Effective Handling of Extremely Controversial Employee Compensation Issues

Human resources managers, practitioners or front-line managers facing extremely controversial work injury, in case of poor handling, may lead to legal litigation and create adverse precedents for the company. This workshop focuses on court judgements on 19 extremely controversial work injury disputes and explains the implications for more effective human resources deployment.

The workshop will cover the following cases:

• Dispute 1 : Effectively deal with "suspected and doubtful work injury" cases or controversies over the continuous change of doctors to extend injury leave period.
• Dispute 2 : "Employee" status and controversy of independent self-employed persons in employee compensation in work injury cases.
• Dispute 3: For employees seeking to resume work after a long-term work injury such as a period of two years, can the employer legally refuse the employee's request to resume duty or arrange staff to depart?
• Dispute 4 : If the degree of incapacity to work of an injured employee is as high as 30%, and the injured employee can no longer afford to perform the original job duties, can the employer dismiss the relevant injured employee in accordance with the common law principle of "frustration of contract" after resuming duty?
• Dispute 5: For an injured employee resuming work, due to the employee's physical condition, the employer arranges lighter work or a lower-skill position for him to take on, can the employer legally adjust or lower the compensation package?
• Dispute 6: By common law, an employer has duty of care towards an employee. Civil claims can be made by an injured employee upon unreasonable job arrangements when resuming duty, e.g. being offered lighter work. What are the recent court cases relating to relevant disputes?
• Dispute 7: The Human Resources Department was negligent or misled by the enforcement agency to commit the criminal offence : agreeing to not declare the injured case and unlawful dismissal of an injured employee. What lesson can be learnt for human resources in court cases?
• Dispute 8: The company has served notice of termination for an under-performed employee, and then the employee advises the employer that he / she was injured several days earlier. How can the employer develop an effective and legally binding termination policy in the view of related court cases?
• Dispute 9: When an injured employee resumes work with poor job performance, what kind of potential legal risks including unreasonable dismissal and disability discrimination the employer will face when terminating such poor performed employee?
• Dispute 10: For controversies over a supervisor's actions towards subordinates, including strong work pressure and scolding, can such "mental injury" be classified as an injured case? What implications can be learnt for the employer in court cases?
   

• Dispute 11: According to the Occupational Safety and Health Ordinance, if an employer has been prosecuted for failing to ensure the safety and health of employees at work within reasonable practicability, what are the case implications for the human resources department ?
• Dispute 12: If an employee has helped his / her boss to handle "the boss's private affairs" during off-hours, will any resulting injury be considered a work related injury case?
• Dispute 13: Will employees working too hard, having great job pressure and/or even overworking to death be considered work injured? How can the human resources department avoid potential legal risks and large claims?
• Dispute 14: If a sub-contractor's employee is injured at the employer's workplace, is the employer liable for the relevant injury? What lessons can be learnt from the landmark judgements from the Final Court of Appeal relating to such disputes?
• Dispute 15: If a sub-contractor's employee is injured at the workplace, but the sub-contractor goes out of business, will the company still need to bear the common law compensation for the sub-contractor's employee?
• Dispute 16: What measures does the human resources department need to implement to reduce or exempt the employer's liability on common law claims?
• Dispute 17: While the employer have secured both "employee compensation" and "common law claims" insurance, insurance companies may still refuse to pay for a claim for damages as the employer has not reported accurate information. What can the human resources department learn from recent court cases?
• Dispute 18: In the face of potential fraudulent work injury of employees, employers insist on not recognizing work-related injuries in order to avoid fostering an inappropriate corporate culture, but insurance companies insist on settlement, compensation, how can the human resources department handle related disputes?
• Dispute 19: Other common handling of work injury disputes.

Speaker(s)

Mr Raymond Fung – Principal Consultant – Strategic Consulting Limited
Mr Fung graduated from a number of prestigious universities in the UK with a Master's Degree of Industrial Relations, and a Master's Degree of Business Administration. He was the Director of Training, Director of Human Resources, and General Manager of several listed companies. He has extensive experience in human resources and corporate management.

In the past 20 years, Mr. Fung has executed various types of training and human resources management projects for over 250 US, European and Mainland corporate clients. He has assisted clients in handling a large number of human resources disputes and litigations in the Labour Tribunal, District Court and High Court. He has a deep understanding of the laws relating to human resources.

Mr. Fung has conducted over 250 public seminars on the laws relating to human resources in the past 20 years. He has taught in a number of enterprises, local andoverseas universities, tertiary institutions and professional organizations. He has trained more than 80,000 administrative and management staff, and is a three-time winner of the Award for Excellence in Training and Development.