Overview
How this affects your claim in practice
A “section 74 notice” is legacy terminology for ordinary NSW workers compensation claims: section 74 of the 1998 Act was repealed in 2018. The current liability-dispute notice is generally issued under section 78. Suitable employment is defined in section 32A of the 1987 Act and is commonly applied through a section 43 work capacity decision. The first task is to identify the actual decision instead of answering an outdated label.
- Section 74 of the 1998 Act is repealed for the ordinary scheme; limited special transitional contexts may differ.
- Section 78 is the current ordinary liability-dispute notice provision.
- Suitable employment is defined in section 32A of the 1987 Act.
- Work capacity decisions are governed by section 43 of the 1987 Act.
- A job does not become suitable merely because it is described as light duties or sedentary work.
- Medical, vocational, skill, location, hours and wage assumptions should be tested against the written decision.
Identify the actual notice and provision
People still use “section 74 notice” to describe an insurer denial, but that shorthand can conceal whether the live issue is liability, work capacity, suitable employment, earning capacity or a weekly-payment reduction. Read the heading, statutory provisions, reasons and effective date in the actual notice.
For ordinary claims, section 78 of the 1998 Act is the current notice provision when liability or an aspect of liability is disputed, or weekly payments are to be discontinued or reduced. Special coal-miner or transitional arrangements should be checked separately where relevant.
What suitable employment means
Section 32A directs attention to the worker’s incapacity and medical information, age, education, skills and work experience, any return-to-work plan, rehabilitation services and matters in the guidelines. It is an evidentiary assessment, not a job-title exercise.
The statutory definition also says the assessment is made regardless of whether the work or employment is actually available, the general availability in the labour market, the nature of the worker’s pre-injury employment and the worker’s place of residence. Those exclusions do not permit an insurer to ignore the worker’s medical restrictions, skills or the actual demands and earning assumptions of the proposed work.
Test each proposed job against the evidence
| Assumption in the decision | Documents to compare |
|---|---|
| Physical and psychological demands | Certificates, treating reports, job task analysis, tolerance for hours, pace, travel, interaction and symptom fluctuation. |
| Skills and experience | Work history, licences, qualifications, literacy, digital skills and any realistic retraining evidence. |
| Hours and sustainability | Actual or trial hours, breaks, attendance, medication effects, rehabilitation notes and failed return-to-work attempts. |
| Earning capacity | Award rates, advertised duties, wage assumptions, PIAWE material and the calculation used in the decision. |
Review and PIC options for a work capacity decision
A worker may request an insurer internal review or apply directly to the Personal Injury Commission for a work-capacity dispute. The correct response should address the precise section 43 finding and the evidence relied upon, rather than sending a general statement that the worker is still injured.
If the worker starts PIC proceedings before the notice period expires, the Commission may stay the proceedings. The effective date, notice period and current payment position should therefore be recorded accurately.
Common mistakes in suitable-employment disputes
- Treating an old “section 74” label as the legal issue instead of reading the decision.
- Answering only the diagnosis and not the proposed job demands.
- Assuming occasional task ability proves sustainable weekly attendance.
- Ignoring psychological symptoms, medication, travel or fluctuating capacity.
- Accepting a wage figure without checking the job, hours and source.
- Letting a rehabilitation summary replace the underlying medical and vocational evidence.
Official sources
Sources are listed for transparency. This guide is general information only and is not legal advice.
- Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW)
- Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW)
- Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment (Reform and Modernisation) Act 2026 - text passed by both Houses
- SIRA - workers compensation information hub and current reform guidance
- SIRA - work capacity decision reviews
- SIRA - current workers compensation guidelines
Frequently asked questions
Is section 74 still the current ordinary dispute-notice section?
No. It was repealed in 2018 for the ordinary scheme. Section 78 is generally the current liability-dispute notice provision.
Where is suitable employment defined?
It is defined in section 32A of the Workers Compensation Act 1987. Work capacity decisions are addressed in section 43.
Does a suitable job have to be currently vacant?
The statutory definition says the assessment is made regardless of actual availability and general labour-market availability, but the job still must be tested against the worker-specific statutory factors and evidence.
Can suitable employment reduce weekly payments?
A section 43 work capacity decision may affect earning capacity and weekly payments if the statutory and evidentiary requirements are met.
Must I request insurer review before going to PIC?
SIRA states a worker may request an insurer review or apply directly to PIC for a work capacity dispute. The notice and issue should still be checked.
What evidence is most useful?
Current medical restrictions, actual duties, hours and attendance, skill history, rehabilitation records and the wage or vocational assumptions used by the insurer.
Need a suitable-employment decision checked?
Send the full notice, proposed jobs, wage calculation, certificates, treating reports and rehabilitation material. The current provision and each work assumption can then be tested.