Rank: New forum user 
|
I work for a company in the waste sector. I have advised against the wearing of shorts, provided a rationale, and it is covered in site activity risk assessments. Senior leaders, are suggesting employees who wish to wear shorts sign a form / waiver accepting liability in the event of injury that could have been prevented had they been wearing long trousers! Views would be appreciated. Many thanks
Thank you all for your considered thoughts - much appreciated Edited by user 30 June 2025 11:40:50(UTC)
| Reason: Update
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
whilst it is not my area of expertise and I have never came across this before, In my opinion any waiver of liability would not be worth the paper it is written on as the employer can not sign/give away their responsibiliies of keeping employees safe. This is just my opinion, so could be wrong.
|
 4 users thanked George_Young for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I don't think you're wrong!
|
1 user thanked Kate for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hi Vince, basic legal principle that an employer cannot contract out of their criminal (statutory) responsibilities. So, unless you can risk assess out of the need for clothing that covers the full length of the legs, then any "waiver" is unlikely to be worth the paper (or electronic equivalent) that it is written on! When it comes to a civil legal claim the waiver might lead a Court to conclude that there was an elemet of contributory negligence. so a reduction on any monetary damages due after an accident, but probably not much as the prime duty of care is on the employer.
|
1 user thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Agree with the above - no the responsibility can’t be signed away. If we followed that logic, then why not sign off the other PPE, RAs, SSOW etc
The lawyers would love a claim. imagine the debate (costs) of how much more /less the injury would have been had they been wearing proper PPE .. doubled to deal with each leg🙈😂
|
2 users thanked Acorns for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: peter gotch  When it comes to a civil legal claim the waiver might lead a Court to conclude that there was an elemet of contributory negligence. so a reduction on any monetary damages due after an accident, but probably not much as the prime duty of care is on the employer. Forther to what Peter says, I have known a situation where the courts viewed a waiver as evidence that an employer was deliberately trying to avoid their duty of care and imposed punative damages on top.
Id check out the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 which your company lawyers would have referred you to had you consulted them. Most (all) of the legal waivers you will be given as examples by members of your management team are not actual waivers but set out those thisng that the duty holder was not actually liable for regardless of a signed piece of paper. In the main these are a tool to prevent false claims that will be closed with a no liability settlement as a cost saving measure from the insurance company (but still will be viewed as a 'win' by both claimant and plaintif).
|
4 users thanked Holliday42333 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Having worked in Swaziland some years ago I was often in contact with Afrikaaner construction guys [as an inspector with the Swazis-Aussie foreign aid project]. They generally wore shorts at all times and in most jobs, so would look askance at any demand for other wear, so the problem would be unlikely to appear.
I didn't note any extra harm occuring to them either through wearing shorts. [and long socks]
regards
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.