AAP Information Services Pty Limited v Hanson

WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION
DETERMINATION OF APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION CONSTITUTED BY AN ARBITRATOR
CITATION:		AAP Information Services Pty Limited v Hanson [2009] NSWWCCPD 24
APPELLANT:		AAP Information Services Pty Limited
RESPONDENT:		Gordon William Hanson
INSURER:		GIO General Limited
FILE NUMBER:		A1- 004384/08
DATE OF ARBITRATOR’S DECISION:		9 October 2008
DATE OF APPEAL DECISION:		11 March 2009
SUBJECT MATTER OF DECISION:		Psychological injury; whether the condition complained of constituted an ‘injury’ within the meaning of section 4 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987; whether the claimed injury was as a result of misperception of conduct which actually occurred in the workplace; whether the injury was as a result of reasonable action by the employer in relation to transfer and/or discipline.
PRESIDENTIAL MEMBER:		Acting Deputy President Deborah Moore
HEARING:		On the papers
REPRESENTATION:		Appellant:		Sparke Helmore Lawyers
Respondent:		CMC Lawyers
ORDERS MADE ON APPEAL:		1. The decision of the Arbitrator, dated 9 October 2008 is revoked and the following decision is made in its place:
(1) Award in favour of the Respondent.
(2) No order as to costs.
2. No order as to costs of the appeal.

BACKGROUND TO THE APPEAL

1. On 6 November 2008 AAP Information Services Pty Limited (‘the Appellant / AAP’) sought leave to bring an ‘Appeal Against Decision of Arbitrator’ in the Workers Compensation Commission (‘the Commission’) against a decision dated 9 October 2008.

1. The Respondent to the Appeal is Gordon William Hanson (‘the Respondent / Mr Hanson’).

1. No formal statement was given by Mr Hanson, and I have set out the background to the claim by reference to the Arbitrator’s ‘Statement of Reasons’ (‘Reasons’) and other documents.

1. Mr Hanson commenced employment with AAP in 1987 as a manager in the finance section. He was responsible for the company’s specialised financial computing system. In 2001 there was a restructure whereby he was transferred to the central computing section, the Integrated Technology Group (‘ITG’). He was under the supervision of the Computer Operations Manager, Mr Paul Bland.

1. In the ITG, Mr Hanson’s duties and responsibilities were essentially the same. He was responsible for the upgrade of the old financial computing system. This was a staged process whereby temporary upgrades were installed while a new system was being investigated. There appear to have been difficulties in finding an adequate replacement for the old system. Mr Hanson claimed that he was kept “out of the loop” with regard to the proposed replacement. On completion of the temporary upgrade in March 2006, Mr Hanson installed a new password. He then went on leave in September 2006. While he was away, the company was unable to access the system because it did not have the password. On his return he was asked to attend a meeting with Mr Bland and Ms Bridge from the human resources department on 12 October 2006. It was claimed that Mr Hanson had not followed the correct protocol in respect of passwords. A verbal warning was given to him at this meeting.

1. Since his transfer…