Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Someone died last night where my DH works...

42 replies

ShockedAndAppalled · 28/02/2010 11:45

I'm really upset...My DH phoned me a few minutes ago and told me a man died in work last night!...this was at 9:45pm on Saturday and now the business is up and running as normal since 6am!

The company have briefed the workers and effectively told them it was the employees fault as he was not 'working as trained'...

This man was married and had 2 young children, he was a person and yesterday he was still alive!

My DH didn't really know him but spoke to him and he's cut up about how the Management and even the Union (this is a huge supermarket chain) are just acting like nothing has happened (he's not the only one)..and everyone should just 'Crack on'...During the briefing my DH asked the Senior Manager..'what about people affected and friends.. is there anything in place for them?'...he was told yes they could go home ..I mean they had to be prompted FFS!!

I feel so sad and upset for his family my heart is breaking.. although I didn't know them... and yes it's a business blah blah blah..but this just does not sit right with me...not decent or respectful,its heartless...AIBU???..

OP posts:
EarthMotherImNot · 28/02/2010 11:48

That does sound a bit heartless.

How did the poor man die?

Nancy66 · 28/02/2010 11:49

I think you are being a bit unreasonable, yes.

It's a tragedy - but what do you suggest? That the business shuts for a week? That the other workers all forfeit their pay?

MollieO · 28/02/2010 11:51

If he died in an accident I assume the HSE will be involved. Very surprised at the comments of senior management saying the accident was his fault. That will be a matter of investigation.

violethill · 28/02/2010 11:52

Sorry to hear this, and can understand that you are shocked.

However, the fact that the business is running 'as normal' doesn't surprise me. What would be achieved by it not running as normal? I have once during my working life experienced the sudden death of a colleague. it was shocking, but the work place stayed open, and then was shut on the day of the funeral.

The thing that really shocks me is that the company have publicly stated that it was the employees fault, as presumably it would be far too early to know that, or even if it was known, the company would presumably be advised to say nothing other than a standard condolence message. Did they really state that it was the employees 'fault'?

TotalChaos · 28/02/2010 11:52

yanbu. Like Mollie I'm very surprised at them saying anything so definite attributing blame - you'ld expect them to say they were going to investigate at this stage.

Original poster
ShockedAndAppalled · 28/02/2010 11:54

Earth He was an engineer...a machine he was working on ran him over and killed him..

I'm not saying a week Nancy but not even 8 hours? where was the investigation?..the Police came and they left it in the hands of the Health & Safety Officer who works for the company?? so the building was opened ...

He was a man who worked there for many years...obviously if a company was closed due to something like this why would a workers pay be forfeited???

OP posts:
Parmageddon · 28/02/2010 11:54

My dp works for Health and Safety Executive (HSE). He says a death at work is legally reportable, to police, local authority and/or HSE. The workplace should have been shut down pending an investigation. You can ring RIDDOR (Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences) - an HSE helpline in Caerphilly - to report this incident 0845 300 99 23.

LostArtOfKeepingASecret · 28/02/2010 11:56

It's really sad, but business does need to go on. It would be different if there was any H&S issues, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Original poster
ShockedAndAppalled · 28/02/2010 11:57

I was surprised by that too..how can they attribute blame without a full investigation???

OP posts:
violethill · 28/02/2010 12:00

Did someone in authority actually state that it was the employees 'fault'? Or was it hearsay?

There is quite an important difference.

Original poster
ShockedAndAppalled · 28/02/2010 12:00

During the briefing they stated he was not 'working as trained'...which probably means it was quicker to work that way...which saves the company money but cost him his life...

OP posts:
Original poster
ShockedAndAppalled · 28/02/2010 12:01

Yes it was a Senior Manager...

OP posts:
violethill · 28/02/2010 12:03

Stating he was not 'working as trained' is stating a fact. Presumably means he was not following a procedure.

Everything else you've added to that is your own conjecture. It is absolutely not the same as appointing 'blame'. That will be the remit of the investigation.

nellie12 · 28/02/2010 12:03

I think Parmageddon is right. It sounds a bit dodgy if they have put it in the hands of their employed H&S person.

It still has to be investigated, and the excuse that he was working differently to save money.. I suspect that if the company endorsed this and / or knew about it, they would still be held culpable.

poor man

Original poster
ShockedAndAppalled · 28/02/2010 12:06

I didn't actually add anything I asked my DH what they said and he said 'he was not working as trained' so thats why the building was opened it was the employees 'fault'

OP posts:
Ivykaty44 · 28/02/2010 12:07

Do the union and employer know the full facts of the incident?

thehillsarealive · 28/02/2010 12:08

not working as trained could have meant not wearing safety shoes or glasses or a whole host of subjective hearsay.

Seems a bit dodgy not to have this investigated properly, but if it is a massive organisation then they wont close.

mummyofexcitedprincesses · 28/02/2010 12:09

It is very sad, particularly for the family of this poor man. However, I do think that if there was a big safetry issue, the policeor HSE would have not allowed them to remain open.

Life does go on, the business needs to continue to stay open and productive in order to trade and pay the other employees. I don't think staying open is the most symathetic thing, but it is the most

violethill · 28/02/2010 12:10

But you have just added that 'it was the employers fault'!

If Senior Management simply said the employee was not 'working as trained' they are stating a fact. presumably he wasn't following a procedure as he had been trained. To add anything about 'fault' is not stating a fact, it's making a judgement.

It may be that in the fullness of time, the investigation proves that the company endorsed the employee's lack of procedure, and it may conclude that this was influenced by profits - but at the moment that's all conjecture, and not actually very respectful or helpful in a situation where a man has lost his life.

oldandgreynow · 28/02/2010 12:11

AS others have said the HSE( NOT the company H & S officer) legally have to make Aa report and decide whether it can re-open yet for exmple tehy have to be satisfied that the accident couldn't happen again.I would have thought that by opening before this they could be covering their tracks contaminating the scene of the accident, making a proper investigation impossible
Ring the HSE now !!

Pofacedagain · 28/02/2010 12:16

Yes ring HSE NOW. I am shocked the police left in the hands of the company's own H&S officer.

Original poster
ShockedAndAppalled · 28/02/2010 12:18

DH may ring me on his break so I can find out exactly what was said... as I have said I did not add it was his fault that was what my DH said...

OP posts:
Parmageddon · 28/02/2010 12:18

Dp says that the company H&S Officer has a duty to report fatalities to the enforcing authority immediately. So this should have already been done. The enforcing authority can either be the HSE (manufacturing/construction) or the Local Authority (warehousing/distribution/retail). It is effectively a crime scene until investigated and could result in a prosecution of the company, regardless of whether the employee was supposedly 'at fault'.

violethill · 28/02/2010 12:21

ShockedandAppalled - when I talked about 'adding' stuff, I didn't mean you, personally, I meant your DH, or other people he had spoken to.

I just find it hard to believe that senior management would use the word 'fault' which is judgemental, not stating facts. To say someone wasn't working as trained is a fact, not a judgement.

Original poster
ShockedAndAppalled · 28/02/2010 12:22

and tbh I dont think the fact he was not 'Working as trained' should have even been mentioned in the brief...kind of colours the whole incident doesn't it?...

OP posts: