Human Capital forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Employee compensated for $20K breast surgery

Notify me of new replies via email
HC Online | 08 Oct 2015, 10:43 AM Agree 0
A court has awarded costs to a public servant who claimed her need for breast reduction surgery was sparked by her work environment.
  • Jenny | 09 Oct 2015, 09:30 AM Agree 0
    Unbelievable! Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Individuals are first and foremost responsible for their own health and wellbeing. Hopefully most now have additional support and encouragement from their employers through wellness programs and education.

    I have no doubt that the breast reduction and the tummy tuck made Ms Howes look and feel better, as well as reducing her need for medication for back/neck/shoulder pain. So would have a sensible diet and exercise.

    Many working people, male and female, make poor food choices at times due to lack of time, lack of energy, lack of healthy options if they work odd hours or in remote locations. We still 'own' those decisions and literally wear the consequences. Can we all get our employers to pay for our cosmetic surgery??

    These types of decisions makes tribunals look ridiculous and encourage frivolous, non work related claims.
  • Simone | 09 Oct 2015, 01:44 PM Agree 0
    Ridiculous! This case makes a joke of our legal system.
    Every individual makes lifestyle and health choices. The decision to eat in excess and refrain from exercise shouldn't entitle anyone to receiving cosmetic surgery compensation from your employer - and in this case from tax payers!
    This person had already been compensated for her workplace injuries - and rightly so - but any claim that she deservers cosmetic surgery suggests that employers are responsible for weight loss. Where is the onus on employees! What about a standing desk, exercise program or physiotherapy... all the responsibility of the employee (sometimes in conjunction with an employer).
    This sounds like the court supporting frivolous claims, ignorance and greed more than employee health and wellbeing.
Post a reply