Question for Legal Beagles
Gentlemen,
I am sorry to admit that I was caught reading a copy of the Jun/July BALPA magazine (which had been left on the flight-deck). However, there was within this fine publication an article on the recently updated law on corporate manslaughter - namely, the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007.
The article described how the law has been amended to make it easier to prosecute senior mangement of organisations who failed any, or all, of 3 basic tests as result of an inquiry following an accident/incident. The most important of these tests is:
"The duty (of care) owed by an organistion to its employees or others working for it."
To prosecute under this Act, one would have to ascertain a gross breach of conduct which -
"falls far below what can reasonably be expected of an organisation in the circumstances."
The article went on to list a number of failings that would
'make an organisation vulnerable' to this legislation.
One could argue that 5 out of 10 failings on this list might be appliacble to the Nimrod case:
"6. Poor communication with the workforce and contractors."
"7. Inadequate management, audit and review of safety systems and contractors."
"8. Inadequate attention to 'near misses'."
"9. Failures of lower managers to report failings up the chain."
"10. Senior managers/directors makinng decisions on incomplete or wrong information - such as cutbacks adversely affecting safely."
It is also arguable that the other 5 failings might also apply (you'll have to read the full article)!
However, the questions to which I would like to know the answers:
a. Is RAF senior management liable to this Act (as it is to the Health and Safety at Work Legislation)?
b. Do we have a 'we're at war, poke off' get-out clause?
c. Does this new Act apply to 'legacy' aircraft built before 2007?
If the answers are Yes, No, Yes.... then, as Sherlock Holmes would say,
"The game's afoot Watson!"
If so, now might be a good time for all lower-order managers (Cpl/JT upwards) to comply with Number 9 (above) and start telling their bosses (in writing) what the bosses don't want to hear (if you haven't already).
Furthermore, it could leave senior management at star-level most vulnerable if they themselves don't insist that HM Treasury provides funding to ensure the remedial action to the QQ recs is completed much, much sooner than the middle of next year.
flipster