Two questions about work.

Martynb_

Just a legal question to do with work. I am a community support worker out and about supporting autism and disabilities. If one of my service users happened to run into a busy road, would I still have duty of care knowing my life could be at serious risk?


Does anyone know why companies have to have staff supervisions and appraisals, because I just think that they cause a lot of unnecessary trouble? I am told CQC need to keep checks on employers and staff and that's why they have to have all this monitoring malarkey. So the forms have to be filled in with stupid !!!! ("criticisms") to keep CQC happy.

HappyMJ

I don't really understand Q1. You don't have to run out into the road to save them putting yourself in danger. That would be silly. You would need to wave at the traffic to slow down from the safety of the side of the road and only when all the traffic has stopped should you go and retrieve them.

Martynb_

HappyMJ wrote: »

I don't really understand Q1. You don't have to run out into the road to save them putting yourself in danger. That would be silly. You would need to wave at the traffic to slow down from the safety of the side of the road and only when all the traffic has stopped should you go and retrieve them.

That's exactly what I would have done but my co-workers say that the business practice insists that you have a duty of care to save that person even if it means risking your own life.


Personally, I think that they are wrong.

sangie595

Martynb_ wrote: »

Just a legal question to do with work. I am a community support worker out and about supporting autism and disabilities. If one of my service users happened to run into a busy road, would I still have duty of care knowing my life could be at serious risk?


Does anyone know why companies have to have staff supervisions and appraisals, because I just think that they cause a lot of unnecessary trouble? I am told CQC need to keep checks on employers and staff and that's why they have to have all this monitoring malarkey. So the forms have to be filled in with stupid !!!! ("criticisms") to keep CQC happy.

It sounds as if you are in the wrong job. Although you'll have to look hard to find one that ignores staff performance and development, or doesn't what to supervise your work.

You may not be required to throw yourself into the road to save a service user - although it might the questionable why they were on the road in the first place if you are there caring for them. But supervision of care staff, and performance monitoring and development is an essential requirement for safeguarding

NewShadow

I would think you have a duty of care to act in such a way as to minimise the chance the service user would run into the road.

Such as not leaving them unattended if you thought they might, or using reasonable means to prevent it if they start to do so.

sangie595

Martynb_ wrote: »

That's exactly what I would have done but my co-workers say that the business practice insists that you have a duty of care to save that person even if it means risking your own life.


Personally, I think that they are wrong.

Then perhaps you can get them to point you to the
is in writing? Gossip and fact are not the same thing.

elsien

Martynb_ wrote: »

Just a legal question to do with work. I am a community support worker out and about supporting autism and disabilities. If one of my service users happened to run into a busy road, would I still have duty of care knowing my life could be at serious risk?


Does anyone know why companies have to have staff supervisions and appraisals, because I just think that they cause a lot of unnecessary trouble? I am told CQC need to keep checks on employers and staff and that's why they have to have all this monitoring malarkey. So the forms have to be filled in with stupid !!!! ("criticisms") to keep CQC happy.

1. That's why companies have risk assessments around supporting people - if you follow them and something happens you are not responsible. If you ignore them and something happens, on your own head be it.

2. So the "stupid criticisms" are nothing at all to do with poor performance on your part? The monitoring malarkey is to ensure you do a good job; given that CQC have let people get away with terrible practices in the past (does Winterbourne mean anything to you, because it really should), I'd be wanting a far higher standard than CQC seem to expect.

It's the people you are supporting I feel sorry for, at the moment. You have a choice of job, they have little choice in the people they have to support them and help them to keep safe.

theoretica

In your next supervision say that you feel you need more training on duty of care as you and co-worker are interpreting it differently.

ohreally

Martynb_ wrote: »

If one of my service users happened to run into a busy road, would I still have duty of care knowing my life could be at serious risk?

Are you qualified for this type of work?

Martynb_

elsien wrote: »

1. That's why companies have risk assessments around supporting people - if you follow them and something happens you are not responsible. If you ignore them and something happens, on your own head be it.

I understand that, but what if one of the service users runs off and I am unable to go after them or they run off right into an oncoming bus in the blink of an eye?

elsien wrote: »

2. So the "stupid criticisms" are nothing at all to do with poor performance on your part?
It's the people you are supporting I feel sorry for, at the moment. You have a choice of job, they have little choice in the people they have to support them and help them to keep safe.

Not if the criticisms are that I said I was too warm on a few occasions (during a very hot day) or that I was not good at maths or that I told my co-worker to wait for me whilst I go to the toilet.


And are you a troll? I ask because although my performance is not 100%, if those service users didn't have me to support them, they would be lost.

HappyMJ

Martynb_ wrote: »

I understand that, but what if one of the service users runs off and I am unable to go after them or they run off right into an oncoming bus in the blink of an eye?

If they run into the path of a bus they'd most likely be dead or so seriously injured that your services would no longer be required. Buses have CCTV so you should be able to defend your actions by staying at the side of the road....but you'll still have no service user so it wouldn't matter unless you can find another service user you'd be out of a job.