ACC disbands firefighters' toxicology panel which assesses cancer claims

Photo: RNZ/Marika Khabazi ACC has disbanded its toxicology panel that firefighters take their cancer claims to. The New Zealand Professional Firefighters Union (NZPFU) says the corporation did not tell it about this, but it was pleased to see the back of the panel. But the United Fire Brigades' Association (UFBA) - which represents volunteer firefighters - said it was a "blow" to advancing the cause of getting cover for volunteers and of "great regret" ACC did not consult it. ACC said it was disestablishing the panel due to retirement and bereavement, and would use individual advisors instead like it did in other clinical cases. The panel had several specialists on it. Cancer claims now were assessed by an occupational doctor registered with Australasian Faculty of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (AFOEM), who could call in extra expert advice from its clinical services team or further afield, said acting chief clinical officer Dr Dilky Rasiah. NZPFU national secretary Wattie Watson said it would be nice if ACC had talked to them first, and they wanted to know more about the new approach. "They don't tell us how they are going to manage them," Watson said. "We went backwards with the toxicology panel, so I am pleased that the toxicology panel is gone. "But we still have not resolved the underlying issue about recognising, on a scientific basis, firefighters' occupational cancer." The union has been fighting for years for an approach like in Australia, Canada and US where certain specified cancers are presumed to be work-related so firefighters face fewer hurdles in proving it. A firefighter or former firefighter who developed cancer may be covered by ACC under work-related gradual process injury/disease legislation. "To date everyone's still going through the same process but without the toxicology panel," said Watson, who argued it should instead be streamlined, with the onus on Fire and Emergency (FENZ) to lead that change. Volunteer firefighters can only take the ACC approach if they fight alongside paid firefighters at a fire with proven toxic fallout - but could not claim over prolonged exposure. Photo: RNZ UFBA chair Peter Dunne said it was possible the new doctor-centric assessments would be advantageous, nevertheless they had seen the panel as a bit of a "lever". "There's still the problem of the legislation that excludes volunteer firefighters from coverage in certain circumstances. "And the toxicology panel was seen as a bit of a way, a bit of hope, if you like, as a way of getting this issue resolved. "I'm very surprised, given the interest and coverage of volunteers, that it's been done without any consultation. This is news that's come through just on Saturday. "It will be seen as a blow for advancing the cause of getting coverage for volunteer firefighters in some circumstances." ACC told a select committee the cost to cover volunteers might be just $250,000 a year but it feared a precedent would be set for having to cover surf lifesavers and other volunteer responders, Dunne said, despite not being exposed to the same toxicities. "The response that we've had all along on this issue has been, look... this is the thin end of the wedge." Also, new toxic threats - such as lithium battery fires - had to be taken into account, he said. Whangārei firefighter and career union local secretary Maurice Tipene went to a lithium battery fire at the city's port earlier in November. "We were not so keen on putting people in 'cause of what was in there," he said. So they called in a long-ladder truck from Auckland two hours away. In the end, it was not needed. They went back in later days because the batteries kept blowing up in small explosions, he said. Photo: Supplied / Auckland Council His crew had just done a case study at work on lithium battery fires when they were called out. Asked if the case study was scary, Tipene said: "One hundred percent. One of the lines in it was 'this smells like cancer'." They had the right gear and personal gas metres, he said. 'So-called values' A FENZ letter to ACC in 2023 said out of 45 cancer claims, 35 were accepted for cover by the toxicology panel. But Invercargill firefighter Brent Wilson's ACC claim for thyroid cancer in 2020 was rejected and he also lost on appeal. But a mediator then upheld his claim based on international expert input, so that some of his expenses and lost earnings were covered. "I'm not the only one at this station who's gone through this," Wilson told RNZ. "Another guy on another shift [has] gone through the same process. The organisation has these so-called values - manaakitanga - but it's all empty words. They have these values but they don't stick to them." FENZ deputy chief executive of people Janine Hearn said they had kept working on this with the union. "With or without the toxicology panel, the claims assessment process is hard to navigate for people who are unwell and stressed, and we are...

ACC disbands firefighters' toxicology panel which assesses cancer claims

Continue Reading on RNZ

How do you feel about this article?

📝 Article Information

Author

Original Publisher

Published Date

Disclaimer

ACC disbands firefighters' toxicology panel which assesses cancer claims

Continue Reading on RNZ

How do you feel about this article?

📝 Article Information

Author

Original Publisher

Published Date

Disclaimer

More from RNZ