Posted By Lulu What in your opinion is the criteria for determining whether a social event is classed as "at work" and therefore would need to comply with usual H&S procedures or "not at work" and therefore at the individual's own risk. The scenario is an outdoors (and fairly high risk) fundraising activity taking place at the weekend but with some "work time" being used to travel to the location. Does it make a big difference if this travel time is paid or not paid by company? If you think it is "at work" is there a precedent I can use as evidence. Your help is much appreciated.

Posted By Tabs There is a precedent - just can't recall the name at the moment. Basically, use the boss rule - if one is obliged to comply with the boss's instruction, one is at work. Being given the opportunity to travel in works time does not make it a works event after arriving. Having to do what your told, does.

Posted By J Knight Then it gets really complicated. What the publicity around parties and so on said was that the people attending might be at work under particular circumstances, and also that the organisers might have duties of care which carry over from the workplace. So there isn't really a definitive answer (at least, not one that I can give, there are people who contribute to this site who might be able to). My feeling would be that if attendance is purely voluntary then one of the key criteria for defining the event as not at work has been met, but there are other considerations which might determine whether or not duties of care arising in work will apply. One of the key considerations is Section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Act, duty to persons not in your employment, which might apply if it is 'the employer' who has organised this, even where s2 doesn't apply, John

Posted By Phil Grace Lulu, Why this preoccupation with whether the event/activity would be classified as "at work"...? Is there a concern that if an accident occurred your employer would be open to enforcement action or prosecution? Your employer would presumably accept they have a duty to manage risk in the workplace... if they are organising or facilitating an event involving employees but taking place after the normal work day has finished why shouldn't the same standards of care be used? What would happen if an accident occurred..? A potentially valuable member of staff is injured, there is disruption in the workplace, there is "guilt" etc. In the worst case scenario the employer (or at least their representative,.. the MD?) has to go round to wife/family and express condolences....! The risk of all of this can be reduced, if not eliminated by managing the risk rather than agonising about whether it is "at work". And do not forget that even if one decides it wasn't "at work" the employer could still face a civil claim. Most employers accept that they have a responsibility for selecting competent contractors, to dig holes, mend the roof etc. Use the same procedure to select the firm that is providing this activity... and make sure they have Public Liability insurance..!! Phil

Posted By Ian P Who if anybody is arranging public liability for the event? If it is high risk I'm surprised that a specialist organiser isn't involved. If one isn't or if they don't have sufficient public liability insurance then the involvement of any "work time" could mean that it would be your insurance a claim would be made against. I would check it out with your insurers and I guess they will ask for risk assessments etc. before agreeing or refusing to cover the event.

Posted By Sally if it is being organised by the participants and it is a fund raising event for a third party does your company actually have any involvement other than donating some of their employees time to travel to the venue? if not then I would say it is an event not related to your organisation at all. Just because I'm curious - what sort of 'high risk' activity is it?

Posted By Lulu Thanks for the replies so far. The event is one of these 24 hour 3 peaks challenge things. Participants are being asked to accept a "company bears no responsibility for injury blah blah" clause in the info pack. Participants are paying all their own costs so all I can see that the company is contributing is perhaps some work time to organise the event and to travel there but does this make it a "company event" or not? As you say if someone gets injured and is off work with a broken leg would they have a case to claim against company insurance.

Posted By Andrew Meiklejohn Hi Lulu I think the questions you need to ask yourself are: 1. Does the company get any benefit out of it ie. awareness of the company, health improvements to workers, team bonding, improved morale etc. If the answer is yes then it could be classed as a work related activity. 2. Is it required by work ie. is it mandatory or is there any peer pressure for partcipation? Also any sort of indemnity agreement is not worth the paper it is printed on re: Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 Hope this helps

Posted By James Lawrence Lulu, Sorry to stabotage your thread, however the definition of 'At Work' and this thread has proves interesting for me. I do think how far our duty of care goes along with 'Must or shall', 'Practicable' and 'SFARP. The former's are pretty clear, as for the latter is our competence to establish acceptance of SFARP, have we struck the right balance? My question is.... when someone leaves at the end of their working day and the premises of their work, How far do we extend our duty of care, especially in undesirable areas if being the case. Technically, they not 'at work' however I do see a real moral issue and employees be vunerable, particularly women. We've provided awareness classes and panic alarms in the past and fortunately we not in these circumstances now. But our sister sites have a similar issue. are we obliged to provide transportation costs to X?

Posted By Ian P If the company have nothing to do with it why are they asking for disclaimer forms to be signed? As has been said they aren't worth the paper they are written on anyway unless perhaps for information if they ask about any existing medical conditions etc. A friend of mine did the 3 peak challenge a few years ago and the team name was his company's name which inferred a certain amount of involvement. I don't think it is HSE involvement you have to worry about but if there was a serious accident and a liability claim it would be the courts who would decide if compensation was due and who was liable to pay it. As the company is likely to be the only one worth sueing they would be the target.