In August 2021, something happened that should never have been necessary in a workers compensation claim.
A family member began calling Catholic Church Insurance (CCI) to try to understand why basic obligations connected to my claim were not being addressed.
They were not a lawyer.
They were not a case manager.
They were simply trying to help someone they loved who had become too traumatised to keep navigating the system alone.
What followed were documented notes made at the time of the calls.
The events described below are drawn from these handwritten notes taken during the calls themselves, which form part of the documentary record of what happened.
Those notes remain a small but revealing record of what it looked like when someone tried to reach assistance within the system — and repeatedly could not.
---
The Calls Begin
The first calls began on 12 August 2021.
A staff member answered and transferred the call.
The caller was placed on hold indefinitely.
Eventually they had to hang up.
Another attempt connected with another staff member.
According to handwritten notes made at the time, the interaction was immediately hostile.
The caller recorded that the staff member was:
“rude, arrogant and hostile from the word go.”
When asked for a surname — a basic step if you need to follow up a matter with a large organisation — the request was refused.
The reason given was “privacy”.
Moments later the call was abruptly terminated.
---
Endless Transfers
Further calls followed.
They resulted in:
- repeated transfers
- voicemail messages
- promises of follow-up
- calls that were never returned
At one point the caller was transferred to Adelaide because staff said they could not locate anyone in NSW who could assist.
The staff member in Adelaide listened to concerns about legally binding documents, including:
- the Certificate of Determination
- the Injury Management Plan
These are not minor administrative documents.
They are core instruments within the workers compensation system.
Under the New South Wales workers compensation framework, both the Certificate of Determination and the Injury Management Plan play an important role in how claims are managed and how recovery and return to work are supported.
Insurers are expected to communicate clearly about these documents and to work with the worker and treating practitioners to ensure that injury management obligations are properly implemented. The SIRA Standards of Practice for Insurers emphasise that workers should be able to obtain clear information about their claim, speak with responsible case managers and receive timely responses to questions affecting their recovery and entitlements.
When communication breaks down around core documents that shape the management of a claim, the system can become difficult for injured workers to understand or navigate.
The caller was promised a call back the following Monday.
No call came.
---
A simple diagram can explain what pages of notes describe: a call loop where accountability becomes difficult to reach.
Attempts to Escalate
Further attempts were made to reach senior staff inside CCI.
The caller asked to speak with:
- the General Manager, Workers Compensation
- the Fast Track Case Manager
Again, the calls went nowhere.
No clear answers.
No meaningful engagement.
And no resolution.
---
“Customer Service” as Avoidance
On paper, these interactions appear to be routine customer service.
But in practice they can function very differently.
When staff refuse to identify themselves, when calls are repeatedly transferred, and when promised follow-ups never occur, the effect is the same:
Accountability becomes difficult to reach.
For injured workers already navigating trauma, legal processes and financial uncertainty, this kind of institutional behaviour can be deeply destabilising.
---
Meanwhile, the Legal Process Continued
At the same time these calls were occurring, my lawyers were emailing about administrative forms requested by the insurer.
Routine paperwork.
Banking details.
Processes that assume a functioning system.
But behind those emails was a reality the paperwork did not show.
A workers compensation system that had become chaotic, opaque and emotionally exhausting to navigate.
---
Trauma Changes Your Capacity
One of the things the system rarely acknowledges is how psychological injury affects a person’s ability to engage with complex (and in this case, repeatedly hostile and adversarial) administrative processes.
Phone calls can feel impossible.
Emails can become triggering.
Even reading correspondence can provoke anxiety.
When the handwritten notes from those calls were eventually sent to me, I responded honestly.
I explained that I had not opened the emails.
Not because I did not care, but because the subject itself had become a trigger for trauma.
---
The Standards Insurers Are Meant to Follow
In New South Wales, workers compensation insurers operate under the Standards of Practice for Insurers, issued by the NSW State Insurance Regulatory Authority (SIRA NSW).
These standards are intended to ensure that injured workers are treated with respect, fairness and transparency, and that insurers communicate clearly, respond to enquiries, and manage claims in a way that supports recovery.
They recognise that many injured workers are vulnerable — particularly those experiencing psychological injury — and that communication and conduct from insurers can either assist recovery or compound harm.
When repeated calls lead only to transfers, voicemail loops and unanswered promises of follow-up, it raises a difficult question that is not simply about service.
It is about whether the system is functioning in the way those standards were designed to ensure.
It is also worth acknowledging that injured workers sometimes encounter similar barriers when seeking assistance from the regulator itself. When both the insurer and the regulatory pathway feel inaccessible, the sense of isolation can deepen.
---
Families Carry the Weight
This is something workers compensation systems rarely acknowledge.
When the process becomes overwhelming, families often step in.
Not because they understand the legal system.
Not because they want to become involved.
But because the injured worker can no longer carry the burden alone.
The handwritten notes from August 2021 record more than phone calls.
They record what happens when a system designed to protect injured workers becomes another source of distress.
---
Why This Matters
Workers compensation systems are meant to protect injured workers.
They depend on communication, transparency and accountability.
When those elements disappear, the burden shifts.
Sometimes it shifts onto the injured worker.
And sometimes — when that worker is too traumatised to keep fighting — it shifts onto family members who step in simply to try to reach someone who will respond.
The notes from August 2021 remain, as a record of what happened when an injured worker — and the people trying to help her — attempted to reach accountability and could not find it.
Source: contemporaneous records of events - Document 192.
——
Research Context: What Studies Have Found About Injured Workers and Insurers
Research has long recognised that interactions between injured workers and workers compensation insurers can significantly influence recovery, wellbeing and trust in the system.
A systematic review by Emily Kilgour, Andrew Kosny, Duncan McKenzie and Alex Collie examined qualitative research from multiple workers compensation systems to understand how injured workers experience their interactions with insurers.
Their study found that many workers reported feeling:
• disbelieved or treated with suspicion
• distressed by adversarial or bureaucratic interactions
• frustrated by communication barriers
• overwhelmed by complex administrative processes
Importantly, the researchers concluded that the quality of communication and relationships between injured workers and insurers can strongly influence recovery outcomes. Supportive and respectful interactions can assist recovery, while negative or adversarial interactions can contribute to stress, anxiety and prolonged disability.
These findings reinforce a broader point:
the way injured workers are treated within the system is not simply a matter of service — it can directly affect health, wellbeing and the ability to recover.
The handwritten notes from August 2021 may describe a single series of calls, but the research suggests that experiences like these are not isolated events — they are part of a broader pattern recognised within workers compensation systems internationally.
Reference
Kilgour, E., Kosny, A., McKenzie, D., & Collie, A. (2014). ‘Interactions Between Injured Workers and Insurers in Workers’ Compensation Systems: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Research Literature.’ Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation. Open access version: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262385580_Interactions_Between_Injured_Workers_and_Insurers_in_Workers’_Compensation_Systems_A_Systematic_Review_of_Qualitative_Research_Literature
——
Regulatory Framework: The Standards Insurers Are Expected to Meet
Workers compensation insurers in New South Wales operate under the Standards of Practice for Insurers, issued by the NSW State Insurance Regulatory Authority.
These standards establish expectations for how insurers should communicate with injured workers, manage claims and ensure that the process supports recovery rather than compounding harm.
Several themes within the Standards are particularly relevant to the experiences described in this post.
Respectful and Clear Communication
The Standards require insurers to communicate with injured workers clearly, respectfully and in a timely way, ensuring that workers understand decisions affecting their claim and know who they can contact for assistance.
Effective communication is recognised as fundamental to building trust and supporting recovery.
Repeated transfers, unanswered messages and barriers to speaking with responsible staff can undermine this objective and leave injured workers feeling isolated within the system.
Accessibility and Responsiveness
The Standards emphasise that insurers must be accessible and responsive when workers or their representatives attempt to make contact.
Workers should be able to reach appropriate decision-makers or case managers and receive responses within reasonable timeframes.
When calls lead only to voicemail loops, broken promises of follow-up or difficulty identifying responsible staff, the system can become difficult for injured workers to navigate.
Supporting Recovery and Wellbeing
A central principle of the Standards is that insurers should manage claims in a way that supports recovery and participation, recognising that many workers may be experiencing significant physical or psychological vulnerability.
Communication practices that are dismissive, adversarial or obstructive can undermine recovery and increase distress for workers already navigating injury and uncertainty.
Transparency and Accountability
The Standards also emphasise transparency in decision-making and accountability within the claims process.
Workers should be able to understand how their claim is being managed and who is responsible for key decisions.
Where communication barriers prevent workers from accessing information or engaging with decision-makers, it can create a sense that accountability is difficult to reach.
⸻
Why These Standards Matter
The experiences described in this post reflect more than a series of difficult phone calls.
They raise broader questions about how the principles set out in the Standards of Practice are experienced by injured workers in real situations.
When communication breaks down and accountability becomes difficult to reach, the burden of navigating the system can shift onto injured workers and their families at the very moment they are most vulnerable.
Reference
State Insurance Regulatory Authority (2025). Standards of Practice for Insurers – Workers Compensation.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.