- Messages
- 2,506
- Type of diabetes
- Treatment type
- Non-insulin injectable medication (incretin mimetics)
- Dislikes
- People who join web forums to be agressive and cause trouble
Following the introduction of the Corporate Manslaughter law last year, Health and Safety has tightened with the introduction of new penalties from January 16 2009.
The Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008 raises the maximum penalties that can be imposed for breaching health and safety regulations in the lower courts from £5,000 to £20,000 and the range of offences for which an individual can be imprisoned has also been broadened.
Previously, under the Health and Safety at Work Act, directors or senior managers found guilty of health and safety offences could not be imprisoned. As of 16 January 2009, however, this is a very real possibility.
In the light of this it would be interesting to see whether a refusal to allow a diabetic member of staff the time and/or facilities to take a meal break and blood test when they need to would be seen by the courts as an action that jeopardises the health and safety of that member of staff. Also whether one would need to have suffered actual harm in order to bring a case under the new regulations, or whether the risk of harm is sufficient for a prosecution.
Any lawyers out there?? (not barrack room ones!)
The Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008 raises the maximum penalties that can be imposed for breaching health and safety regulations in the lower courts from £5,000 to £20,000 and the range of offences for which an individual can be imprisoned has also been broadened.
Previously, under the Health and Safety at Work Act, directors or senior managers found guilty of health and safety offences could not be imprisoned. As of 16 January 2009, however, this is a very real possibility.
In the light of this it would be interesting to see whether a refusal to allow a diabetic member of staff the time and/or facilities to take a meal break and blood test when they need to would be seen by the courts as an action that jeopardises the health and safety of that member of staff. Also whether one would need to have suffered actual harm in order to bring a case under the new regulations, or whether the risk of harm is sufficient for a prosecution.
Any lawyers out there?? (not barrack room ones!)