Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Barry Cooper
I have a problem, and would like your views on the matter.
What raised it, was a contractor employee coming on site to measure up for a job, having an accident and making an injury claim against my company.
We vet them, that they have all the necessary H&S systems and procedures, insurance, they attend our induction, we ask for proof of training before they can work on site, and I believe we manage them reasonably well.
How do we protect ourselves. I have no problem if due to our negligence etc they are injured and they claim against us, but if they are injured because of their own unsafe behaviour and negligence then claim.
I appreciate it may come down to who manages them, and responsibilities etc, but how far do we have to go to avoid litigation.
Totally frustrating.
Barry
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By RP
An accident investigation would identify both direct and underlying causes. If you feel that the contractor has placed himself voluntarily at risk, knowing the consequences of his/her actions, then maybe you could justify defending such a claim.
Usually, it would be decided on the weight of probabilities, by a judge.
Has the employer done what is reasonable, so far as is practicable?
With out knowing the situation/incident it would be hard to provide accurate advice or guidance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Barry Cooper
The contractor walked onto a platform (complete with handrails etc) over a machine whilst it was running. He then leant over the handrail to use a tape measure which when extended 5m he lost control of the tape and it fell into the machine, dragging it in, and cutting his hands on the steel tape.
His at-risk behaviour caused the accident and he even admitted it was a stupid thing to do
Barry
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mark Darmody
Having inducted the contractor and they go on to act in an unsafe manner ie violate I think I would be correct in stateing your company could use contributory negligence as one means of a defence!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Barry Cooper
I would like to think that when we employ contractors, they take on some of the responsibilities, and they have employee liability insurance for their employees.
I wouldn't expect their employees to make a claim against the client.
If this is the case then the contractor takes no responsibility for his employees, and it is all on the client.
Barry
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By RP
Questions to ask.
1. Was the contractor told about the dangers?
2. Was he told to go onto the platform?
3. Are there any safety signs?
4. Had he received any instructions from his employer and the client?
5. Was his work supervised?
6. Was it reasonable to expect measurements to be taken in this way?
Answer 'yes' to all and you may be able to defend a civil claim, but expect it to be weighed on 'probabilities' and accepting a portion of blame.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Pete48 Barry, liability is not limited to the employer. Ohers such as controllers or occupiers of sites cannot be ruled out. Was this accident foreseeable given the tasks he planned to undertake? Why did he have to extend the tape 5 feet above an unguarded section of a machine with entanglement/drawing in hazards? These might be the sort of "silly" questions his counsel might ask, have you asked yourself just to make sure you havent missed something here? But remember a claim is just that. Your insurers will deal with any defence based on the info you provide them with regard to your safety management. (which on the face of it looks pretty comprehensive) The employer of the IP will also have received a claim no doubt. We need to recognise in this country that claims are an individual right and use our right to defend them. On which point see this link to a recent ruling by the appeal court. Not to be taken as the whole solution but an indicator of a shift in the natural balance of things maybe? http://www.crippslaw.com...alth-and-safety-1206.php
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
Barry
In my humble opinion, if you have done (as it appears) all that is reasonably possible to ensure the safety of contractors, then you have little to worry about. Furthermore, if the said contractor injures himself through his own carelessness, then you have even less to worry about.
For any civil claim to succeed the injured party must prove, amongst other things, that the injury was foreseeable and thus could have been prevented. It follows that irresponsible acts have no chance of persuading the Court to find in the claimants favour. I doubt whether a solicitor would entertain such a frivolous claim either.
Regards
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.