More than $1.7 M won for ETU members who were initially offered just $18K between them!!!
Parties have been de-identified for privacy reasons.
Electrician/Electrical Fitter:
- Our Member was performing electrical installation work, when the structure he was working on failed, causing our member to fall a significant distance.
- Injuries: lower leg and psychological injury
- The workers’ compensation insurer (the insurer) initially offered approximately $15,000.00 in full and final settlement of our Member’s claim.
- Our Member was off for a period of time and unable to return to their pre-injury employment. Following a period of time off work, our Member found alternative full time employment.
- We recommended our Member reject the offer from the insurer and pursue a common law claim against multiple parties.
- All parties initially denied liability.
- We progressed the claim through two rounds of negotiations and were eventually successful in recovering approximately $600,000.00.
Electrician/ Operator:
- Our Member was performing their duties, when a large boulder came down from the high wall striking our member.
- Injuries: lower leg and psychological injury
- The insurer initially offered approximately $3,000.00 in full and final settlement of our Member’s claim.
- We recommended our Member pursue a common law claim against the mine operator and the employer. Both parties strongly denied liability.
- We maintained our position on liability and successfully recovered in excess of $800,000.00.
Signal Electrician:
- Our Member sustained injuries whilst working as a signal electrician. Our member was provided the incorrect tools to perform a task and, as a result of using the incorrect tools, he sustained injuries to his lower back.
- Injuries: Lower back injury
- The insurer initially offered $0.00 in full and final settlement of our Member’s claim.
- We recommended our Member pursue a common law claim for negligence. The respondent strongly denied liability contending the incident occurred as a result of our Member’s own negligence for not acting in accordance with the SWMS and failing to use appropriate tools for the task.
- We maintained the position that the respondent was 100% liable as the work instructions and directions came from the immediate supervisor. After two rounds of negotiations, the respondent accepted our position and conceded liability.
- We successfully recovered in excess of $250,000.00.
Each case has its own facts and we remind members of the importance of ensuring their rights are properly protected. As part of your membership, you are entitled to a free initial consult with Hall Payne Lawyers and we encourage members to utilise this service to obtain advice about their rights and entitlements.