Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Kim Hedges  
#1 Posted : 19 February 2020 21:28:10(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kim Hedges

In the current news cycle there is 'news' of how the M.O.D. (Ministry of Defence) continues to fail our armed forces by opting out of the laws of the land with legal jiggery pockery. 

Now to explain my position, I am ex-forces, both regular and territorial, serving 18 years under the Queens Colours.  I have been an Army Trainer in the past and taught all the typical subjects to both recruits and candidates.  I left in 1996.  I've since worked under fire as a civilian in Northern Iraq in 2007-2009 working with U.S. Armed Forces. 

I am appalled that the M.O.D. has been allowed to get away with murder, because that's how I see it.  There should be a basic duty of care to all who work, this is how our original 1974 Act was constructed, with the idea of the betterment of British subjects. 

How many more deaths before the law removes Crown imunity?  

Ian Bell2  
#2 Posted : 19 February 2020 22:16:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ian Bell2

I agree with your sentiments, but I thought Crown Immunity had been withdrawn from MOD/HM Forces quite a few years ago. 

thanks 1 user thanked Ian Bell2 for this useful post.
Kim Hedges on 19/02/2020(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#3 Posted : 19 February 2020 22:24:17(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Why would the Commander in Chief bring any law to bear that laid her liable to prosecution?
Roundtuit  
#4 Posted : 19 February 2020 22:24:17(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Why would the Commander in Chief bring any law to bear that laid her liable to prosecution?
Kim Hedges  
#5 Posted : 19 February 2020 22:28:49(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kim Hedges

Yeah I had thought so too, apparently not.  This current item was about the 3 guys who died on the Brecon Beacons.  It was the hottest day of the year, there was no drinking water available, no ambulance, no medical personel nearby, no communications, no overall on the ground control, not even any shelter between stages.  It was a shambles, 15 other candidates could have died too. 

Edited by user 19 February 2020 22:30:25(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Ian Bell2  
#6 Posted : 19 February 2020 23:27:05(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ian Bell2

Won't be a popular view point - but the old special forces statment applies - 'train hard, fight easy'

Afraid to some extent casualties in training are a risk of the job.

In my old mob, occasionally we would lose a jet into the side of a mountain and crew. But a training risk, as that is what was required to fly very low, be the best our guys could be and to give the best chance of surviving in a real shooting match.

Very regrettable however such training accidents take place, but an acceptable and necessary risk.

RayRapp  
#7 Posted : 20 February 2020 08:36:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Sorry but I don't agree training deaths is an 'acceptable and necessary risk'.

I also appreciate that training must be realistic and can be dangerous, therefore mishaps can happen. However, poor planning and management of training is not an acceptable excuse in my book. There have been several incidents of fatalities whilst training and someone needs to get a grip and be accountable when things go wrong.

Crown censure is basically a slap on the wrist.

thanks 1 user thanked RayRapp for this useful post.
jwk on 24/02/2020(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#8 Posted : 20 February 2020 09:13:01(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

https://www.hse.gov.uk/services/armedforces/application.htm#

The HSW Act does not apply in respect of the MOD's work activities and operations abroad.

Is training not a work activity

Edited by user 20 February 2020 09:21:33(UTC)  | Reason: finish posting - windows update struck

Roundtuit  
#9 Posted : 20 February 2020 09:13:01(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

https://www.hse.gov.uk/services/armedforces/application.htm#

The HSW Act does not apply in respect of the MOD's work activities and operations abroad.

Is training not a work activity

Edited by user 20 February 2020 09:21:33(UTC)  | Reason: finish posting - windows update struck

A Kurdziel  
#10 Posted : 20 February 2020 09:35:25(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

Crown Immunity is the idea that the Crown ie the government cannot prosecute it-self. This means that for example the armed forces as such cannot be prosecuted under Health and Safety at Work Act or any other criminal law. It extends to parts of the civil service with many government departments and agencies coming under Crown Immunity. Until about 40 years ago the NHS was also covered but now the health trusts are regarded as independent bodies and   can be prosecuted.

Crown Immunity has been further reduced by the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007. This enables government departments and agencies listed in Schedule 1 to be prosecuted for Corporate Manslaughter and it includes the MoD.  This does not extend to operational matters (ie fighting wars etc)

 

Although Crown Immunity still prevents certain bodies from being actually prosecuted the Health and Safety at Work Act (Section 48) makes it clear that they are still expected to comply with H&S laws, but rather than being prosecuted the crown body in question is subject to a Crown Censure

(I was involved in one a number of years ago). Of course there is no fine levied against the  crown body –what’s the point since the money goes back to the treasury, where it come from in the first place, but it is recorded and listed on the HSE website just like prosecutions. Crown immunity doesn’t apply to individuals and if they are found liable they can be prosecution (for example under Section 7 or 37).

Since 1947 is has been possible to sue the Crown for negligence etc just like anybody else.

 

thanks 2 users thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
Hsquared14 on 20/02/2020(UTC), Natasha.Graham on 20/02/2020(UTC)
Ian Bell2  
#11 Posted : 20 February 2020 11:49:21(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ian Bell2

#6 I usually agree with most things that you have a view on Ray, but think you are wrong on this one.

With the best will in the world and all necessary procedures followed and suitable plans in place - we still lost the occasional jet.

There have been mid air collisions where such was the combination of circumstances, too long to expalain here, that, aircraft hit each other  (mainly a unique set of human factors issues), natural causes from birdstrikes bring aircraft down - sure avoiding known bird activity areas etc, but low flying is inherently dangerous.

Aircraft going into the sea due to loss of crew spacial awarness/situational awareness. Very difficult to train out the risk etc.

Risks are more predictable for ground based activities I would agree and hence more manageable etc. 

We all accept risk in life, for the benefits brought about. Are you going to cancel your 2 weeks in the sun because the aircraft might crash or you get killed in an RTA on the way to the airport? 

RayRapp  
#12 Posted : 20 February 2020 15:45:13(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Ian, no problem. I accept that there are unforeseen circumstances which can lead to an undesirable outcome, sometimes tragic events. I have worked in rhe railway industry for 30 something years and seen many terrible so-called accidents. That said, most were preventable with proper controls in place. 

What I cannot accept is a routine training course where the temperatures are soaring above 30 degrees which leads to several armed forces personnel dying from heat exhaustion and dehydration. Killed in action is one thing, but on a training course is unforgivable.

thanks 1 user thanked RayRapp for this useful post.
jwk on 24/02/2020(UTC)
A Kurdziel  
#13 Posted : 20 February 2020 16:34:43(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

I think that Crown Immunity is a red herring (certain lawyers are looking at ways of extending their range of services perhaps?). Currently the MoD can be prosecuted for Corporate Manslaughter and individuals can also be prosecuted if it can be demonstrated that they were at fault.

The question is what system do we want to hold people to account and will it be fair both on the victims but also on those people who might be held liable? It would make no sense to jail the Chief of the Defence staff for a training accident since they could not have any control over the event that lead to this happening. Equally it would be wrong to entirely place the blame on the junior officers and NCO’s running the training exercise, as they were probably following procedures put in place by more senior people. People do get angry about this but sometimes in the real world it’s difficult to pin the blame on any one person or on the organisation as a whole. We cannot impose a fine so massive that the entire MoD has to close down, which is an option for a commercial business that fails in its duty of care under H&S law.

RayRapp  
#14 Posted : 20 February 2020 19:32:59(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Those at the top should take some level of responsibility when failure happens on their watch. They may not be directly responsible for acts or omissions of lower ranking personnel. Indeed, it is not so different in business management where policies and procedures should be in place for those lower down the line to follow.

There have been 147 armed forces deaths in training or exercise between 2000 and 2019 (Official MoD stats) which is not an unsignificant amount of personnel.

Following the Brecon Beacons tragedy where failings were identified another soldeir died on exercise in the same area in 2016 of heat exhaustion - lessons are not being learnt.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/25/soldier-die-training-hot-day-sas-tragedy-joshua-hoole  

thanks 1 user thanked RayRapp for this useful post.
jwk on 24/02/2020(UTC)
Users browsing this topic
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.