Lord Young actually said this, believe it or not - what do members think of this?

Appalling, but not surprising, John

The statement it true - no problem. People not at work also occasionally get killed by work activities i.e. the former ELO cellist who died recently as a result of a hay bale hitting his car.

Smurf, Ray, You forget the second clause of the sentence 'it's unfortunate'; well, it very often isn't, it's usually culpability rather than misfortune, in that context the comment is brutal, unsympathetic and appalling, John

...it is unfortunate...and some are preventable... and others not..that is a fact of life people can be killed travelling to work or on a night out. But anything that makes working practices safer has got to be a plus in anyones book.

Sorry, I read the sentiment not the semantic. Perhaps 'regrettable' might have been more appropriate.

I tend to agree with what Youngy's said. With the exception of the actual words and the sentiment. Certainly ain't part of life. Is he reviving 'Volenti'?

What he is saying is correct - just he said it in a way that some people may consider insensitive. I'm a matter of fact person and so I didn't consider it insensitive. And yes I have sat with grieving widows so I am more than familiar with the real life consequences. Some people's reaction to what he has said is what worries me. Yes of course we should continue to prevent work place deaths where possible, no one is saying we shouldn't (not even Lord Young in his statement). Deaths will always occur because it is impossible to eliminate risk in life. Yes do what we can to prevent them but we do have to accept that some deaths will occur because as humans we are fallible.

And any death at work is unacceptable. It can never be acceptable.

jwk stuff does happen..and we do have to put up with it....we can all try our best to prevent it..but it happens...as an ex member of hm forces...i cant recall any safety procedures that would have kept comrades from being injured and killed by other peoples action...apart from the government not sending them into areas of conflict... All the people on here agree (with the odd exception exception) that accident do happen because we are human and falible..Lord youngs choice of words may not have been the best and i am sure we all are guilty of that..but we all strive to make the working environment as as safe as practicably possible.

I too am ex-forces (and I still work with them) and would agree with the general statement that people do get killed at work and it's unfortunate. We have no influence over, say, enemy action and soldiers are 'at work'. However, if he'd left the 'at work' part out of his statement, then it would have been better. I agree - his use of the word 'unfortunate' gives me the impression that he's OK with that and that we should blithely accept it as fact and I'm not comfortable with that view at all. Maybe we should consider the statement in the context of what else he said, but I have a suspicion it won't matter.

Very true, we also don’t address the work related deaths from occupational health to the same degree as workplace fatalities, even though these are far greater?

Can we try some thought experiments. How would we feel if a politician said: 'People occasionally stabbed in the street, it's unfortunate but its part of life' 'Children occasionally get beaten to death by their parents, its unfortunate but its part of life' 'People's cars occasionally get stolen, its unfortunate but its part of life' 'People occasionally can't get medical treatment they need because hospitals are over-worked, its unfortunate but it part of life'. All the statements above are true, for a given value of truth, John

Death is the ultimate destiny for us all. It is the last act of life: it is indeed the final part of life. So in that sense the statement is akin to the world is round, night follows day etc. However the manner of our departure from this earth is critical to each and every one of us. For those dying in workplace accidents, their life is prematurely cut short. For the families and friends of those killed, the event is traumatic. The ones left are usually devastated. It is not ‘unfortunate’ it is tragic. People are taken before their time: that is the injustice of it. However it is what the statement implies that is the problem. The definition of unfortunate includes ‘unlucky’ and ‘fateful’. This implies people die at work because they are unlucky: it happens. Get over it. Yet each year the HSE produces accident reports that clearly identify many of the deaths occurred because of systematic failures in managerial control. In the odd incident the individual is deemed to be largely responsible for their own demise. In most cases it was not a matter of luck, it was contrived. Some individuals have gone to jail because they were successfully prosecuted for the manslaughter of a worker. This is hardly reflects some unfortunate ‘Act of God’. Yesterday BP opened up the first gambit in trying to share responsibility for 11 deaths, many injuries and billions of dollars of pollution with at least two other companies in the Deep Horizon oil rig explosion. While the final report will take some time yet, I’ll wager that: ‘the 11 died because they were unlucky’ will not be a conclusion: or ‘workers will need to improve their skills at being lucky’ will be a recommendation in the report. The vast majority of people who are killed at work die because well known and easily available preventative solutions are not applied. This knowledge should not lead to some shrug of the shoulders and comments of ‘such is life’. It should make people angry. We cannot just accept death at work is inevitable. It should be a motivator to galvanise more effort into addressing the failures. Workplace deaths are mainly the result of failures in managerial controls, not unfortunate, unlucky, fateful ‘Acts of God’. To me the statement reads ‘People occasionally get killed at work, so what.’ Nigel

So what’s the point the good lord is trying to make (is there more information on context?). So fatalities are ‘unfortunate’ (ie characterized by undeserved bad luck; unlucky) and ‘part of life’. Most seem to result in (successful) prosecutions so therefore are the result of criminal acts, so generally, the result of an employer not doing all that was reasonably practicable. Is he playing the politicians trick of getting us to accept deaths at work as ‘part of life’, softening us up for a lowering of standards. How much could we increase the current number to a level which was more than ‘unfortunate’?

Folks, The secret of good debating is to attack the "subject" and not the "person". Just to be clear, ad hominem attacks (against individuals) are likely to breach Forum Rule 2. Carry on.

Well put Ciaran

Sorry Moderators for mentioning the word 'dunderhead' in a post. Personally I find it abhorrently offensive for him to say that the death of my father, who died of emphysema recently after many years as a miner to be 'unfortunate', and 'a part of life'. We have personally been robbed of many years with our dad. Maybe the good lord, sat in his very plush, H&S compliant office suite would see things differently if he was to suffer such a loss.

Just to clarify (and perhaps make the point), the above is emphatically NOT aimed at the personal tragedies others have shared here.

The remark was printed in the times, 19-June-2010 (paywall) Have fun. Done-deal springs to mind.