Duty of Care at the Workplace
The Basics of High Quality Academic Writing
August 8, 2017discuss a theme explored in The Lais of Marie de France
August 8, 2017>
Date
Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of
Master of Criminology in xxx (insert your degree title)
Department of *xxx*
University of *xxx*
Duty of Care at the Workplace
Index
- I. Legal Provisions on duty of care in the workplace
- a. The employer’s duty
- b. Duty of employees, customers and visitors
- c. Implications of duty of care requirements on the competency of private security personnel
- II. Implications of physical intervention
Chapter Three
- I. Legal provisions on duty of care in the workplace
- a. Employer’s duties
The increasing workplace violence incidences have attracted legal attention with regards to the role of the operational private security personnel and their employers in the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms (Hakala, 2008). ASIS International (2005) categorizes the duty of an employer into two; the employer’s obligation to safeguard against preventable risk to customers, employees and other visitors on the premises, and the obligation of the employer to consider the rights of employees in the course of any disciplinary or investigative procedure arising from workplace violence incidences or threats. In respect to the first category, there is no particular law that mandates the employer to prevent violence at the workplace (ASIS International, 2005). However, the duty is imposed on the employer in relation to workplace safety, health and welfare legal provisions including common law and statutory provisions.
Though there is no general duty to avoid harming others (ASIS International, 2005), the existence of a duty of care has been recognized by the courts in the past particularly in circumstances where one can reasonably foresee the likelihood of the course of conduct causing damage or injury.But as Dunne (2000) puts it, so far, the Irish courts and legal society have only been able to implement provisions on the responsibility of employers to take charge in case of physical damage and are yet to implement that of mental damage caused to the employee in the course of undertaking their day to day duties. Lawyers have interpreted the law to mean the employer owes his employee the duty of care only in foreseeable risks (Dunne, 2000).
Common law provisions form a platform for solving workplace violence in most states (ASIS International, 2005). The principles included in the common law provisions encompass the obligation of the employer to make responsible measures for guarding against workplace violence that can be reasonably foreseen. In the case of Bradley v. CIE
ASIS International. (2005). Workplace Violence Prevention and Response Guideline. Alexandria, VA: ASIS International.
Avoiding Law Suits – Practical Steps for Licensees & Theories of Liabilities.Lousville Publishing Ltd. (2011).
Brookman, F. & Maguire, M. (2003). Reducing homicide: a review of the possibilities. Home Office Online Report 01/03. London: Home Office.
Button M. (2007). Security officers and policing: powers, culture and control in the governance of private space. Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
CoESS & Euro-fiet. (1996). Joint Opinion of the European Social Partners in the Private Security Industry on Regulation and Licensing. London: CoESS/Euro-fiet.
Cohen, L. & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity. American Sociological Review, 44, 588-608.
Deehan, A. (1999). Alcohol and Crime: Taking Stock. Crime Reduction Series Paper 3. London: Home Office.
Dunne, M. (2000). Employers Liability for Employee Stress. Bar Review.
Farrell, G. & Pease, K. (2006). ‘Criminology and Security’, in Gill, M., The Handbook of Security. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 179-200.
Finney, A. (2004). ‘Violence in the Night Time Economy. Key findings from Research’. Findings 214. Home Office: London.
Hakala, J. (2008). “Why regulate manned private security?” A report on the reasons and requirements for private security regulation as expressed by representatives of governments, industry associations and academia. Helsinki: Opetushallitus.
Health and Security Authority. Guidelines for Employers, Employees and Clients in the Security Industry.
Hobbs, D., Hadfield, P., Lister, S., & Winlow, S. (2003). Bouncers: Violence and Governance in the Night Time Economy. Oxford: oxford University Press.
Maguire, M. & Nettleton, H. (2003). Reducing alcohol-related violence and disorder: an evaluation of the ‘TASC project. Home Office Research Study. London: Home Office.
Mustaine, E. & Tewksbury, R. (1999). A routine activity theory explanation for women’s stalking victimizations. Violence Against Women, 5, 43-62.
Perkins, A. (2009). “Taking it on the Chin: Violence Against British Door Supervisors”.
Polyner, B. & Warne, C. (1988). Preventing Violence to Staff. London: Health and Safety Executive.
Skills for Security, 2010. A guidance to good practice for employers, towards safer performance of the retail security function. Security Industry Authority.
Security Standard Authority. (2002). Raising Security Standards. London: Home Office.
Stein, R. E. (2010). The Utility of Country Structure: A Cross-National Multi-level Analysis of Property and Violent Victimization. International Criminal Justice Review, 20:35.SAGE.
- b. Statutes and Judicial precedents
Bradley v. CIE [1976] IR 216.
Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations: Northern Ireland 2000: Amended 2006.
Occupiers’ Liability Act 1995, No. 10/1995.
Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations (PPE) 1992.
Private Security Services Act 2004, No. 12 of 2004.
Safety, Health & Welfare at Work Act, 1989, Section 6(1).
Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005, No 10 of 2005.
The Intoxication Liquor Act 2005.
- c. Websites
Get Licensed Limited. (2011). “Is SIA Physical Intervention training enough to do the job?” [Online] Available from: [Accessed August 8, 2011]
