Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Iommi Oct 25 2010, 09:41 PM

When are we going to see directors slung in gaol for this sort of thing?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Oct 25 2010, 10:09 PM

I kind of agree. What I mean is, where the accident is the result of a systematic failure to put in place safe systems of work then absolutely, the buck stops with the directors and they should go down for corporate manslaughter - or better still, they should do their duty in the first place. But not every accident is the result of a systematic failure.

Posted by: blackdog Oct 25 2010, 11:04 PM

In this case the guy had a camera installed to prove his care was inadequate - after his complaints were ignored. If this was't a systematic failure I'm not sure what would be.

Posted by: Iommi Oct 26 2010, 08:11 AM

Yes, that is what I getting at. A director might not be able to be everywhere, but there are times when I see things in the news and I am staggered that people don't get gaol more often.

Posted by: Phil_D11102 Oct 26 2010, 09:41 AM

In this case the hiring manager should of ensured the qualifications of the carer's were adequate to the care they should of been providing. The directors should be responsible for the processes that are used to hire workers. I wouldn't hold the directors responsible, I would hold the person who hired the individuals involved.

Posted by: Iommi Oct 26 2010, 09:42 AM

They could be the same person.

At the end of the day, someone is criminally negligent, but all we ever seem to see is: "we've put things in place so it wouldn't happen again." If people started going to gaol, perhaps they would have these systems in place sooner?

Posted by: Bloggo Oct 26 2010, 10:12 AM

I totally agree. It needs a strong and effective deterent to stop this kind of criminal negligence.

Posted by: blackdog Oct 26 2010, 10:53 AM

In law they are both responsible - the individual providing the care should be trained and competent, the person hiring her should have ensured this was so and the people running the company should ensure that everyone down the line is compentent. Ultimately the buck stops at the directors.

The local council / NHS trust who is employng the care company should also ensure that the care provided is adequate - it's their responsibility to provide the care, contracting it out does not absolve them of their duty of care.

Posted by: Iommi Oct 26 2010, 11:44 AM

Dare I say that there could be more, not less of this, as costs are driven down.