Health and Safety and Welfare at Work: A of Mrs. Preston - Case Study Example

Health and safety and welfare at work: A case study of Mrs. Preston Name: Course: Institution: Date: Introduction Making a workplace safe for employees is the duty of every employer. In the United Kingdom, it is the duty of the employer to ensure that the health and safety regulations are fully complied with and this includes the task of managing the same at the workplace. The duty to protect the welfare of the employee that might be affected by the nature of the work of the employee is under the jurisdiction of the employer. In this case, should the employee be injured or face any damages in the line of duty, the employer has the responsibility of ensuring that the employee is fully compensated for the damages. These responsibilities are contained in the statutory duties that applies in law for any company and have to be followed in due compliance with the law. In the case of any violation, the employee concern is at a position to demand for any damages that results from the same. Within this treatise, a case study of Mrs. Preston is examined. It gives an evaluation of the statutory obligations that apply to the case of Mrs. Preston with regards to the trauma and welfare issues that she underwent in her organization that is Fentham Metropolitan District Council. An important note is that the council might take as defenses in the legal action resulting from the case of Mrs. Preston. The paper analyses the potential strengths and weaknesses that the case might have and how each issue might be resolved. In the end it also gives the organizations potential risks and violence at work and how to control such risks and the modalities of controlling home visits for the social workers. Statutory obligations of the case Mrs. Preston, social care assessor working for the Fentham Metropolitan District Council was robbed by a youth in a socially deprived area while on duty. This happened while she had just visited a service user on her way home after the normal working hours. She suffered minor bruises to her arm and lost personal property that includes her mobile phone. The visit was also arranged by Mrs. Preston without the involvement of the Fentham Metropolitan District Council. The shock from the incident led to complications on her pregnancy at the time. Following the complication, she took a leave of six weeks and the general practitioner provided notes that indicated she needed the rest. On return to duty, the management confronted her to talk about her absence from duty but the discussion did not go well. She broke down and was escorted home by a colleague and then proceeded on a maternity leave. Her baby was also born with a light birth weight and detained in hospital for a week by the nurses for monitoring. The maternity leave had been previously planned between the Fentham Metropolitan District Council and Mrs. Preston. She was unable to return to work as planned due to trauma suffered and constant headaches and now wants to pursue a civil action. Within the Fentham Metropolitan District Council, there is no evidence of a formal risk assessment that is filled for home visits by service providers even though the council claims that one was filled in 2014. The following are the main statutory obligations that will arise in this case. Health and safety Employers have a duty and a moral obligation to provide their employees with a safe working environment. In modern corporations, the employees are constantly pushing for the employers to manage the health and safety at work and even the welfare of the employees. It is only when the employees are in good health both physically and mentally that they are able to deliver to the organization. Organizational wellness programs are some of the initiatives that have recognized the importance of mental and physical wellbeing and functioning of the employees (Lingard, and Rowlinson, 2005, p.56). These initiatives are a product of the moral nature of right to health and safety at work. The moral nature of rights implies that it might not be conventionally recognized. As such in many jurisdictions, the institution of labor laws to guide and define these rights has been done. It is therefore the duty of the employer to comply with the laws and provide the employees with a safe workplace. To build a safe workplace, an organization needs to assess the risks that its employees are exposed to in their line of duty. As a legal requirement, the employers and management should constantly talk to the employees on the safety issues. Regular consultations and discussions on the issues of health and safety can reveal concerns about health and safety and yield positive results in the development of healthy and secure working conditions. The organization should also take a risk assessment process that aims at uncovering and showing the employees the various health and safety issues within their line of work In the case of Mrs. Preston, the Fentham Metropolitan District Council claims that a risk assessment was done in 2014 but cannot be traced. This is a serious issue in the civil action as it the duty of the management to regularly avail this information to the employees through talking or consultations. Complaints Mrs. Preston being an employee of the Fentham Metropolitan District Council has the right to complain about any inconveniency that she has at work. This can be related to the harassment by colleagues or other risks that she is constantly exposed to in her line of duty and must be sufficiently handled (Delpo & Guerin, 2014, p.89). The general practitioner in this case did provide notes indicating that the Mrs. Preston had suffered trauma and this did affect the pregnancy. The level of trauma and the subsequent effects should be taken as serious and properly addressed by the authority before issuing warning letters. Sufficient hearing in this case implies that all the aspects and complications that resulted from the incident at Brunswick Estate should be carefully considered. Strengths and weaknesses of the civil action that the council might consider Some aspects of the case of Mrs. Preston give Fentham Metropolitan District Council opposition to the civil action some strength. As noted, the incident at Brunswick Estate did happen in the afterhours of duty. The victim in this case who is the employee of the council did organize to meet this client on her way home. The council can argue that this incident that happened should not be taken as part of the job since the victim who is their employee had already left for home. Therefore the incident was not within the line of duty but a personal activity by the victim (Glusman & Ciociola, 2006). Another possibility that can also support their argument is the nature of the arrangement that led to the attack. If there are procedures of organizing for visits to users of social services by the council then this is a possible avenue of absolving the council from any wrong doing. In this case, Mrs. Preston did organize the visit by the service user without the involvement of the council. This arrangement implies that it could be a private visit rather than the normal working routine if the council has a procedure of organizing these appointments. However, if there are no modalities of organizing appointments with service users, then the council is culpable in this case. It would be difficult to distinguish between employees private visitations and organized appointments to service consumers. As such, the defense of a private visit will not hold in the civil action. There is a record of poor attendance of job by Mrs. Preston. At another instance, she did abscond from duty without a proper documentation showing evidence of the situation she was in at the time. This scenario is also coupled with the fact that she had been initially issued with a number of verbal warnings to the same. The council can therefore claim that the level of misconduct by the employee is some of the reasons that led to their action and therefore needs not compensate the employee. All the above claims can be used by the council in their defense to water down the civil action. However, there are points of weaknesses that the council could be found to be culpable. It is the responsibility of every employer to ensure that the members of their organization operate in a safe and secure environment. This responsibility comes with the duty to constantly make consultations with the employees on their safety and health issues within the organization. A comprehensive risk assessment should also be taken by the council. This information should also be passed to the employees and the potential measures put in place to mitigate the possibility of the risk occurring. An appropriate risk assessment also provides details on how the risk will be handled in case it happens. The Fentham Metropolitan District Council claims that there is a risk assessment that was taken but cannot avail the details of the same. This situation implies that there is a lack of communication to the employees on the potential risks that they face from their work. Furthermore, the risk analysis would reveal the required procedures when booking appointments with service users in case major challenges are foreseen. However, there is no record of the same and this gives the employees the leeway to book the appointments by their own judgment and will. Controlling risks In controlling such risks such as assaults to the practitioners that provide services to the members of the district, the booking of appointments should be overseen by the council (Photopoulos, 2008). The violence at work should be clearly defined by the management of the council. This includes the definition of areas that are prone to violence and the potential of the same violence being met on the employees of the council. A policy statement for the council should look like follows. Before arranging for any visit to social services consumers, the risk situation resulting from the visit has to be analyzed by the council. This information will be provided to the practitioner who has to do the visit prior to the visit. The practitioner has to assent to provide the services under the conditions that are identified in the risk assessment. The council will also look at the condition of the service providers before sending them into the fields in order to limit the potential impacts such as trauma. For any personal arrangements of appointments, the council will not be held liable for any form of violence to the employees. All appointments must also be taken within the stipulated times of work. In case an area is identified as a potential risk area, security escort is to be provided by the council to a practitioner that is to visit the area. If the practitioner feels uncomfortable with the arrangement, they can be given a chance to complain and withdraw from the provision of the service. Alternatively, a special setting can be made to take the meeting. Contacts in case of emergency will also be given to the employees who opt to take visits in areas that are categorized as high risk areas. The contacts will be for medical assistance and security for the employees in case of attack. Employees who have been attacked will need to proceed to have a mandatory psychological evaluation before resuming duty (Fagel, 2003,p43). Absenteeism from work will only be allowed with a prior notice. In case the notice is not availed such as in a medical emergency, the general practitioner’s notes and medical reports should be provided to validate the cause of the absence. It will also provide an insight into whether the cause of the medical condition is from the duty of the social worker. Procedure of a home visit Before a home visit, the following procedure should be followed. First, the risk analysis of the region is conducted by the council. This will look at the security of the region and the likelihood of the events happening. The situation will then be monitored over a period of time like one week. The practitioner who will take the visit is then informed of the situation of the area and how best they can mitigate the possible risk associated with the area. This will be followed by a signing of an acceptance form that shows whether they are willing to take the assignment or not under the prevailing circumstances. If the practitioner is unwilling to take the risk of visiting the home area, alternative arrangements can be made like assigning another practitioner or provision of security escort. If the practitioner wishes to take the assignment, he must sign a consent form that indicates their acceptance. The council will then liaise with the individual that is to receive the visit and make appointments. This process will include the preparation of the individual so as to prevent the individual from acting violently against the practitioner. The social services provider will then proceed to take the home visit and an evaluation taken at the end. Bibliography Delpo, A., & Guerin, L. (2014). The manager's legal handbook. Fagel, M.J., (2013). Crisis Management and Emergency Planning: Preparing for Today's Challenges. CRC Press.Bottom of Form Glusman, D. H., & Ciociola, G. D. M. (2006). Fiduciary duties and liabilities: tax and trust accountant's guide. Chicago, IL, CCH. Lingard, H. and Rowlinson, S.M., (2005). Occupational health and safety in construction project management. Taylor & Francis. Photopoulos, C. (2008). Managing catastrophic loss of sensitive data a guide for IT and security professionals. Rockland, Mass, Syngress. Read More