Home› Archived Forums› Politics

BA to be sued over Pilots child abuse.

BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
Forum Member
✭✭✭
in Politics #1
This seems ridiculous, why should an employer be made responsible for a workers off duty activities?

http://news.sky.com/story/1310116/ba-to-be-sued-over-pilot-child-abuse-claims

Comments

  • David TeeDavid Tee Posts: 22,833
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #2
    BrokenArrow wrote: »
    This seems ridiculous, why should an employer be made responsible for a workers off duty activities?

    http://news.sky.com/story/1310116/ba-to-be-sued-over-pilot-child-abuse-claims

    Agreed.
  • Camp FreddieCamp Freddie Posts: 1,534
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #3
    As with Jimmy Savile, these are allegations, and as both are now dead, how can they be proved ? That said, an employer should not be held accountable for the actions of an employee. Compensation culture again, methinks !
  • ShrikeShrike Posts: 16,606
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #4
    I think the argument is that Wood gained access to the children whilst administering BA's charitable donations. I would think those suing are going to have to prove that BA should've vetted him better. There was an assult allegation, but he wasn't arrested - wonder if they would've shown up on a CRB check? Where there CRB checks at the time?
  • rusty123rusty123 Posts: 22,872
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #5
    Shrike wrote: »
    I think the argument is that Wood gained access to the children whilst administering BA's charitable donations. I would think those suing are going to have to prove that BA should've vetted him better.

    Vetted how? Attach electrodes to his bits and wheel a few youngsters in?

    I have CRB checks done on me every few years for my job. At the end of the day all it shows is that I've never been accused/convicted of stuff not that I'm a whiter than white pillar of the community so the idea that they can act as a guarantee of anything is a bit of a joke.

    What makes employers liable for these kind of crimes and not when employees rob/steal/etc?
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #6
    Shrike wrote: »
    I think the argument is that Wood gained access to the children whilst administering BA's charitable donations. I would think those suing are going to have to prove that BA should've vetted him better. There was an assult allegation, but he wasn't arrested - wonder if they would've shown up on a CRB check? Where there CRB checks at the time?

    I doubt South Africa has CRB checks.
  • ShrikeShrike Posts: 16,606
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #7
    BrokenArrow wrote: »
    I doubt South Africa has CRB checks.

    Whats the relevance of South Africa?
  • blueisthecolourblueisthecolour Posts: 20,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #8
    1. Just because BA are being sued doesn't mean that there is any substantial legal basis to it. It could be fishing exercise by those involves to see if BA will settle rather than deal with the headlines. If it gets to court that's another matter.

    2. BA does have certain legal duties regarding the screening and monitoring of it's employees during official company activities. This is largely bureaucratic but still needs to be followed.

    3. I agree though that this kind of thing is damaging to the whole nature of charitable giving and is likely to make companies less willing to engage in them in the future.
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #9
    Shrike wrote: »
    Whats the relevance of South Africa?

    That's where the alleged offences took place.
  • Parker45Parker45 Posts: 5,854
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #10
    rusty123 wrote: »
    What makes employers liable for these kind of crimes and not when employees rob/steal/etc?

    Don't give them ideas :)

    What's this got to do with politics anyway?
  • ShrikeShrike Posts: 16,606
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #11
    BrokenArrow wrote: »
    That's where the alleged offences took place.

    No - according to the linked article it was Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania.
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #12
    Shrike wrote: »
    No - according to the linked article it was Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania.

    Your right, my brain must have inserted "South" before Africa :blush:
Sign In or Register to comment.