It is important for business management to develop and promote sound health and safety policies and to consider, not only the legal requirements and the possibility of prosecution, but also the possibility of an employee personal injury claim.
The number of work related personal injury claims and especially those relating to Repetitive Strain Injury (RSI), an umbrella term normally used to describe Work Related Upper Limb Disorders (WRULD), seem to be rising.
RSI is not a recognised medical condition, more a medical term. There are two types: type 1 RSI with recognised, specific pathological conditions and type 2 RSI non specific pain syndrome (NSPS) or Diffuse RSI, which as the name suggests is difficult to diagnosis. Some medical practitioners unable to establish its cause do not accept the existence of it. Consequently, over the years it has been at the centre of much medical and legal discussion.
The underlying cause behind the increase in claims maybe partly the fault of administering the health and safety policy of UK employers, as well as a greater awareness amongst workforces of the medical term RSI. However, combining both with the rise of no-win, no-fee legal services being advertised, it is perhaps understandable why the number of personal injury claims is rising.
This essay will identify the main sources and routine functioning of the English legal system and research and report on the developing area of law involving RSI.
Health and Safety Act
The health and safety of employees in the workplace is protected by legislation provided under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HASAWA) and its applicable regulations.
The development of health and safety law dates back to the early 19t...
... middle of paper ...
...ld significantly lighten the judicial systems personal injury case load, and would give peace of mind to all concerned in the knowledge that a fair and consistent outcome for their injury was guaranteed.
Overall, the uncertainty amongst medical practitioners in determining a clear medical/work link to RSI injuries is all too common. This can lead to difficulty within the courts in reaching a legitimate decision, let alone one that is comparable with past cases and with compatible damages.
Whether RSI claims reach the courts and are won or lost, employers, prior to the claim, have almost certainly been paying a price through the employee’s general lack of wellbeing and discontent at work. Unfortunately, in a lot of instances the very nature of this condition lends itself to being overlooked by management, until it is too late and a claim becomes imminent?
The health and safety and safety work act 1974 is one of the major pieces if legislation is this country to affect businesses and the workplace. It is an enabling act, which means that other legislations can be added without changing the actually act itself. The health and safety at work act has five main aims:
The refinement of this definition has significant legal implications, as it broadens the scope of those who can sue within blameless accidents. Prior to this, such victims would also face being labelled with “fault”. Supporting the findings of Axiak, by establishing non-tortious conduct as separate from “fault”, similar, future cases are more likely to proceed despite the plaintiff’s contributory
It is unfortunate that accidents that result in injuries are a part of life. Further more it is also unfortunate that often the party responsible for said accident do not feel compelled to offer compensation to the party affected. However in spite of this, there is still hope for the injured party thanks to personal injury lawyers. They are tasked with representing their clients who suffered from these events while making sure that their clients receive the compensation that they deserve. Ultimately personal injury lawyers play a big role with regards to safety initiatives by helping those injured, which is something that we all should aspire to do.
‘Health and Safety at work act 1974’ is a very important Legislation when working in healthcare as this is here to keep everybody involved as safe as possible. This has a huge contribution to health care provisions as it involves mainly everything with the job, it will include providing the right training for the certain job they do, carrying out risk assessment for service uses and the equipment used. Making sure there is a safe environment to be working and providing the correct information on health and safety. There are many policies under this one legislation for example, First Aid. Every staff member working for the NHS and in health care should all have this basic training in case needed in an emergency. The...
This Act of Parliament is the core part of UK health and safety law. It places a responsibility on all bosses and managers to make sure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and well-being at work of all their staff and workers.
Section 8 of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act (2005) puts the onus on the employer to ensure systems of work that are planned, organised, performed, maintained and revised as appropriate so as to be, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe and without risk to health. Section 19 of the Act requires the employer to conduct a risk assessment of work activities and Schedule 3 of the Act provides the general principles of prevention to ensure the safety of employees in the workplace.
Showing that program structure, program processes, program outcomes, client satisfaction, and cost effectiveness will all be considered to ensure that all individuals involved the best practises will be followed (Dyck, 2013). Claim management steps should also be taken in Suzie’s case due to unaffordable ambulance, physiotherapy and medical fees. Through completing the proper checklist of claim adjudication, such as appropriate documentation, it’s a work related injury, employee is under treatment, and that medical information supports it being a long-term disability claim are only a few supporting examples. To sum up, the initial assessment of Suzie’s case brings many critical points to understand for the Disability Case Manager. Many surface issues such as conflict between the organization and employee must be addressed, this can be done by insuring policy is addressed and conveyed to both sides, making it clear an Intergraded Disability Plan will be followed. This includes assessments of the employee and workplace situation, development of rehabilitation plan, goal setting and coordination of the case, and brokering return-to-work
In rare occurrences workplace injury leads to death while the majority of injuries are minor. The national OHS strategy 2002-2012 by the Australian government has set a target to reduce fatality rate by 20% over the decade. The data from Safe Work Australia statistical report 2009-2010, shows a 10% decrease over 5 years to 2008, an increase in 2009 and a decrease in 2010 (Graph 1). The increase in 2008-2009 was among 15-24 years age group with 95% being male workers.
Occupational injuries pose a major public health problem. In 2002 it was revealed that more than 5,500 workers died as a result of occupational injuries (Barry S. Levy, 2006). It further revealed that another 4.4million non-fatal injuries among workers were registered (Barry S. Levy, 2006).
Many workers are injured and killed at the workplace every day by underestimating the value of Safety and Hazards. Safety and health can add value to your business, your job, and your life. A Job hazard is a condition that causes harm, injury or illness during any work; it can never be eliminated: however it can be minimized by analyzing the acceptable risk level.
The Health and Safety Act of 1974 was set up as a means to protect
Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) legislation are a set of rules that promote worker safety within a workplace. These rules are based around the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (Work Safe Australia, 2014, p.1) which aim to improve workplace safety in Victoria, however these are regulated and applicable nationally. This act ensures that certain precautions are taken in work activities by both employers and employees to benefit both parties through the minimisation of health or harmful risks and ensure that management of the workplace operates with minimal complications. Each profession and workplace encourages and educates employees of OH&S procedures, and how to optimize personal safety. This creates a win-win situation, as the employees are ensured safety whilst the work place reduces the responsibility they have towards injured employees as well as the risk of employee injury. Occupation Health and Safety legislation is not for the...
...ed with construction companies may be in fear of losing their jobs when they report a work related injury. “A large body of evidence indicates that illnesses, traumatic injuries, and fatalities are more prevalent among workers in the construction industry than any other occupational groups in the USA or other industrialized nations.” (Moore, Cigularov, Sampson, Rosecrance, & Chen, p. 97) This means that when injuries go unreported it puts employees at greater risk, “under-reporting of injuries and illnesses can compromise the accuracy of surveillance data, thus hindering the proper and timely identification of areas for organizational or industry interventions.” (Moore, Cigularov, Sampson, Rosecrance, & Chen, p. 98) Based on a report investigating barriers of reporting work-related injuries, researchers found, “that workers were dealing with work-related injuries
Although workplace accidents are very common, the majority of them can be prevented. As a company, you are obliged by the law to protect your employees, so it is important to take the necessary actions that will minimize the risk of accidents (Intelligent HQ, 2015).
Research showed that CTS claims cost employers “over $4,000 per claim” (Faucett, Blanc, & Yelin, 2000, para. 4). Included in this cost is the hiring of temporary personnel to replace the injured worker while they are at home recuperating from their injury (Faucett et al., 2000). Research showed that employer bias against employees with CTS is due to its medically imposed restrictions (Faucett, Blanc, & Yelin, 2000; Vickers, 2009; Welch, Haile, Boden, & Hunting 2010), which are placed on the employee and to which the employer must adhere (Holmgren & Ivanoff, 2007). Holmgren and Ivanoff stated that the reason employers have this type of bias is because they feel trapped by the societal constraints of this disease, which state the employer has to allow the employee with CTS the right to work a reduced work schedule and find tasks that they can perform. In the employer’s mind, this does not make good financial sense while trying to keep their budgets