes and legal involvement.	Employee wellbeing is the main focus.
Employees with non-compensable health conditions are not provided with rehabilitation assistance.
Management is frustrated, claims staff are frustrated, and employees feel they are badly treated. Blame and mistrust underlie the high rate of long term cases.
Cost minimisation is the main focus, yet remains elusive.