DEADLY WORK ACCIDENT - WORK AT HEIGHTS

Mer som dette

LSTD Ch. 12 Torts

Ved Alain Garrido

ASC Folder Structure

Ved John Hayter

Essay on Computer

Ved Ismael Reynaga Chumacero

Pre-Training Readiness Test Deep Emotional Work Academy

Ved Matthias Behrends

Corporate social responsibility

Law 1295/94

Dec. 1072/2015

Res. 0312/19

Law 1562/2012

Res 1409/12

The company didn^t analyze the cost benefit in its actions as a company in the face of non-compliance with the lifeline, which generated the worker's fatal accident.

Actors

Avoid Accidents, Incidents and Workplace Illnesses.

Failures

Company negligence

Lifeline breach

Failure to comply with safety regulations

Company overconfidence

Lack of supervision

DEADLY WORK ACCIDENT - WORK AT HEIGHTS

CONCLUSION

Although the rule is clear regarding compliance with the law, there was not full awareness of its application, which generated inappropriate conduct on the part of the company.

benefits of risk taking

MONITORING

Supervision and surveillance

TREATMEN

Proposed action and plan

ANALYZE - EVALUATE

Possibility and Consequences

IDENTIFY

What how when, where and why?

Benefits AED

Build a more efficient law

Identify efficient solutions

Create behavioral incentives

benefits of risk transfer

Payment of compensation

Control

shared responsibility

Time saving

As a company it did not have corporate social responsibility, it did not contribute to the prevention of the death of the worker or to guarantee the benefit of himself and his family as the main affected party.

Due to failure to comply with the rules for working at heights, a worker dies

It will help the debate by clarifying important legal problems, by determining what incentive structures generate various legal norms; generally within a “cost-benefit” analysis framework.

Have

Layoffs

Pension found

Occupational hazards

health

Parties involved

Worker

Employer

Estate