- 67 -
progressive standards in respect of medical care and compensation for injured workers, it has been a very widely observed practice amongst a large proportion of employers to resist clains made by their employees. As a result, very lengthy delays of many months and even years in the settlement of claims has been a marked characteristic of employers' liability schemes for employment injuries. This has led to some malpractices such as the acceptance by workers of less than the prescribed amounts of compensation, which also can be attributed to the wish of workers to retain the goodwill of their employers. The position of dependants making claims tends to be weaker due to illiteracy and a lack of understanding of legal matters. Intervention by the authorities responsible for the supervision of the legislation, and the efforts of trade unions, have helped workers and their dependants to some extent. Some countries have stipulated compulsory insurance of the liability with private or public insurance carriers. However, these various safeguards have not rectified all of the fundamental faults of the workmen's compensation schemes. For example, workers in the smaller establishments, which are less able to comply with their statutory liabilities, tend not to be organised into trade unions and thus lack help in pursuing their claims. Some insurance companies, driven by commercial considerations, have sought to avoid coverage of hazardous occupations, and their expertise in the field has made them even more effective in contesting claims than the individual employers.
9.
The
The main underlying cause of these serious deficiencies of the employment injury schemes is the financial risk and burden borne by employers, either directly or through private insurance.
numerous small-scale establishments operating on a limited capital may face financial ruin as a result of a serious or fatal accident. Even if the worker or his dependants are given preference in the event of the employer's insolvency, this does not guarantee full and prompt payment and both the injured employee and his fellow workers may suffer unemployment. This central consideration of the direct financial burden on the employer has had adverse effects on the standards of social protection laid down in the legislation, often resulting in narrow definitions of employment injuries and the curtailment of the rates and amounts of compensation. In an assessment of the Indian Workmen's Compensation Act of 1923, the National Commission on Labour stated t "The Act makes no provision for medical care and treatment which is the greatest need of the worker when he meets with an accident. There is also no provision for rehabilitation to restore the loss in his earnings capacity. The system of lump-sum payment is also not satisfactory in that it runs the risk of the amount being frittered away. These lacunae are met under the Employees' State Insurance Scheme." It is significant that when employer liability systems have been replaced by social insurance schemes in respect of employment injury generally these have introduced enhanced standards in the form of broader concepts of the contingency, extended medical care and rehabilitation, and improved cash benefits as regards their amount and duration. This is most marked where pensions are given in place of lump sums, thus providing a subsititute income throughout the contingency.
the
10. In spite of the advanced welfare policies of many large undertakings and the examples set by public authorities, the fundamental weaknesses of the employer liability method of providing social protection also affect the benefits payable in respect of sickness, maternity and on retrenchment. As explained, in the paper "Social Security in Asia" the quantum of benefit employers are required to pay is not comparable to that available under social insurance and non-contributory benefit schemes because of the latter's much greater duration of benefit. The enforcement machinery of governments has regularly detected breaches of employer liability legislation, particularly anong the smaller establishments, leading to prosecution of the offenders. The great number of small establishments makes control and enforcement extremely difficult, and consequently it is to be expected that much evasion of the law goes undetected because of the complicity or ignorance of employees. Additional difficulties arise with regard to maternity leave and allowances. In spite of the direct prohibition of such practices, a proportion of employers are known to dismiss women workers on marriage or on the occurrence of pregnancy.
It is also generally recognised that the requirement to give maternity benefits has led to some discriminary practices in the employment of women.
11.
These comprehensive shortcomings of employer liability systems render them incapable of providing a general scheme of social security. Consequently, many countries have found it necessary to remove the direct liability for benefit from
1 Report of the National Commission on Labour, Government of India, Ministry of Labour, Employment and Rehabilitation, 1969.
E-1195-2D:5