申请文书代写-A case study of employment relations。The relationship of employment is set on the basis of confidence and mutual trust. The behaviour of employer and the environment of work place which may result in causing serious damage or destruction of the work force violates several legal regulations (Brown, 2010). An employer must take each and every necessary step to safeguard the work force and the work place environment. This is the duty of the mental and physical health. If this duty is breached by the employer, and the breach ended up causing detriment, then the employee can sue for the damages due to the negligence of employer (Ferrett, 2015). There is huge significance of Health and Safety at Work Act, 1974 (HSE). HSE has been identified as the overarching law of safety and health which places general responsibilities across the employers for ensuring the welfare, safety and health of the employees with maximum reasonable acceptance and practicability (Hood, 2012). The basic duty for providing a healthy and safe environment at work is applicable for preventing ill- health related to stress. Also, the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations, 1999, provides the duties to employers for assessing the risk of illness related to stress in the work place. Damages can be claimed for stress that is caused in the work place by breaching these regulations. Also, there can be huge significance of Fatal Accidents Act, 1976 and in this paper, this Act will be referred to from the case of Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd (2008) (Jones, 2008).
In the case, an employee ended up suffering from depression due to the negligence of employers, and out of this depression, he killed himself subsequently. It had been stated by the House of Lords that the negligence of employer resulted in the suicide. Suicide does not end up breaking the lawful “chain of causation” that relates the actions of employers for causing harm to the employee (Mahood, 2007). There can be application of the same rules to the local authority and other bodies of public.
Based on the above mentioned legal facts, it can be stated that Emily can claim for damages as the accident took place in the work place due to the negligence of the manager. The manager considered the decision of overriding safety guard of the machine, while his key focus was on speeding up the production. This negligence resulted in the horrific accident of Alan that affected the mental condition of Emily. To avoid further negative consequences due to the nervous breakdown, the company holds the obligation of providing psychiatric services to Emily for fixing and strengthening her mental condition. If the company fails to do so, it will be charged against several different acts mentioned above.
申请文书代写-A case study of employment relations。就业关系是建立在相互信任和信任的基础上的。雇主的行为和工作场所的环境可能导致对劳动力造成严重损害或破坏，违反了一些法律规定(Brown, 2010)。雇主必须采取每一个必要的步骤来保护劳动力和工作场所的环境。这是身心健康的责任。如果雇主违反了这一义务，并最终导致损害，那么雇员可以起诉雇主的过失造成的损害(Ferrett, 2015)。《1974年健康与安全工作法案》(HSE)具有重大意义。HSE已被确定为安全与健康的最高法律，它赋予雇主以最大限度的合理接受和实用性，确保员工福利、安全和健康的一般责任(Hood, 2012)。提供健康和安全的工作环境的基本职责适用于预防与压力有关的健康问题。此外，《1999年工作时健康及安全管理规例》亦规定雇主有责任评估因工作压力而引致的疾病风险。违反本规定造成工作场所压力的，可以要求赔偿。此外，1976年的《致命事故法》也具有巨大的意义，本文将参照Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd (2008) (Jones, 2008)的案例来研究这部法律。
在这个案例中，一名员工由于雇主的疏忽，最终患上了抑郁症，并因此自杀。上议院已经声明，雇主的疏忽导致了自杀。自杀并没有最终打破合法的“因果链”，即雇主对雇员造成伤害的行为(Mahood, 2007)。同样的规则也可以适用于地方当局和其他公共机构。
基于以上法律事实，可以说Emily可以在事故发生在工作场所时，由于经理的疏忽而要求赔偿损失。经理考虑了压倒机器安全防护罩的决定，而他的重点是加快生产。这个疏忽导致了Alan的可怕事故，影响了Emily的精神状态。为了避免因精神崩溃带来的进一步负面后果，公司有义务为Emily提供精神治疗服务，帮助她改善和加强精神状况。如果该公司不这样做，它将被指控上述几种不同的行为。
