The American Compensation Phenomenon

Abstract

In this article, the author defines the occupational safety and health domain, characterizes the distinct compensation phenomenon in the United States, and briefly reviews important developments in the last decade involving Karen Silkwood, intentional torts, and asbestos litigation. He examines the class conflict over the value and meaning of work-related injuries and illnesses involved in the practical activity of making claims and turning them into money through compensation inquiries. Juries, attributions of fault, and medicolegal discourse play key roles in the compensation phenomenon. This article demonstrates the extensive, probing inquiry through workers' bodies constituted by the American compensation phenomenon into the moral basis of elements of the system of production.

Employers' perceptions of claims/injury management and rehabilitation in South Australia

“…The role of the employer not only impacts on the management of the injured worker's claim, it supports the rehabilitation and return to work options of the worker whilst taking into account the cost containment of these measures. The costs associated with work accidents and work-related ill-health are considerable and generate concern both in Australia and overseas (Bale 1990; Davis and Teasdale 1994;Head and Harcourt 1998;Jensen 1996;Lunde-Jensen 1994;Miller and Galbraith 1995;Mossink and Licher 1998). In South Australia, as elsewhere, each injury that occurs in the workplace produces hidden costs in addition to the direct expense of compensation (Ganora and Wright 1987).…”

Regulating Workers Compensation: The Medico Legal Evaluation of Injured Workers in Victoria

“…The notion that doctors are gatekeepers for the accident compensation system and that their continuing lucrative income from assessments will dwindle if they start favouring workers, appears to be prevailing. In line with Bale (1990) there are clear indications that weak workplace legislation and weak uni.9n activity is contributing to injury. In 1987 in Victoria, out of 57 work related deaths only one employer was prosecuted, receiving a good behaviour bond of $500.…”

“…Sociological research has avoided the psychological focus on,the individual worker viewing occupational injury as a form of resistance by workers to the gradual dehumanisation of mechanised, rationalised work (Willis, 1986). Well-being and injury are seen as being embedded in the social relations of industrial production, class issues of control and the labour process (Quinlan, 1988;James, 1989;Willis, 1989;Bale, 1990;Quinlan and Bohle, 1991). A focus on labour process has led to concerns regarding the organisation, nature and transformation of wprk, patterns of employer-employee conflict and the association between work place changes and injury and illness (Quinlan and Bohle, 1991).…”

“…One key process has been that of the medico-Iegal evaluation of injured workers. Using Figlio's framework Evan Willis (1986) and Antony Bale (1990) identified the development of this process:…”

“…Following Bale (1990) value is taken from workers in the form of illness achieved in the act of creating wealth for employers and is returned in part to the worker through compensation. This process serves to discipline labour by providing some financial exchange for the wearing away of workers' bodies.…”