Australia is perhaps my favorite country. In part this is because there have been some good economic reforms, such as personal retirement accounts.
But there’s more to life than public policy, and I like Australia because the people are so outgoing and friendly.
Though sometimes their outgoing friendliness, so to speak, creates opportunities for really stupid government policy. A judge in Australia has ruled, for instance, that a woman deserves employment compensation after injuring herself while having sex. Here are some of the remarkable details.
The battle for compensation is not over for a woman who was injured while having sex in a motel on a work trip. Comcare, the Federal Government workplace safety body, has lodged an appeal against the Federal Court decision that the public servant, aged in her late 30s, was entitled to workers’ compensation.Comcare is appealing the judgment on four grounds, including that the court was wrong in finding the woman’s injuries were caused “in the course of her employment”.She is claiming compensation for facial and psychological injuries suffered when a glass light fitting above the bed was pulled from its mount while the woman was having sex in November 2007.Justice John Nicholas said it was not relevant whether it was the woman or her partner – who she met about a month earlier – who pulled the light fitting from the wall.The Administrative Appeals Tribunal had earlier upheld Comcare’s decision, finding that sexual activity was “not an ordinary incident of an overnight stay like showering, sleeping or eating”.”…She was involved in a recreational activity which her employer had not induced, encouraged or countenanced.”However Justice Nicholas overruled that decision and found in favour of the woman.
I have two reactions to this story.
First, what am I doing wrong? How come I’ve never caused light fixtures to be pulled from a wall? That might be worth a facial injury.
Second, what sort of idiot judge concludes that an injury suffered during a sexual relationship entitles someone to get employment compensation money from taxpayers. Sounds like the Appeals Tribunal showed a lot more common sense in ruling that her sexcapades were a “recreational activity” and not “induced, encouraged or countenanced” by her employer.
I’ve come across lots of crazy government decisions in my time, but this is near the top of the list. Probably not as bad as the Greek government subsidizing pedophiles or demanding stool samples before letting entrepreneurs set up online companies, but still amazingly foolish.
It’s also at least as silly as the European courts that have ruled that there’s an entitlement to free soccer broadcasts and a right to satellite TV.
And it’s probably worse than the Finnish court that ruled there’s a right to broadband access, though not as nutty as the Bolivian decision that there’s a human right to receive stolen property.
In any event, at least the Australian government is appealing this moronic decision, so that’s another reason to think it’s a good country. Maybe when America falls apart and enters a Greek-style fiscal death spiral, I can emigrate.
Though I would still need to fight for freedom since Australia’s government does plenty of bad things, such as their version of wasteful “stimulus” and very shameful efforts to stifle political dissent on global warming hysteria.
[…] in mind that this took place in the nation that awarded workers compensation to a woman who injured herself while having sex and also threatened fines against companies that pointed out the downside of a […]
[…] in mind that this took place in the nation that awarded workers compensation to a woman who injured herself while having sex and also threatened fines against companies that pointed out the downside of a […]
[…] in mind that this took place in the nation that awarded workers compensation to a woman who injured herself while having sex and also threatened fines against companies that pointed out the downside of a […]
[…] to be fair, at least the Aussies manage to involve sex when trying to bilk the workplace compensation […]
[…] but its government is plenty capable of boneheaded policy. Heck, the government even provides workers’ compensation payments to people who get injured while having sex after work hours, simply because they were on a business-related […]
Motels should reinforce their overhead systems so that customers can expect to have safe sex in them.
[…] Switching to another topic, we have an encouraging update to the post I wrote last year about an Australian bureaucrat who won a court decision for employment compensation after injuring […]
[…] but its government is plenty capable of boneheaded policy. Heck, the government even provides workers’ compensation payments to people who get injured while having sex after work hours, simply because they were on a business-related […]
[…] but its government is plenty capable of boneheaded policy. Heck, the government even provides workers’ compensation payments to people who get injured while having sex after work hours, simply because they were on a business-related […]
If the appeal went to the ninth circus in the US, they might agree with the Federal Court judge.
Droll, amusing and accurate what more could a writer hope for? I saw a similar example of this sort of foolishness was while a member of the Independent Monitoring Board supervising Wormwood Scrubs prison. This position required that the Home Office Minister personally appoint you, after a very thorough security vetting. A couple of years in we were told we might need to undergo a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check , a lower level review, which was passed by a friend who was a teacher, without any of her references being checked (my wife was a referee). This would cost £80 for all 25 board members at the prison at a time of financial constraint but was though to be necessary as some 18-year-old prisoners may be ‘vulnerable young adults’. No shit, they were in an adult prison, and in the UK to achieve this at 18 is no mean feat of criminality!
she was on a work trip and injured in her hotel room. Generally, putting to one side the sex, that would entitle a person to workers’ compensation. Eg if the light fitting fell on you while you slept. The question here is whether the fact she was having sex, which apparently caused the light fitting to fall, makes any difference.
Well, she could claim workman’s compensation if she’s a prostitute, but only if prostitution is legal in her country of residence.