Hi everybody.
As someone working in transport safety I believe there are some misconceptions being posted in this thread that perhaps I can help and advise on. There is within the United Kingdom a legal framework set out by the health and safety executive with regard to accidents/incidents in any workplace. The foregoing is also supplemented by the “fairness at work act” which lays down set procedures in regard to the handling of disciplinary matters when it is felt action against an employee may or could take place.
In the above, if an employer feels that an employee has breached any company rules, safety regulations or has carried out harassment, bullying or discrimination in any way then the above laid down procedures must be brought into practice.
In the event of an incident such as that which took place at King’s Cross station, then the driver of the train must undergo at first a medical check-up and then if fully fit would be requested to attend a company incident investigation meeting. At that meeting the driver would be asked to make a statement in regard to how in his view the incident took place and details of any witnesses or procedures that would give evidence to his/her statement. Only questions which would give clarification to employee statement are allowed to be asked by the employer at this stage of the procedure.
If the employee admits in their statement that he/she has some responsibility for the incident or if the employer feels there are further investigations to take place based on the employee statement then the employee has to be suspended from work on full pay while those further investigations take place or the formal disciplinary procedure is brought into practice. The employee is then informed that they must not contact anyone in the workplace while on suspension and is normally given the contact details of company personnel who would not be directly involved with the incident or any enquiries being made. The employee is not allowed to contact anyone else within the company but those persons whose details they have been given
If through the foregoing enquiry the management feels that disciplinary action needs to be carried out against the employee then a written statement is sent to the employee informing that person of the date and time of a disciplinary hearing and the allegations that will be laid out against them at that hearing. The employees is allowed to be accompanied at that hearing by a person of their choice (known as a formal companion) with the exception of anyone holding office in the legal profession.
Under legislation the management must lay out their case against the employee at the disciplinary hearing, who will be allowed to rebuff that case and question the evidence presented by the employer. The formal companion is also allowed to make statement on behalf of the employee in regard to any weaknesses he/she feels are in the company case against the employee.
At the conclusion of the hearing, if management feels there is sufficient evidence which concludes liability of the employee for the incident then disciplinary action can be carried out at that point. That action is immediately effective and in the case of dismissal the employees pay stops at that point.
Under legislation the employee must be allowed the right of appeal and that appeal hearing must be undertaken by a person not involved in the first hearing and not in any way have any connection with the incident/accident or other for which disciplinary action has been taken. The terms of the appeal hearing are the same as those of the original disciplinary hearing.
If those undertaking the appeal hearing decided to overturn the original hearing decision then the wages have to be paid for the time between dismissal (if that has been the case) and the persons reinstatement as an employee. Appeal hearings often overturn the conclusions of the original hearing which is a point so often not recognised by employees and general society in the UK.
In the case of the King’s Cross incident an investigation is under way by the government health and safety executive (HSE) which would be outside of the train operating company’s own investigation or that of the Office of Road and Rail Safety. In the foregoing the train operating company cannot carry out any disciplinary action against the driver or the training driver who was also in the cab, until the HSE or their agents investigation is concluded and therefore they remain suspended on full pay.
In the above, no speculation need take place as normally HSE investigations are concluded within three months as has been the case in the Stafford rollercoasters accident investigation so well publicised the here in the UK. In that case the HSE investigation took less than eight weeks to conclude and compensation is already being paid out to those young people so tragically maimed in that incident.
I believe I can state that all of us involved in transport safety here in the UK have every confidence in the foregoing procedures as their efficiency and effectiveness have proven to be correct in so many cases and incidents for so many years.
So, let us all just wait and see as I believe the HSE enquiry results will be released within the next three weeks.
Apologies for the long posting, but there is no quick way to state all the above.
Bill
