Moral injury and perceived injustice are increasingly recognised as pervasive forces within workers compensation schemes; where case management models are applied to the objective of returning injured workers to health and work. Moral injury refers to the bio-psycho-social-spiritual harm resulting from an experience that violate one’s moral code, often manifesting as internal conflict. Perceived injustice, on the other hand, is characterised by a subjective sense of unfair treatment, often accompanied by external blame attribution.
In 2025, the EML Group, Australia's largest personal injury insurer, commissioned Griffith University to conduct a literature review on perceived injustice in occupational rehabilitation. The review identified several contributing factors, including the claims process and associated legislative frameworks. Notably, it highlighted that the role of a case manager can both contribute to and be personally impacted by perceived injustice. The complex nature of compensation schemes was posited as a key ingredient in increasing injustice appraisals among injured workers. Internal sources suggest this trend is mirrored in case manager experiences, with exit surveys from departing EML staff revealing feelings of ethical compromise when navigating rigid processes that conflict with personal values of care and fairness. These compounding issues are particularly pronounced in high-risk public service claim portfolios - such as police, paramedics, nurses, and social workers - where there is a high frequency of defined moral injury.
EML Group now seeks to explore the intersection of moral injury and perceived injustice across both injured workers and case managers, with a focus on how legislative and procedural frameworks may exacerbate the distinct conditions. By recognising stressors and their organisational impact, we aim to identify system-level solutions that impact organisational resilience and reduce iatrogenic harm for both injured workers and case managers.