I think the staff factor came into it because it was reporting...

I think the staff factor came into it because it was reporting that the business is churning some staff because they aren't happy, particularly what they view as excessive workload, but as staff leave it increases the workload further on those that remain resulting in claims taking forever to process. To the customer who thinks they are dealing with their superfund it looks like obsfucation to make them go away but the report is pointing to the cause being a lack of staff for the workload.

I'm not aware that Link is acting as an underwriter of insurance, so I wouldn't have thought they have an incentive to deny claims. They are just managing the process on behalf of the funds which usually have insurance underwritten by other companies like MetLife, TAL, etc.

Link has provided a service offerring that the superfunds have gone holus bolus into to reduce their overheads but I think what this report is questioning is whether it was wise for this to happen without some kind of oversight. In a way you could say it looks like they might be a victim of their own success.