Hi everyone,

I just want to know your experiences and thoughts on this topic.
We have an employee who has had 11 accidents in the last 3 years. He has had several claims against the company also. I am new with the organisation am investigating this as from what I can see no other employee has a safety record like his. This person has had all the safety training that everyone else has had, more in fact. He has been spoken to several times by supervisors and managers regarding his attitude, but still does not seem to want to try to improve.
What I am wondering is.....Does it just get to the point where he is too much of a danger to himself and others to keep employed?

Thanks

Hi Sharon - I'm sure that this will generate a lot of comment!

I've seen a few of these situations over the years and it's never good!

You identify that you're new to the organisation; so, in no particular order:-
Has the job been subjected to an independent and thorough Risk Assessment?

Not wishing to denigrate your predecessor and/or the overall management, have you ensured that the investigations have been sufficiently impartial, thorough and objective?

Just what is meant by "spoken to several times by supervisors and managers regarding his attitude"? It could well be that this has become a case of "it's him again" which creates a cycle of resistance throughout - Kieran Duignan can explain this much better.
Is there an element of bullying involved here?

Are these accidents the result of a job that the worker does disproportionately to others?

Does the job require any particular educational, intellectual, cognitive, ergonomic, etc characteristics - inc colour perception, ergonomics ?
Has the employee been matched against the actual required characteristics to ensure that they are physically and mentally capable of understanding the training and putting it into practice?
Just what does the training scheme consist of and is it appropriate for the characteristics of this individual - etc?

Does the employee have a condition that could fall within the Equality Act definition of "disability"?

Only after you've objectively considered the above [and a few more] can you legitimately consider that the individual may have an alternate agenda. And only then would I suggest that you might consider dismissal for their own and the workforce good.

Don't short-cut the process; the company will lose yet again!!

Frank Hallett

SharonD

Your account of the problem doesn't include verbatim statement of how the 'trouble-prone' employee views the issues involved.

While compliance with relevant injury prevention and disciplinary procedures are relevant, you can greatly enhance the case for the employer if you ensure that an assessment of the individual's personality is used to provide appropriate coaching based on a well-validated personality measurement tool (e.g. Risk Compass, HEXACO).

A relatively short smart way of opening new options for him and his manager that, like surgery, works very neatly and objectively in the right hands, and quite professionally sidesteps any resistance or bullying to which Frank refers (with a somewhat amusing nod to me!).

If issues of 'dyslexia' are relevant, the occupational psychology practice, Enquire Within, are worth considering

The investment of a one-off consultation of this time offers a saving of time and money in managing human risks that can be significant. For a consultant who provides such an assessment can be used as a material witness in any event of litigation if the 'magic' of coaching feedback doesn't achieve the desired behavioural changes

Obviously, my bias is one of an occupational psychologist as well as a chartered MIOSH and FCIPD, qualified ergonomist. But I'm not the author of the psychological measurement tools Risk Compass and HEXACO and have no commercial link with them.

I do generally think some people are accident prone and serial claimers as it always seems to be the same people.

I often think the whole aspect of employee's having a duty of care to themselves is often overlooked!

Grounds for possible dismissal referred to by fscott and Bob Howden are the class of 'Some Other Substantial Reason' (SOSR) and relevant case law is often classified under this heading in relation to the Employment Act 1996 and subsequent amendments including those recently introduced by the coalition government about off-the-record conversations for a settlement.

The barrister Daniel Barnett has an excellent free daily report online on decisions of higher courts as well as employment tribunals about case law in the area of employment which you may be able to trawl for guidance if need be.

Yes - and after I'd 'let him go' he said that he didn't blame me.