Subjective vs Objective Injury

Most safety professionals prefer to make decisions based on work injury data with clear physical evidence, as opposed to personal opinions.

Individual assertions like “I am feeling stressed” or suffering psychological harm are difficult to validate. Even where psychological injury is accepted it can be difficult to demonstrate a clear link to what the employer did (wrong), or should have done.

Let’s look at what we mean by these terms.

Objective injuries can be seen, measured, tested or independently verified by another person eg doctor, imaging or physical signs or limitations.

Subjective injuries is where the primary evidence is the person’s report of symptoms eg pain or discomfort, without clear independent measurement.

Injury Trends

From early industrial times up to the 1950s, most work injuries were incident-based physical injuries eg cuts, abrasions, eye injuries, over-come by fumes, fall injuries etc.

The 1960 and beyond saw growth in over-exertion strains and back injuries.

Famously, the 1980s gave us “Australian Paw” over-use injury syndrome, which many now believe was largely the result of technology changes eg where workers changed from using larger muscle groups to highly repetitive fine finger movements initially on electric typewriters and then on computers.

Today, many workers compensation claims involve subjective injuries, some of which transition from minor physical injuries or initial minor altercations at work to then progressing into a psychological injury.

Whilst many people might be cynical about this trend, having a healthy work environment and a good safety culture where we genuinely care about the wellbeing of our fellow workers is best placed to minimise inappropriate subjective injury claims.