Rank: Forum user 
|
I am interested in the legal position and how far the Duty of Care extends to the employment of a sub-contractor (SC) who is lone working (LW). Bear in mind the SC is sole trader and has no H&S Policy etc in place, but is willing to comply with the employers H&S Policy and procedures.
Does the employer need to provide LW devices, as it does for its own staff and monitor the SC. If so - does the SC or the employer pay for the LW device.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Mmmm...I will try to answer this one. The employer (duty holder) has a duty to ensure the safety of others arising from his/her undertaking, which will include a duty of care in some circumstances. A duty of care is purely contextual and therefore it all depends...in the cirsumstances you describe I think it is better the employer treat the sub-contractor as an employee and provide any necessary equipment, PPE etc in order to avoid any complications.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Interesting response - since posting this I asked HSE and they gave an interesting reply. Technically the answer to the 'Duty of Care' and the provision of a LW device (PPE) is NO! However, the SC has a 'Duty of Care' for their own H&S and potential obligations under contract for the LW procedure, which should be made clear. I asked about who pays for any LW devices and again an interesting response - for Agency the employer would, for SC they would, hence the contract conditions should be made clear!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Interested to find out who you have spoken to at the HSE. Was it your local inspector or the HSE help line.
If it was the help line have you asked all the relivent questions, I only mention this because I have recently advised a client who used the help line that she had only been given half the answer. The reason being was that she had only asked half the question.
Her company asked "can i use a competant manager to train in house FLT drivers" The answer was correctly given as "Yes" What she had failed to ask was "what makes a competant person". Her company was therefore using an individual who had completed a 4 hr training course 10 years previously who had good personnel and training skills.
Before anyone comments that using an in-house trainer is not a goood idear, as inpartiallity can be a problem, yes i agree. Just an example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Also the SC still needs to have carried out a RA and therefore have in place control measures. The differance being that they dont have to be wriiten as he has no employees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I spoke to the helpline and as far as I am concerned, I asked all the relevant questions. You can take it that the SC has already been approved as competent via an assessment process.
These issues are the finer detail of 'Duty of Care' verses 'Contractual Responsibilities' - which in bothg cases need to be clarified, not assumed!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.