Originally Posted by Dom Heffner
I guess I view my job as an employer very differently.
I wouldn't ask one of my female employees to work late at night at our office by herself.
If I did, however, and something happened to her, I would think it would be pretty low of me to say to her family, "Well she must have thought it was safe because she agreed to do it.."
When I look at accountability and responsibility, I look at the employer. Because here's why: My employees look at me as the one who gives them raises, who does performance evaluations, references, letters of recommendation, who basically gives them their livelihood or can help them in their future, especially our younger ones.
When I ask them to do something, all those things are in the back of their mind, becuase I can hold all of those things over their head, and they dont want the one time they say no to me to be the one thing that I remember about them.
I do get what Brutus is saying here, but truthfully this is 99% the fault of the university.
You don't ask somebody to do that. You just don't.
You're hiring people you think are trustworthy, make good decisions and are knowledgeable about safety, do you not? And if something is amiss, wouldn't you expect them to tell you about it?
To me, it's almost like you are expecting your employees to be ignorant of safety hazards. On the contrary, I imagine as an employer you raise awareness of safety and would hope and expect your people to use such judgment. Since you're cognizant of safety standards, wouldn't you expect them to know if there's a problem and alert you of it?
It's a two-way street. The employer is responsible for providing the resources for a safe work environment, and making the bottom line decisions when safety is an issue. But the employees are expected to be knowledgeable, trustworthy and good decision-makers. If you don't expect your people to raise safety issues, since you're human and not going to catch everything yourself, you've failed as an employer just as much as by not catching it to begin with.
I'm sorry, but a business is about people working together
to get something done. It's not a very smart (safe) business model to expect any employer to be perfect in making safe decisions for the workers. You've got to have all workers able to be trained properly to identify and point out safety concerns. If a company is built on only the managers being able to spot safety problems, well that's not a very safe company to work for. I'd much rather work for a company that raises awareness but wants their people coming to them when something isn't caught. Two sets of eyes are better than one. Four sets of eyes are better than two.
As I said from the beginning... I'm not saying Notre Dame, as an institution, has no blame in their ultimate decision (or rather indecision) to spot this safety issue. Contrary to your earlier comment, "You've made just about every excuse imaginable for the guy," this has nothing to do with making excuses for him. This has everything to do with asking why individuals can't have any accountability for their own choices. One of my favorite sayings in the world: "work smart not hard."
The best employees are not the ones that do what they're told to do. They're the ones that can think for themselves and exercise their best judgment, use their common sense and work with (not for) their employers to get the job done as best and safely as they can.
Do you or do you not want your people coming to you with safety concerns. I would hope that you do... because in my honest opinion, it's actually much more dangerous a work environment if you don't. It's far more worse to run any kind of business that expects only a few people to catch all hazards.
You provide the work environment and are responsible to fix the problems. But the people you hire to work should also be trained to spot problems and come to you with them. Correct?