The Compensation Fund is like a safety net for workers. It was established to alleviate some of the financial burden on employers when their employees are injured on the job. So, if you get injured while doing your job, this fund allows you to claim money to help with your injuries.
However, it’s not for everyone. Some types of workers and some kinds of work aren’t covered by this fund. This article will explain exactly who can claim from the fund and what kind of injuries or situations qualify.
The Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act No. 130 of 1993 (COIDA) was established to create a fund for compensating employees who have been injured as a result of their employment. The first thing which must be analysed is who the Act defines as an employee. Section 1 of the Act defines an employee as “a person who has entered into or works under a contract of service or of apprenticeship or learnership, with an employer, whether the remuneration is calculated by time or by work done”. This means that most forms of work fall within the scope of employment, which may relate to a permanent employment contract, a fixed-term contract, or a casual employment relationship. Where your time or skills are used in exchange for remuneration, it is generally seen as an employment relationship, and once an employment relationship may be established, the employees may become eligible to claim from COIDA as a result of an injury that occurred in the workplace. However, it is not always this straightforward; with any rule, there are always exceptions to that rule, and this is no different.
For COIDA, not all forms of work are seen as equal. Certain types of work are excluded by the Act. These include individuals who are in the employ of the State, specifically performing military service or undergoing training in terms of the Defence Act No. 44 of 1957, further to this an individual who is a member of the Permanent Force of the South African Defence Force is not including within COIDA’s definition of an employee. In addition, COIDA further excludes members of the South African Police Force. What is common with all of these exclusions is that these forms of work have an inherent form of risk and unavoidable injury. COIDA further excludes persons who contract for the carrying out of work by him/herself and further subcontract such work to a third party. Finally, and the most controversial of all, COIDA excludes domestic employees who undertake to work in a private household as an employee, under the Act.
This brief outline of who may claim from COIDA is not a complete list thereof. Certain circumstances may result in certain types of work being included or excluded, and each matter must be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Where COIDA is silent on a certain set of circumstances, the common law may be looked to.
Should you require a more thorough analysis or further guidance on this matter, whether you are an employer or employee, contact us, and we will gladly assist you.
Saeedah Salie
saeedah@bbplaw.attorney
Associate
Recent Comments