Payroll Distribution. Print and distribute reports needed such as
Unit 8: Understanding health and safety in social care settings. Activity 1: Legislation and policies indentify the responsibilities of employer, employee and individual in relation to the legislation and policies below Health and safety at work act 1974 The setting in which you provide care are generally covered by the health and safety at work act 1974. This act has been updated and supplemented by many sets of regulations and guidelines which extent it, support it, or explain it. The regulations most likely to affect your workplace are manual handling 1992, control of substances hazardous to health regulations 2002 (coshh), reporting of injuries, diseases, and dangerous occurrences regulations 1995 (riddor), health and safety first aid regulations 1981, management of health and safety work regulations 1999. There are many regulations, laws and guidelines dealing with health and safety.
Peter is extremely unhappy and his attitude about his work affects almost everything that he does. He displays this attitude through cognitive, affective, and behavioral components throughout the movie. In an attempt to make his situation better, Peter agrees to seek the help of an Occupational Hypnotherapist to try and save the struggling relationship that he has with his girlfriend Anne. At his session Peter tells the hypnotherapist “Ever since I started working, every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it, so that means every single day that you see me, that’s on the worst day of my life”. This is the cognitive component of Peter’s attitude.
Explain where an employee can reasonably expect to have privacy in the workplace. Employee privacy rights are automatically granted and protected by specific labor laws, regulations and certain rules to follow, especially when it comes to employment. According to privacy NSW (2002), in order for an employer to legally videotape you it must have some legitimate business purpose. Though, there is no specific statute or code that creates a right to privacy, a gray line is always brought into discussion which employers could always argue about gaining more control and productivity over one employee. If there is a policy of the employer related to workplace including privacy issues, that policy is legally binding.
What should the court decide? Why? > Background check is very important before hiring an employee because it presents the potential liability of employers for the harmful acts of the people they hire. Employers are generally responsible for the actions of their agents so they should avoid negligent hiring. If an employer fails to meet its duty to conduct an adequate background check and hires an unfit employee who uses his or her position to inflict harm on others, that employer may be liable for negligent hiring.
The first of these processes is the piecework payment system. At Lincoln, manufacturing employees are compensated for the work based solely upon the number of pieces that they have completed (p.131). Rates for each piece were predetermined by management and fixed at that rate unless the method or process of production was changed as noted in Figure 1. However, employees are given the opportunity to challenge management about the rates if they believe the rates are inadequate as noted in Figure 1. To ensure the quality of the products being produced at Lincoln, employees were only compensated on products that were not defective and employees had to repair the products on their own time in order to receive payment for them (p.132).
Remember that there are a number of labor laws that are mandatory but even if this is so, there is still a lot of people who tend to violate the rights of workers everywhere. One example of an employee’s violated rights is unfair dismissal. When it comes to this particular thing, you are dealing with a situation where a worker is fired for no reason or coerced into quitting his or her position. Aside from the obvious reason of not wanting to keep the same employee in the company roster of paid personnel, there are businesses that resort to this so that they will not have to provide any severance pay for a worker that they are planning on removing from the system. There have been plenty of instances when workers lost their jobs for reasons such as not having the right looks or being of a different race.
It is well established law that an employer may be held liable for its employees’ breaches of common law obligations and statutory duties where this is expressly stated within the statute. Employers will be liable for injury sustained by employees in the course of employment. It is applicable to claims by both third parties and fellow employees. If a fellow employee's injury is sustained outside, the course of employment the employer is not liable. An employer is not liable for the torts of an independent contractor, but he will be responsible where the contractor's negligence produces a breach of the employer's primary duty Every employer has a common law duty to provide a safe workplace, safe equipment and a safe system of work for employee in order to avoid injury to employee in all area of their employment, Connolly v. Dundalk UDC (1990).
Drug use in the work place Drug use by an employee is rightfully private unless the reason that an employer needs to know is for the safety of their employees. There are many reasons to support employer’s right on regulation of their employees drug use. Amongst these are the arguments focusing on the personal rights of other employees and safety by having a drug- and alcohol-free workplace policy in place. While I support the rights of privacy for consenting adults. I feel that once you use drugs in a work place you put other employees at risk.
Common law and risks in the workplace in the 1880s Common law doctrines dealing with risk in the workplace before the 1880s, states that an employer was obligated to provide a safe work environment for their employees. As a result, employers who failed to provide their employees with a safe place to work were vulnerable to lawsuits. Injured workers file these lawsuits siting a breach of contract, but employers had a number of strong defences which the courts accepted; minimizing the liabilities for injured workers of lawsuits that were filed. The first defence accepted by common law courts was that of contributory negligence with the issue of causation. If it can be proven that it was the employee’s own negligence that contributed to the cause of the accident, then the employee would not be entitled to any recovery from the employer.