KEY POINTS:
A sex worker hurt when she and her client plunged 100m down a Canterbury hillside in his car may be eligible for compensation for a work-related injury.
The woman is believed to have been in the car with a man driving on Christchurch's Port Hills when the vehicle went off the Summit Rd in icy weather and fell into a gully early on Friday morning.
Here is the latest selection of Your Views:
Mat
I honestly cannot believe the number of people (thankfully few) who actually believe she shouldn't get anything. If she is paying taxes (you know, a percentage of your income paid to the government for such purposes as infrastructure, and a small segment ** to ACC for the purpose of insuring you **) then she is absolutely entitled to ACC, because she's already paying the same premiums you are. In fact, she's likely paying more than you. It's just selfish to basically claim that if you get injured, she should be subsidising you, but if she gets injured then tough bickies. Disgusting.
Michael
Not to worry. Her ACC payout will be a direct reflection of her previous years declared earnings. Well, just wait and see.
Dave (USA)
A lot of people seem to be missing out on what the debate is about. Are sex workers entitled to ACC? Absolutely, that's not in question. The question is, is this particular sex worker trying to abuse the system by applying for ACC benefits when she wasn't actually working? What constitutes "working" as a sex worker? Is it simply the act of copulation, or is it the entire process of walking down the street lifting your skirt as each John drives by? Hey, if walking around trying to find a bloke counts as work, then my drive to work in the morning should count as work too, so if I'm in an accident on the way to work, I can get ACC too! The spokesperson for the Prostitute's Association even said it was unusual for her to be so far away from the city. What if she was really on a joy ride with her boyfriend and wants to cash in on the situation?
I think a thorough investigation is needed.
Susan O'Neill
If the prostitute in question is legitimately at work and paying all taxes and levies then yes she should get ACC, after all prisoners seem to eligible, however misguided our system is it is still a no fault accident compensation system.
Dick
What is the deal poking around the prostitute's personal business. Of course she can apply for work related compensation, just like anyone else injured on the job. How much she receives for lost earnings, will depend on how much client servicing she has declared, and when the service will resume.
murdoch
Providing she was in the act of sex while the car was plunging do the hill - then its legit !
Chieftain
Our Government, for better or for worse, decided that being a prostitute was not an unlawful pursuit. Moreover, it forced thru legislation that required our cities to accommodate brothels. Presumably then, prostitutes and/or their employers pay ACC and taxes and are covered by OSH requirements, just like any other manual laborer.If so, there is no question but that compensation should be paid in full. She was doing an honest day's work and came a-cropper thru no fault of her own. Doubtless her brothel has records of ACC deductions paid, and doubtless too she has had PAYE deducted from her payslip. Assuming this is so, there is nothing more to be said or done but to pay her. And for ACC to take good care of her, as a productive and contributing member of Society.Some folk may not like that, but it is a natural consequence that we must abide by: prostitution is no longer against the law, and prostitutes are no longer criminals. They are engaged in legal employment and are therefore entitled to be treated as any other working person should be. And if they are injured while doing so, then they should be compensated.Open-and-shut case, no further analysis required.If we do not like this, then we should un-elect Labour at next election and elect instead a party that will change Legislation more to our liking. Meanwhile, we are morally and legally obligated to pay out for damages suffered, as it was a legitimate workplace injury. We should do so without hesitation or regret: this was an entirely predictable outcome of legislation that our duly-elected government passed without batting an eye. With our full support. We have no excuse for not doing so.
Jimbo
Hi all. I am sure that if she has taken the law reforms seriously and registered herself, then there is no question whether she should or should not be compensated. The job type should not discern whether a person should get compensated or not, but whether they are legally employed or not. If I apy my taxes and something happens to me at work, I would expect to be paid for any injuries I receive at work.
stace
i can not believe Duncan called people hillbillies.
Auckland
If she's a registered tax paying worker, of course she should be covered. However, who's to know whether the accident was caused partially by driver distraction as well as the icy conditions if she was working at the time of the accident? Although ACC being a no faults scheme would probably cover this anyway?
Auckland
Of course she should be paid compensation...as long as everything is legit i.e. taxes paid etc then what's the problem? Being a sex worker in NZ is legal so, if she was at work, pay her out!
Phil
Pleased to see the vast majority of posters support this woman being paid compensation.Her occupation is a non-issue and an indication of exactly how many so-called contentious issues are in fact just the result of media trying to sensationalise everything.This ploy ranks with the old 'running the denial before mentioning the accusation' and other similar tricks to try and persuade the customers to take a point of view that aligns with the editorial point of view.The internet has been a godsend for ensuring that the hoi polloi's views are aired as well as 'our betters' preference for what we should be thinking.
Jackie (Timaru)
f course she should get compo. Her line of work is completely legal in NZ and her injuries were sustained whilst at work. The sad issue here is the mouthy member of the public who blabbed their (his and her) predicament to the media - shame on them, I certainly hope they have nothing private they never want all in sundry to know!
graham
Is she OSH compliant and does she have public liability insurance? If so, she should be entitled. If not, No.
A from Auckland
Thats cool if she claims compo provided that she has being declaring all her income and paying her taxes when due.
Jonty (Hicks Bay)
If she pays her taxes, sure, I'd give her compensation.But if I were ACC I'd be checking that her injuries are consistent with the type of injuries which are usually sustained in a car accident.I would not, for example, approve of compensation being awarded to her if she suffered from torn inner labia after mysteriously landing on the gear stick, or from lockjaw after an airbag was mysteriously fully deployed in her oral cavity. Seriously.
Racheal (Wellington)
Does it really matter that this woman is/was a sex worker? It has totally irked me that this part *her occupation* seems to have taken over the whole story and it has focused on the "Female sex worker". "So what?", is my thoughts. Would it have made a difference as to why they *the couple* were out there? Makes me wonder what the guy had to gain by telling all and sundry that he had hired her for her services.
Bruce
Prostitution is a legal profession in New Zealand, and whether this woman pays taxes or not is actually irrelevant. Up to 50 per cent of New Zealanders are tax neutral in this country, i.e. they receive some sort of government assistance offsetting their tax contribution and they would be provided compo for a work related injury. I can see no difference in this case. The woman in question should receive what anyone else would receive. Simple as that.
Haywood Jublomee
I belive that she should get compensation because, it is a work related injury,and there is no reason why it doesn't meet the requirements.
Duncan
I can't believe how many rednecks there are saying she shouldn't get compensation. What do you expect her to do? Have sex on the street to avoid getting in cars? Saying that it's PC is rubbish, as: a. she was working; and b. she was injured. It probably wasn't her choice to drive miles away to have sex in the hills.The people who disagree with compensation are probably the same morons who disagreed with the prostitution reforms act. Go back to your hick towns and please, for heaven's sake, try to be informed before making and voicing an opinion.
Jenene
This article really got my back up. The 'journalist' really showed his opinion in the headline. Why shouldn't she get compensation? If she's a tax paying citizen, whether you agree with her line of business or not, she's entitled to it and it's frankly no one else's business. Just shows further PP journalism from the NZ Herald.
James B
She should definitely get compensation - ACC is a "no fault" scheme. Section 28 says "A work-related personal injury is a personal injury that a person suffers (a) while he or she is at any place for the purposes of his or her employment, including, for example, a place that itself moves or a place to or through which the claimant moves; ... (c) while he or she is travelling to or from his or her place of work, if ... the transport (i) is provided by the employer; and (ii) is provided for the purpose of transporting employees; and (iii) is driven by the employer..." Then the question is whether it is a "work-related" injury under s29(1), or a "motor vehicle" injury under 29(2). Given that the Act prefers inclusive, rather than exclusive, definitions, she will probably be included under "work-related" rather than excluded to "motor vehicle", provided she pays taxes.The fact that she was doing a job some find objectionable doesn't change the fact she should still be entitled to society's protection.
Missy
Yes, absolutely as long as she pays her taxes then why not?
Raqwe
I think she is entitled to compo for her injuries only if she is paying tax - I doubt she is however and if she is I doubt she is declaring all of it.
Kath
She absolutely should. Remember, she couldn't be a sex worker if there weren't any clients to pay her. If her client was injured would he get compo? Of course he would! Why vilify the sex workers and ignore the actions of the clients?
Hawkeye
Of course she should. She injured herself in a work related injury. With regarding OSH the client's car might have a current WOF so that should not be an issue, if not, then maybe more investigation should go ahead.
the real question is "does she pay her taxes".Most of these workers do not declare their income, which they boast to be a couple thousand per week, tax free, and probably on some benefit as well.
John
If you can tax their income they should be entitled to all the same benefits every other business gets. Shouldn't she be carrying a first aid kit and have a first aid certificate though?
Ray E. (Whangarei)
Should a sex worker get ACC for her injuries? What a stupid question. Yes, she should get ACC to cover the costs of her physical injuries, but no compensation at all for loss of income. I do not have a problem with the government spending tax payers money on legitimate causes, but to spend tax payers money on sports and compensation to burglars, rapist etc is just so very wrong. Especially when the health system is in crisis through lack of funding. Where are the priorities and where is the social conscience of the Red Party?
Bhoyo
No prostitutes should not be eligible for this a so called work related injury My goodness where will it all end, next thing the so called client will want compensation as well and guess what ? in todays PC and secular society with its lack of morals and decency he would probably get it.
Allan
She should not get compensation. She never asked to see the guy's driving history or if his vehicle met OSH requirements before getting in.
B Herbert
Work injury compensation is paid related to declared income on which ACC is collected through paye. No declared income - no compensation.
Delenn
If the woman is a registered sex worker and pays taxes, then she should be treated the same way as any other person in this country. Her choice of employment shouldn't make a difference, why should it? If the Government chooses to legalise certain professions then its pretty straight forward, workers in those professions have the same rights as anyone else.
Alan Wilkinson
It was either work or sport, mate - either way ACC is liable!
Absolutely Astounded
God help us! What is our country coming to when a sex worker "on the job" can claim ACC for work related injuries! I am sure it wasn't the ice that made them crash! Also, in this day and age of cellphones, why didn't they ring for help themselves, was it shame? A truly unbelievable story!
Rosie
I thinks she should be paid out ACC as she was working at the time. If she pays her taxes and everything like that then she should get what she is entitled to, after all if prisoners can get paid out while committing an illegal act then why cant she.
Rosina
What kind of a red neck question is that? Of course she should get ACC if she is legally entitled to it.Why is the NZ Herald hung up on this matter....because sex is involved? Each year big business legally rips the system off in tax write offs or other areas and feel quite smug about it.Fay Richwhite have just paid out on $20m to shareholders on a deal they claimed they didn't know the share values had turned for the worst....and you whine on in your paper about a woman who is going to be compensated for being in a car accident with her client.For goodness sake who cares - get a life.
R, Whangarei
If she is registered with IRD and paying taxes - yes. If she is working under the table - no.
Lilith
She was just doing a job, like any other worker. it is a service. Why condemn the worker , when the fellow who hired her is not . If he was drunk driving , hope he gets the book thrown at him.
Tony
Yes to work related injuries.
Marn (Hamilton)
If she pays her Taxes and ACC levies like others then yes but otherwise no.
Peter
"No-faults compensation for personal injury" is what we gave up the right to sue for. This law apples to all residents of and visitors to New Zealand, so the fact that this woman is a sex-worker is immaterial to the issue of her cover by ACC.
