Traffic control injury: NSW workers compensation guide

Traffic control injury can occur through public vehicle fails to stop, breaches barriers or enters the work zone and site plant or work vehicle moves contrary to the agreed traffic or communication sequence. The incident history should identify the task, equipment, location and sequence of events rather than relying on the job title alone.

People commonly exposed include traffic controllers using stop-slow or portable devices and workers implementing or monitoring a Traffic Guidance Scheme. Employment records should identify each person's task, employer and position in the work area when the incident occurred.

Medical records after a traffic control injury may identify head, spinal, fracture, crush and limb injury and psychological injury after impact, threat or fatal incident exposure. Each diagnosis should be linked to the event or exposure and to the worker's actual functional change.

For a traffic control injury, the first evidence to preserve includes approved Traffic Guidance Scheme or work-zone traffic-management plan, design version, implementation record and any authorised or informal changes and traffic-control card and role, site induction, SWMS, toolbox, roster, break and supervision records. It is most useful when dates, people, equipment, duties and later medical histories tell a consistent account.

• Barrier type and fill, speed reduction, sign and device placement, sight distance, lighting, worker position and escape-route photographs.
• Radio and communication logs, portable-device records, CCTV, traffic camera, dashcam, vehicle and plant telematics.
• Police, SafeWork, incident, witness, supervisor and early medical or psychological records identifying the exact event and symptoms.

After a traffic control injury, an insurer may dispute the controller’s conduct is emphasised while the approved plan, actual setup and later site changes are not produced and the worker’s position, instruction, escape route, communication method or approaching vehicle is contested. The written decision should be answered with evidence directed to those stated reasons.

Physical and psychological consequences should be recorded as separate diagnoses with their own causation and functional evidence. Return-to-work planning should address live traffic exposure, concentration, standing, noise, shift timing, communication and the worker’s response to the incident location. If treatment is disputed after a traffic control injury, the request should explain the accepted diagnosis, expected functional benefit and reasonable alternatives.

Work capacity after a traffic control injury may turn on safety-critical traffic-control work may remain unsuitable despite capacity for lower-risk or indoor duties and night work, road noise, prolonged standing, weather, vigilance, escape movement and radio communication can each affect sustainable capacity. Proposed duties must be compared with the real task demands and the worker's ability to sustain them for the proposed hours.

WPI is assessed from stable, accepted medical impairment under the applicable NSW method; travel, collision, surgery or imaging does not create an automatic percentage. Each diagnosed body system must be assessed using its own clinical findings, and any pre-existing impairment issue must be addressed separately. Any WPI assessment after a traffic control injury occurs after stabilisation under the NSW method for the accepted body system; the accident or surgery alone does not determine a percentage.

A qualifying vehicle impact or evasive motor accident may require a separate CTP claim. Another contractor, road authority, vehicle owner or plant operator may raise a separate recovery issue depending on the evidence. These issues are separate from workers compensation and depend on the particular facts.

For a traffic control injury, assistance may involve identify the employing or labour-hire entity and every business responsible for the plan, implementation, plant and supervision and preserve the approved version and actual site setup, including changes, video, radio and vehicle data. The purpose is to identify the disputed decision and the evidence needed for the next step, not to promise an outcome.