BS: ? Injury on the job in UK

Subject: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 24 Sep 12 - 03:06 PM

I have a question for anyone who maybe has experience with this. I've a friend whose son works for a Security Company.   

He sustained some injuries when on duty at a supermarket, which contracted with the security company he works for. While escorting an out of control customer off the premises, (an adult male who was shouting, swearing, drunk and damaging displays and stock) he was attacked.   At the door the assailant turned, pulled a knife and slashed the security guard's forearm (the top side, he is so lucky it was not the under side) to the bone and slashed his forehead.

The Security Company refuses to pay him for his time missed from work, while he was getting stitched up in hospital and will not replace his now ruined uniform, which he had to pay for in the first place.

Seems to me like a raw deal. You don't expect to get sliced up at a supermarket, even if it was a late night job.

Any thoughts?

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 24 Sep 12 - 03:18 PM

Lawyer. PI claim.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Leadfingers
Date: 24 Sep 12 - 05:47 PM

And join the appropriate Trade Union !!

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Mo the caller
Date: 25 Sep 12 - 05:54 AM

Here is the official advice

I suppose they are afraid that if they pay anything it could be taken as admission of liablity and then he'd claim compensation for the injury.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Mo the caller
Date: 25 Sep 12 - 05:58 AM

Citizens Advice Bureau will know the ins and outs

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 25 Sep 12 - 06:20 AM

As an ex union official I would say the company is liable because they have a ' duty of care ' for the safety and well being of all their employees whist at work.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Charmion
Date: 25 Sep 12 - 08:39 AM

The issue is Which company?

The supermarket chain won't pay compensation to the security guard because its contractual relationship is with the security company, not the guard. The security company is the party with primary responsibility for the guard, and I'll bet a silk pyjama that its hands are in its pockets until and unless it is forced to pony up -- at which point it will sue the supermarket chain.

Note: I am not -- repeat not -- a lawyer. Also, I am Canadian, and all my work experience has been in Canada. But I have been an employee of a firm that put its people on other companies' premises, and I doubt very much that the rules are all that different here.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Musket
Date: 25 Sep 12 - 10:06 AM

My understanding, having been a director of companies and public bodies and therefore culpable in certain circumstances for such actions, is that the supermarket owners have a duty of care to contractors' staff on the premises in terms of health and safety. (This is why many places have safety induction before you can work on their premises.)

Notwithstanding that if he were doing what was expected of him in the line of his duties, his employer has a duty of care too.

Perhaps a discussion forum is not the best place for the de facto advice, so he should really do the Citizens Advice route.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: GUEST,VaTam
Date: 25 Sep 12 - 10:52 AM

Thanks guys adn gals. Mudcat peeps come through again. I have forwarded this info along to my friend.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Sep 12 - 11:39 AM

That's one reason why companies (and local authorities) like to outload jobs when they can, to avoid responsibility, and to make it harder for fellow workers to exercise solidarity.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 25 Sep 12 - 02:53 PM

Someone working sub contract will come under the responsability of the company on whose premises they are working at that time.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Mo the caller
Date: 26 Sep 12 - 05:41 AM

I'm puzzled though.
If the company (whichever it is) has a duty of care, what care do they have to take.
Well they have to do a risk assessment.
So the risk is that there will be drunk and possibly violent people entering the store.
The solution to that risk is - Employ a security guard to deal with them.

Maybe the company that employed him should have made sure he was trained to deal with drunks and knife attacks.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Sep 12 - 06:37 AM

CAB is understaffed, underfunded, and overstretched. It is often impossible to get an appointment. I repeat: lawyer up.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Sep 12 - 09:15 AM

Union membership includes free legal support. That's one reason why any employee who doesn't belong to the appropriate union is not exercisig common sense.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Sep 12 - 09:52 AM

CAB ?

It's pot luck if local CAB volunteers have sufficient/appropriate knowledge and competence
to handle complex specialised enquiries.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Sep 12 - 10:29 AM

I agree with McGrath - although I have seen overstretched union functionaries badly let down victimised depressed members (my late wife being a case in point and one of her brothers being another).

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Sep 12 - 07:00 AM

And Unison did nothing for me, about a bullying complaint. They said "Nothing to do with us! Talk to your line manager".

My line manager was (and they new this) the person I was accusing.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 27 Sep 12 - 10:36 AM

When I lost my job at Royal Mail, the union, then the UCW [ now CWU ] were worse than useless, they sent an Executive Council Member to represent me at the Industrial Tribunal who told me I didn't need any witnesses whereas Royal Mail brought 6 and a barrister, he couldn't remember anyobody's names or got them wrong, he just ended up looking foolish and lost me the case, for all that I am still a firm believer in trade unions.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Sep 12 - 11:14 AM

The official advice linked a couple of days ago 25 sep 0554] by Mo the Caller seems to be not relevant, as it relates to 'accidents at work'. The instant case was surely not an accident, but a matter of a man being deliberately attacked while doing the job he was paid for, and occasioned what appears to be Actual [or even Grievous] Bodily Harm. Were the police called? If not, why not? Why has not the assailant been identified and arrested? Surely a court which tried him would be empowered, upon conviction, to order compensation to be paid to the injured party?

I am sure, re last post, that we are all firm believers in trade unions ~~ provided they remember at all times that their function is to look after the interests of their members, and not to govern the nation.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Sep 12 - 11:17 AM

You don't rely on amateurs when you are up against professionals - and that goes for unions in legal matters. Sometimes you need to dig your hels and be bloody minded when making sure your union does its job properly. As when you are dealing with management - the difference is the union is there to work for you, and management isn't.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocler
Date: 28 Sep 12 - 11:46 AM

My wife was involved in a problem with her senior manager.
Her union rep was well meaning, but timid & unassertive,
verging on ineffectual.
He was more wrapped up in his own family concerns
causing him to cancel and rearrange meetings
and drag things out for weeks longer than necessary.

Not the best represetative, but the only one available in difficult circumstances.

Still, the underlying principle remains is it is essential to respect
the right to union membership.

My wife eventually came out of the dispute reasonably ok.
But a stronger union rep may have secured her a more positive resolution
requiring the manager to publicly apologise
and accept personal responsibility & blame for creating the problems
in the first place.

Then again, that hypothetical outcome may have resulted in a Boss with a bruised ego
and hostile grudge against my wife
and who knows what vindictive disputes further down the line ....????

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 28 Sep 12 - 12:58 PM

Leave it to the present government and slime like Myer who only accepts unions that tug forelocks to dictators and soon there will be no unions, no union rights, and no workplace rights.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: banjoman
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 07:20 AM

As a former union officer, I represented quite a few people in claims against emloyers, including representation at Industrial Tribunals. However, I always knew the depth to which I felt comfortable in proceeding to and would recomend a more professional consultation when needed. I did represent myself at IT against an employer who believed they could hire & fire at will and even briefed a QC to put their case. I won my case and received compensation -for all the good that did me in looking for a new job

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: GUEST,William Hamilton
Date: 03 Oct 12 - 07:03 AM

"I am sure, re last post, that we are all firm believers in trade unions ~~ provided they remember at all times that their function is to look after the interests of their members, and not to govern the nation."

I should cocoa. The unelected and the unrepresentative acting as though they had the divine right to rule the country. They'll be wanting to live rent free at the tax payers' expense next.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 03 Oct 12 - 11:18 AM

Like MPs, I assume.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Oct 12 - 04:23 PM

I assumed GUEST William Hamiton was referring to the royals.

Subject: RE: BS: ? Injury on the job in UK
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 12 - 05:51 AM

McGrath. I was being mischevious of course but you are quite correct. For all their faults and for all the failings of our non-constitutional system of government, MPs are at least elected and accountable. And I have on the odd occasion even heard one or two of them talk sense.