EMPLOYMENT LAW YEAR 3

Employment law year 3



Employment law year 3

Introduction

The legal issues that are discussed in this document are related to health and safety act of the work place. This includes Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 that is able to cover all the necessary regards that would be discussed regarding the issues and situations that occurred in WYAA and are to be decided by Dick Branson as the deputy CEO of the organization

The reason why the specific laws have been applied in this regards is that the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and Employee Rights Act 1996 are made and legislated by the government of the UK to compensate benefits, safety and injuries related to the work place environment. Since the case was related to work place injuries and threat therefore the act would be clearly able to describe and legislated the concerns through which proper decision making can be done in this regards.

Discussion

Dick Branson v. Andrew Frost

Overview

Andrew Frost, a newly appointed truck driver, whilst re-loading his truck, was reversing his Mercedes-Benz truck towards a mound of rock salt. As he did so, he failed to see that Martin Gill was at the rear of the truck. Martin is struck by the truck and is severely injured. His legs are so badly crushed that the left leg will need to be amputated. He is unlikely to be able to continue in his current job.

Analysis and Recommendation

In the case of Andrew frost who accidently collided his truck onto Martin Grill, there are several factors that can be analyzed to provide a final decision to Dick Branson. According to Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 of UK, there is much compensation that is forced to be served by the employer to the company in case of any accidental work place injury. In this situation since Martin Grill was seriously injured within the premises of the work place the compensation and legislation is liable according to which Dick Branson must compensate for the necessary funds and compensation of Martin Grill. Pitzer v Alfasi Steel Constructions Pty Ltd [2008] VCC can be referred to in this scenario where the employer compensated for the injuries that were case during the job in work premises. Daniel Hewitt v C. & K. Henderson Roofing Pty. Ltd, and Davies v Trowel Craft Commercial Plastering Pty Ltd [2009] VCC 0198 can also be referred for the compensation of injuries during workplace. It is also important to know that the compensation is also legible for Martin Grill because any type of injury that happens during the work place is to be compensated by the organizations. Furthermore, it is also a situation where the injury is caused by another employee's accident by the machinery of the company. Andrew Frost in this regards also have some mistakes however, he is not legible for any sort of disciplinary action. This is because of the fact that according to Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 of ...