Knowingly Recommending Equipment That Is Not Fit For Purpose
Who would be liable in an organisation is a trusted person was intentionally bringing in equipment that was not fit for purpose, in other words, it has not been industry tested or medically reviewed, and was, therefore, breaching Section 6 of the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974?
For information on the equipment mentioned in the video please contact Doug Melai by email at [email protected] or via the website at www.safer-handling.co.uk
You Must Take Extra Precautions Where Someone is More Susceptible To Injury
Following on from the video I did yesterday (‘What Do I Do As A Trainer If I Believe a Learner is Not Fit Enough To Undertake the Training?’) I’ve been sent some information by a good friend of mine who is also a very competent and highly qualified Health & Safety Professional that adds additional value to what I put out yesterday.
What would you do as a trainer if a learner turned up on your physical intervention training day and they disclosed information to you about themselves that led you to believe that they weren’t fit enough to do the training or capable enough to do the training but you were being told that you had to train them anyway?
If you are currently a trainer delivering the module 4 pi unit of the door supervisors award course, then why not consider mapping over to us here at NFPS Ltd?
An individuals rights under Common and Criminal Law cannot be compromised by a contract of employment.
Sam Childers (and not the Hollywood star Gerard Butler) will be speaking at the South Hayling United Reformed Church on Tuesday 16th April 2019 as part of his UK tour.
Sam will be speaking about his work rescuing children in war-torn Africa and you can help us to make Sam’s visit a memorable one by coming along and by sharing the event with your friends and colleagues who may also be interested in attending.
