Analysis of the Case Concerning Employees Safety and Harassment - Assignment Example

Law Table of Contents Question 3 Introduction 3 Discussion 3 Conclusion 7 Question 2 8 Introduction 8 Discussion 8 Conclusion 12 References 14 Question 1 Introduction According to the case scenario, Steven is an employee of Conventina Motors who is being working as a salesperson in the distribution of automobile parts. He has been provided with the company vehicle for travelling various areas for his work purpose. The policy of Conventina Motors restricts the employees as well as the staff members to carry other passengers in the vehicle provided by the company. However, it can be found that Steven usually used to provide lift to a student named Nigel form his work to his home. Nigel was a student who used to work as work placement and he often supported Steven in delivering the automobile parts to different garages. One day Steven offered Nigel to accompany him in delivering some automobile parts to a garage, which was on the way to their home. However, after delivering the parts to the respective garage, they were returning home and Steven was driving the car at high speed. Thus, the car crashed on the way and both of them were injured but the injury of Nigel was more severe. Nigel therefore held Conventina Motors responsible for the accident that took place. Thus, with this concern, an advice would be provided to Conventina Motors about whether it is liable for the accident that has been caused to Nigel with reference to varied legal regulations. Discussion The overall management of road safety has been increasing the consciousness among people and changing the overall social set up. Safety at road is equally important, as that of the safety in a workplace. Organisations are aligned towards developing the overall attributes and providing safety based on the individual needs of the employees who are operating at various operational levels and enhancing the prominence in the global domain. Correspondingly, the companies tend to develop the overall management for raising the effectiveness of the system and maintaining sustainability to ensure that the security needs of the employees could be met. With effective management of the diversified needs of the society, organisations operating in the global edge remain involved in developing legal obligations based on the effective needs of maintaining a proper channel of workflow and employee security (1Crown, 2014). Companies that are operating into the domain of providing delivery services to the users are noted to impose extensive level of impact on the overall lifestyle of the people. Thus, to maintain the effective needs of security, organisations of this present global arena are managing the safety needs based on different social status and changing needs of security amid the employees. Specially mentioning, in this regard, UK laws specify the need of maintaining a safe system of developing a proper channel and ensuring the effectiveness of the system by maintaining a safe and secured environment (2Crown, 2014). Based on the specified laws, the organisations need to assess the level of risks involved with the operations and security needs of the employees. Following this, the employees’ security must be assessed so that the commitment level of the employees could be duly met and likewise increase the effectiveness of the system. According to the law specified under The Health and Safety at Work, the states are bound to ensure the safety of all employees associated with any kind of work of a company (2Crown, 2014). Similarly, Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 provide the jurisdiction an authority to charge the organisations that faced breach of contract in terms of maintaining employee security and breach of trust. Thus, it is the legal duty of an organisation to assess different amount of risks and provide security to the employees while face such risks (1Crown, 2014). In relation to the above context, the provided case scenario reveals that Nigel who was the victim of the accident was not the member of Conventina Motors and he belonged to some other organisation. As per the policy of the company, the company vehicles being provided to the employees and staff cannot be used for carrying outside passengers other than the company personnel. From the case scenario, it can be seen that Steven has breached the policy of Conventina Motors by carrying some outsider in the company provided car (1Crown, 2014). Steven often used to drop Nigel to his home at the time of returning from work. Holding the company liable for the accident conducted through office vehicle was natural and justified from the viewpoint of Nigel. This is because the car in which he was driving belonged to Conventina Motors and it was not at all his concern regarding the policy of the company that does not allow the outside passengers to be carried by the vehicles provided to the organisational members for their respective work purpose. It would be thus the responsibility of Steven to abide by the policies of the organisation and do not carry some outsiders in the vehicle. It is a punishable offence to violate the rules, regulations and policies of an organisation and thus the court can suit charges against Steven for violating the policy of the organisation (2Crown, 2014). Conventina Motors had a strict policy for the rules to be followed about carrying any outsider in the company vehicle, which Steven has violated, by carrying Nigel in the same. Thus, the company is clear from its side about maintaining the policies of the system and ensuring effectiveness of the same. Correspondingly, the company must have kept a strict note about the fact that there was a violation of the law specified for the system and ensuring effectiveness of the same. The company is bound to keep a track of the activities perform by the employees and maintain a strict regime so that the prevention of the violation of the laws that are specified for the safety could be effectively maintained within the social domain. On the other hand, the company can even plan to compensate Nigel by penalising Steven for breaking the policies that were specified under the system (2Crown, 2014). Conventina Motors has the right to sue Steven for his malpractice and not following the specified laws under the system of the organisation security. This could be largely viewed to be having a huge amount of distress within the social domain and affecting the overall lifestyle of the employees. Furthermore, the vulnerable operations of the employee and his hindrance towards the company policy has deferred the well defined security needs of the company and thus ensured that an effective system could also not be maintained within the social domain (Crown, 2011). The development of strict rules by the organisations is often made to ensure and maintain the security of the employees. The same has been duly adhered by the company i.e. Conventina Motors, as per the scenario provided, to comply with the needs of security and safety within the social constraints (Equality and Human Rights Commission, 2011). Parallel to this, the company should also be acquainted about the different ill practices perform by its employees towards violating the norms and leading to a position of obligation. This could be even noted to impose adverse effects on the diversified requirements of the people and maintaining a secured system for the organisations as well as for the people living within a specific society (Crown, 2014). The review of the case scenario in correspondence with the different existing laws under the UK makes it evident that the company i.e. Conventina Motors can effectively defend its position. The crime or the illegal deed is an outcome of the improper practice of Steven, which is against the norms stated by the company itself. Thus, based on the above stated ground, the company can sue Steven and penalise him for the conduct of improper practices and violating the terms of the organisational rules. Additionally, Nigel does not have any direct claim against the company for meeting the need of medical assistance and costs associated with the same. However, he can put up a claim against Steven in the UK court (Equality and Human Rights Commission, 2011). Conclusion The provided case reflects a clear practice about the violation of different laws that are being specified by the organisation i.e. Conventina Motors to maintain safety of the employees. The well designed guidelines that detailed by this organisation can be apparently noted as well constructed, ensuring that a secured system could be maintained. With effective management of the employees’ security needs, the company has specified certain strict guidelines to maintain an effective domain and ensure a system for enhancing the transparency of the same. Moreover, with greater control and supervision of the different organisational needs, the company has been effectively managing the different needs of the society, enhancing the effectiveness of the system and maintaining transparency of the operations. Thus, it could be duly concluded that Conventina Motors was not liable to pay compensation to Nigel even though the accident took place in the company’s car. As the company prohibits employees to pick up passengers in the car provided by it, the violation of the law by Steven does not put the company in a position to bear the liability of Nigel. Rather, Nigel can claim the same from Steven on personal grounds, only if he wants to. Question 2 Introduction Harassments at office both at mental as well as physical level have been an alarming issue for the organisations operating in the present contemporary world. With more number of women being integrated within the organisational domain, the chances of causing harassments are increasing extensively. This has even been a common practice within the organisations to exploit junior employees based on the needs and bindings. More frequently, female subordinates become more vulnerable to such exploitations from the seniors who are working within the similar company (Acas, 2014). The situation presented under the case is also of a similar nature wherein Elizabeth is facing a situation of exploitation from a senior partner of the firm i.e. Robert where she is currently working. Several legal obligations are apparent within the systems that have been safeguarding the needs of women and other subordinated from being exploited by the seniors. With due consideration to the above stated views, the assignment tends to elaborate o the position of Elizabeth and provides an in-depth understanding about the laws prevalent to support her claim. Discussion UK laws provide a strict law specifying the detailed obligations and punishments to the people conducting assault on people working within an organisation both verbally as well as physically. These unwanted behaviours through verbal, gestural or physical conducts are often considered to be of high legal obligations that certainly affects the effectiveness of the system. The overall development of such laws majorly focuses on effective progression of the system and ensuring that harassment of any kind and conduct could be averted that may lead towards affecting the health of the people living within a specific society. It must be mentioned in this regard that The Prevention of Harassment Act (1997) provides detailed rules specifying the ill impact of harassments of any kind inclusive of psychological health of the person in concern (HSE, 2015). The Act makes it mandatory for the development of different approaches with respect to meet the needs of the individuals that impose significant impact on the health of the individuals. In relation to the case of Elizabeth, the overall scenario leads to a situation of different failures that have been creating a huge amount of impact on the mental health of the people (Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, 2015). The case scenarios reflect on the fact that different approaches pertaining to law are majorly inclined towards safeguarding the needs of development that are associated with the harassment issues likely to be faced by the people in their respective workplaces. The organisations even follow a strict rule for mitigating such instances and ensure that the effectiveness of the overall system could be enhanced. With effective progression of different approaches, the harassing attribute of the senior partners is noted to be creating an impact on the overall lifestyle of the people. Robert has been creating a menacing situation for Elizabeth and creating a huge amount of distress and psychological impact on her (HSE, 2015). The organisations that are operating within the UK jurisdictions are noted to be following a strict rule for managing the diverse situation of health and safety at the workplace. It is the duty of the organisations to assess the different level of risks that an employee can be exposed during the course of operation ensuring a far more effectiveness of the system. This is noted to be having a huge amount of impact on the different level of attributes and maintaining a transparent system that would be able to manage the level of security of the employees and safeguard them from various risks (HSE, 2014). Thus, it is to be affirmed that Robert is directly taking an advantage of Elizabeth’s situation and deliberately harassing her to make a deliberate move to hurt her self-esteem. This act could be directly considered as a case of harassment and can have a massive impact on the psychological health of the person who is being bullied (Upex & et. al., 2009). Correspondingly, Elizabeth must be seeking help from the different higher authorities of the Conventina Motors about the ill approaches and comments made by Robert towards her (Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, 2015). The case is liable to be treated under the court of law and the person conducting such heinous crime is liable for strict punishments. Elizabeth at the initial stage should comply with the different policies that are available within the Conventina Motors in safeguarding her self-esteem. Specifically, at the initial stage, the overall legal obligations must be fulfilled using the legal needs that are available with the organisation and hence strict rules must be taken for the same (HSE, 2015). However, if there are no such specific rules provided under the system for safeguarding the needs of the employees to maintain the secured system, then the plaintiffs can approach the legal steps that are specified under The Prevention of Harassment Act (1997). It can be apparently observed that the legal obligations illustrated under the court of law are deemed to be regarded as highly complex process and are noted to impose extensive level of impact on safeguarding the needs of the people (McCann, 2005). In accordance with case scenario provided, it can be affirmed that Elizabeth, to avoid the complexities attached with the legal obligations, can opt for formal procedures that are most common and prevalent within all organisations. This could create a huge amount of impact on the overall lifestyle of the people and also within different systems that are related to the program (HSE, 2015). Hence, it is to be affirmed that under The Prevention of Harassment Act (1997), the plaintiff i.e. Elizabeth can duly comment about the level of psychological insecurity that she is likely to face due to the comments passed by her senior partner Robert. Conversely, it is evident that the employee has been facing the similar instances at several other situations. For this reason, it is high time that Elizabeth needs to disclose the same to one of her senior executives and ensure that a proper system gets ensured and such adverse approaches of Robert could be duly mitigated (Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, 2015). Correspondingly, she should be informing the management of Conventina Motors about the unwanted gestures and comments that provided by Robert immediately to prevent from the chance of taking undue advantages from her. With the strategic development of the process, the employee must be raising her voice against the different approaches of harassment undertaken by the senior partner Robert (McCann, 2005). Roberts’s attitude could be counted under the notion of “unwanted sexual attention” towards Elizabeth and can be legally treated under the UK law. However, the prolonged system of the law could create huge amount of dilemma amid the employees for maintaining a transparent system and obligation. Thus, the employee must be informing the higher authorities for the negative behaviour of Robert made towards her, which is hampering her self-esteem (Crown, 2013). This could lead to an informal regulatory move against Robert and prevent from prolonged situations of legal bindings and obligations. Notably, based on the hierarchical position of Robert in Conventina Motors, the chances are high that he can influence the system of law and legal binding prevalent within the organisation. In this situation, the employee must however blow the whistle against the uncouth behaviour of the senior executive and ensure that the other employees are acquainted of his negative behaviours (Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, 2015). However, the UK law that is available for the harassment of the employees support the situation of Elizabeth and puts her plea under a positive situation. The employee can freely appeal to the court about the level of harassment that she faced (Rogers, C. & et. al., 2011). The employee can take strict legal actions against Robert so that he can be duly punished for his wrong doings. Conversely, she should be approaching the court if the Conventina Motors fails to meet the needed legal actions that are to be taken against Robert and ensure that the security needs of the plaintiff have been duly met (HSE, 2015). Conclusion At several instances, it is evident that the employees especially the women have faced harassment at different levels within the organisations, which affected their level of self-esteem and recognition. The ill behaviour of the senior executives is noted to affect the psychological health of the employees attached with any organisation as well as the prevalent organisational culture. Commendably, a huge amount of integration that has been prominent within the system and over the years is developing the transparency of the legal obligations associated with such instances. The case of Elizabeth reflects on a common scenario, which is being faced by women within the work culture of an organisation and unwanted gestures passed by seniors taking undue advantages of the people having certain obligations. This development within the system gets promoted based on the diverse needs of the society and maintaining self-esteem of the employees operating within an organisation. The review of the situation of Elizabeth reflects on the fact that the plaintiff can duly seek legal support from the UK court for safeguarding her self-esteem. References Acas, 2014. Bullying and Harassment at Work. Media, pp. 1-16. Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, 2015. Harassment and Bullying At Work. Factsheets. [Online] Available at: http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/factsheets/harassment-bullying-at-work.aspx [Accessed May 04, 2015]. 1Crown, 2014. Driving At Work. Health and Safety Executive. [Online] Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pUbns/indg382.pdf [Accessed May 04, 2015]. 2Crown, 2014. A Guide to Workplace Transport Safety. Health and Safety Executive. [Online] Available at: http://www.hseni.gov.uk/hsg136_workplace_transport_safety_employers_guide.pdf [Accessed May 04, 2015]. Crown, 2014. The Basics for Your Business. Health and Safety Made Simple, pp. 1-12. Crown, 2013. Information for Local Areas on the Change to the Definition of Domestic Violence and Abuse. Home Office, pp. 1-20. Crown, 2011. Guide to Legal Forms. Department for Business. [Online] Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/furtheradvice/bullyingindividuals.htm [Accessed May 04, 2015]. Equality and Human Rights Commission, 2011. Employment Statutory Code of Practice. Equality Act 2010 Statutory Code of Practice Employment, pp. 1-200. HSE, 2015. Advice for Individuals. Guidance. [Online] Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/furtheradvice/bullyingindividuals.htm [Accessed May 04, 2015]. McCann, D., 2005. Sexual Harassment at Work: National and International Responses. International Labour Office, pp. 1-66. HSE, 2014. Preventing Workplace Harassment and Violence. Joint Guidance Implementing A European Social Partner Agreement, pp. 1-12. Rogers, C. & et. al., 2011. Police Work: Principles and Practice. Routledge. Upex, R. & et. al., 2009. Employment Law. Oxford University Press. Read More