Local Govt | National News Video | Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Search

 


Can an employer be held accountable for the unforeseeable?

17 October 2013

Security Guard Death – Can an employer be held accountable for the unforeseeable?

Employers face prosecution if they fail to take all reasonably practicable steps to ensure the safety of their employees while at work.

But the employer is unlikely to be held liable when it can be shown that, even if all such steps were taken, this is unlikely to have prevented the serious and unanticipated harm.

Earlier this week, a court ruled that the company that employed Auckland security guard Charanpreet Dhaliwal could not be held accountable for his death.
CNE Security was charged with failing to adequately ensure Mr Dhaliwal's safety, but in a judgment released by the Waitakere District Court, the company was found not guilty.
Mr Dhaliwal was killed in November 2011 on his first night on the job as a static security officer at a base campsite for workers engaged on an interchange development. The case, brought by the Ministry of Business Innovation,looked at the extent to which CNE was responsible for the death.

The site where Mr Dhaliwal died was regarded by both CNE and site controllers Fulton Hogan as low risk. CNE had not been fully informed about previous incidents on-site and although it was his first day, Mr Dhaliwal was an experienced guard who had previously done work that was more difficult compared to the basic work of a static guard.

It is possible the result might be different if an employee had little or no previous experience - especially if the employer was aware of previous serious incidents on the site as the of risk of harm could be much greater.

The facts
CNE was engaged by Fulton Hogan Ltd to provide security at the site, which contained port-a-coms, a few containers and various construction equipment. The site had experienced several break-ins at night. The static security guard was to perform hourly checks of the buildings and gates, with a log to be completed in one of the port-a-coms.

Mr Dhaliwal called the owner of CNE to seek work and was told he would be contacted if there was any work available. A few weeks later, CNE called Mr Dhaliwal and asked him to work that night, as another employee needed the night off. He accepted and agreed to meet the CNE’s owner on-site at 10.30pm.

When Mr Dhaliwal arrived he was provided with the site keys, a high-visibility vest and a business card containing the owner’s 0800 number so he could be contracted throughout the night. He was then walked around the premises by another employee, showing him the keys for the gate and port-a-coms, how to set and unset the alarm, the boundaries and how to complete the log book. The employee then took Mr Dhaliwal’s mobile number to pass on to the owner and left.

That was last anyone heard from Mr Dhaliwal. He was found dead at approximately 3.30am by a Fulton Hogan employee.

The decision
The MBIE informant inspector suggested two practicable steps CNE could have taken to ensure the safety of its staff. First, ensuring its security officers received appropriate induction and site training and second, having an effective procedure to monitor CNE’s staff.

Judge Tremewan accepted that, given that there were no potentially hazardous construction or building issues and no restricted areas on-site, it could be properly regarded as a low risk site. She also held that the comparatively minor incidents did not indicate that a physical confrontation was a likely risk.

The Judge acknowledged that texting as a means of checking on staff was an appropriate step that CNE should have taken., she believed that such monitoring would still not prevent an attack occurring, but it would allow CNE to respond faster to any potential problems, and possibly reduce the resulting harm.

Ultimately, the Judge decided that even if CNE had taken the steps suggested by the MBIE informant, these would not have made any difference to what occurred.

The Council of Trade Unions is seeking to appeal the decision.

·       Mark Lawlor is a specialist employment law partner at Duncan Cotterill in Auckland and Jessie Lapthorne is an associate. Mark.lawlor@DuncanCotterill.com

ENDS

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

 

Plain Packs Plan: Gordon Campbell On Tobacco Politicking (And The TPP Death Watch)

Has Act leader David Seymour got the easiest job in the world, or what? Roll out of bed, turn on the radio and hmm…there do seem to be a lot of problems out there in the world. Must think of something. And so it came to pass that this morning, David Seymour took up his sword and shield to fight for a world that’s about to be denied the rich and vibrant beauty of tobacco advertising. More>>

ALSO:

.


RECENT TPP MEETING:

Professor Ian Shirley: The Budget That Failed Auckland

The 2016 budget offered Auckland nothing in the way of vision or hope and it continued the National Government’s threats against the Auckland Council. Threatening the Council with over-riding its democratic processes if it fails to release land for housing is a bullying tactic aimed at diverting attention away from the fundamental problems with housing in the region. More>>

ALSO:

PM's Post Cab Presser: Budgets, Trusts And Pacific Diplomacy

Today Prime Minister John Key summarised last week’s budget and provided further detail about his upcoming trip to Fiji. He said that there has been “plenty going on” in the last couple of weeks and emphasised the need for Auckland council to facilitate more housing supply. More>>

ALSO:

Max Rashbrooke: A Failure Of Measurement: Inside The Budget Lock-Up

Shortly after the embargo lifted at 2pm news organisations started filing reports claiming that health, and to a lesser extent housing and education, were the ‘big winners’ out of the Budget. It failed to take into account the fact that in most cases the apparent increases were in fact cuts. Because of the twin effects of inflation and population. More>>

ALSO:

DOCtored Figures: Minister Clarifies DOC Budget

“Commentators have overlooked the fact $20.7m of that perceived shortfall is new funding for Battle for our Birds 2016, provided for in last week’s Budget...” DOC also has approval in principle to carry over a further $20m to 16/17 due to unexpected delays in a number of projects. More>>

ALSO:

For The Birds: Gordon Campbell On The Budget

Budgies, so their Wikipedia page says, are popular pets around the world due to their small size, low cost, and ability to mimic human speech. Which is a reasonably good description of Finance Minister Bill English eighth Budget. . More>>

Max Rashbrooke On The 2016 Budget

The best label for this year’s announcement by Bill English might be the ‘Bare Minimum Budget’. It does the bare minimum to defuse potential political damage in a range of areas – homelessness and health are prime among them – but almost nothing to address the country’s most deep-rooted, systemic social problems. Indeed the Budget hints that these problems may get worse. More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On Bank Scandals (And Air Crashes)

Last month, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) filed proceedings against Westpac over activities that have some distinct echoes of the Libor scandal. More>>

Get More From Scoop

 

LATEST HEADLINES

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Regional
Search Scoop  
 
 
Powered by Vodafone
NZ independent news