Organisation name (if applicable)
Upload your submission
Marsh Pty Ltd
ABN 86 004 651 512
One International Towers Sydney
100 Barangaroo Avenue
Sydney, NSW Australia 2000
PO Box H176
Australia Square, Sydney, NSW 1215
www.marsh.com.au
By email: srcactreview@dewr.gov.au
31 January 2025
Marsh Submission: Review of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988.
Marsh is grateful for the opportunity to provide its submission to the independent review of the Safety,
Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (SRC Act).
With offices in more than 130 countries and 45,000 colleagues worldwide, Marsh is the world’s leading insurance broker and risk advisor. We provide industry-focused brokerage, consulting, and claims advocacy services, leveraging data, technology, and analytics to empower our clients, and the community, to thrive.
Marsh welcomes reform to improve Australia’s fragmented workers’ compensation system and is supportive of the implementation of a national scheme where national private-sector employers are granted greater access to the Comcare scheme.
Marsh provides the following high-level feedback, with respect to the scheme’s coverage, for the Panel’s consideration:
Accessibility of the Scheme
Recommendation 1: Amend current legislation to allow national private sector employers to enter the Comcare scheme, both as premium payers and self-insured entities
Access to the Comcare scheme is currently limited to national private sector employers that are in competition with current or former Government corporations (Competition Test). This access to
Comcare has been as a self-insurer, however the ability to gain entry has been inconsistent with successive Governments opening or closing the ability for these employers to gain access to the scheme, limiting the ability for these employers to compete on a “level playing field’.
It is recommended that access to Comcare for national private sector employers consistently remains open for those employers that wish to self-insure; and that access for national private sector employers is expanded by removing the current competition test and allow for these employers to access the scheme as premium payers. The benefits of this are as follows:
Marsh Pty Ltd (ABN 86 004 651 512, AFSL 238 983).
This document and any recommendations, analysis, or advice provided by Marsh (collectively, the “Marsh Analysis”) are not intended to be taken as advice regarding any individual situation and should not be relied upon as such. The information contained herein is based on sources we believe reliable, but we make no representation or warranty as to its accuracy. Marsh shall have no obligation to update the Marsh Analysis and shall have no liability to you or any other party arising out of this publication or any matter contained herein. Any statements concerning actuarial, tax, accounting, or legal matters are based solely on our experience as insurance brokers and risk consultants and are not to be relied upon as actuarial, tax, accounting, or legal advice, for which you should consult your own professional advisors. Any modelling, analytics, or projections are subject to inherent uncertainty, and the Marsh Analysis could be materially affected if any underlying assumptions, conditions, information, or factors are inaccurate or incomplete or should change. Marsh makes no representation or warranty concerning the application of policy wording or the financial condition or solvency of insurers or reinsurers. Marsh makes no assurances regarding the availability, cost, or terms of insurance coverage. Although Marsh may provide advice and recommendations, all decisions regarding the amount, type or terms of coverage are the ultimate responsibility of the insurance purchaser, who must decide on the specific coverage that is appropriate to its particular circumstances and financial position.
A business of Marsh McLennan
Standardised Benefit Structures
Currently, discrepancies exist between state-based workers' compensation schemes, including weekly compensation entitlements, duration of entitlements, and whole person impairment entitlements. These variations can lead to significant inequities for employees. For instance, workers performing identical roles for the same employer may receive different compensation benefits based solely on their jurisdiction.
From an employer's perspective, the administrative burden of navigating multiple acts and regulations complicates the management of injured workers. Employers must ensure compliance with various legislative frameworks, which can lead to inefficiencies and increased operational costs. A standardised benefits structure would streamline these processes, providing clarity and consistency across jurisdictions, ultimately enhancing the experience for injured workers by ensuring equitable treatment regardless of location.
Reduced Administrative Burden
Employers face significant challenges when managing claims across different state-based schemes. The need to understand and implement various legislative requirements complicates the claims management process, leading to inconsistencies in the injured worker experience. This complexity can result in delays in processing claims and providing necessary support to injured workers.
Integrating private sector employers into the Comcare scheme would allow for a more uniform approach to coverage and entitlements, reducing the administrative burden on employers who operate in multiple states. By standardising processes and entitlements, Comcare could simplify compliance and enhance the overall efficiency of claims management.
Enhanced Competition
Allowing private sector employers to participate in the Comcare scheme could significantly alter the competitive landscape. Workers' compensation is a substantial expense for businesses, and those that self-insure under Comcare may benefit from lower total insurance costs compared to those operating under state-based arrangements. This potential for cost savings, coupled with operational efficiencies offered by Comcare, could incentivise employers to prioritise workplace safety and rehabilitation initiatives.
Increased competition may lead to improved outcomes in workplace safety and rehabilitation, as employers strive to reduce costs associated with claims and enhance their reputations as safe workplaces.
Marsh Pty Ltd (ABN 86 004 651 512, AFSL 238 983).
This document and any recommendations, analysis, or advice provided by Marsh (collectively, the “Marsh Analysis”) are not intended to be taken as advice regarding any individual situation and should not be relied upon as such. The information contained herein is based on sources we believe reliable, but we make no representation or warranty as to its accuracy. Marsh shall have no obligation to update the Marsh Analysis and shall have no liability to you or any other party arising out of this publication or any matter contained herein. Any statements concerning actuarial, tax, accounting, or legal matters are based solely on our experience as insurance brokers and risk consultants and are not to be relied upon as actuarial, tax, accounting, or legal advice, for which you should consult your own professional advisors. Any modelling, analytics, or projections are subject to inherent uncertainty, and the Marsh Analysis could be materially affected if any underlying assumptions, conditions, information, or factors are inaccurate or incomplete or should change. Marsh makes no representation or warranty concerning the application of policy wording or the financial condition or solvency of insurers or reinsurers. Marsh makes no assurances regarding the availability, cost, or terms of insurance coverage. Although Marsh may provide advice and recommendations, all decisions regarding the amount, type or terms of coverage are the ultimate responsibility of the insurance purchaser, who must decide on the specific coverage that is appropriate to its particular circumstances and financial position.
A business of Marsh McLennan
Change in Licensing Framework for Self-Insurance
Recommendation 2: Modify the self-insurance licensing framework to allow for employer groups to be covered under the Comcare scheme, rather than limiting self-insurance licences to single employing entities.
Implementing a group licensing framework could simplify administrative processes for employers. By reducing the complexity of navigating multiple acts and regulations, employers would be better positioned to manage their injured workers effectively.
While group licensing structures exist in various states, the disconnect with the Comcare scheme highlights an opportunity for improvement.
Marsh is grateful for the opportunity to provide feedback to this significant review and would welcome the opportunity to provide further feedback should it assist the Panel. Should you have any queries in relation to this submission, please do not hesitate to contact James Camilleri, Director of Government
Relations, at james.camilleri@mmc.com
Yours sincerely
Josh Roach
President, Marsh Pacific
Marsh Pty Ltd (ABN 86 004 651 512, AFSL 238 983).
This document and any recommendations, analysis, or advice provided by Marsh (collectively, the “Marsh Analysis”) are not intended to be taken as advice regarding any individual situation and should not be relied upon as such. The information contained herein is based on sources we believe reliable, but we make no representation or warranty as to its accuracy. Marsh shall have no obligation to update the Marsh Analysis and shall have no liability to you or any other party arising out of this publication or any matter contained herein. Any statements concerning actuarial, tax, accounting, or legal matters are based solely on our experience as insurance brokers and risk consultants and are not to be relied upon as actuarial, tax, accounting, or legal advice, for which you should consult your own professional advisors. Any modelling, analytics, or projections are subject to inherent uncertainty, and the Marsh Analysis could be materially affected if any underlying assumptions, conditions, information, or factors are inaccurate or incomplete or should change. Marsh makes no representation or warranty concerning the application of policy wording or the financial condition or solvency of insurers or reinsurers. Marsh makes no assurances regarding the availability, cost, or terms of insurance coverage. Although Marsh may provide advice and recommendations, all decisions regarding the amount, type or terms of coverage are the ultimate responsibility of the insurance purchaser, who must decide on the specific coverage that is appropriate to its particular circumstances and financial position.
A business of Marsh McLennan