Financial Times Articles
FT articles cannot be accessed through website so they are set out here

Letters to the Editor
Unions seek accountability from directors who have caused death
By John Monks
Financial Times; Oct 03, 2002

Sir, Contrary to your report "Blunkett backtracks on corporate killing law" (October 1), we are closer to a corporate killing law than ever before and this could mark a sea change in health and safety at work.

Under the proposals the Home Office is working on, which the Trades Union Congress very much hopes will be in this year's Queen's Speech, it will be easier to convict directors who have caused someone's death. That is the basic accountability that the TUC and victims' families are campaigning for. Sensible employers have no reason to object to that, or fear it. What they would be right to reject, and what trade unions have not asked for, is the automatic blaming of a particular director just because of his title, such as safety director.

We do not want scapegoats. We want accountability. That is the way to ensure that employers give more emphasis to preventing people being killed or injured in the first place
.
John Monks, General Secretary, TUC, London W C1B 3LS

Blunkett backtracks on corporate killing law
Financial Times; Oct 01, 2002
By Jean Eaglesham, Political Correspondent

Directors of big companies that cause fatal accidents will escape the threat of jail or disqualification, following a U-turn by David Blunkett.

The home secretary has been persuaded that government plans to make board members individually liable for train crashes and other disasters were legally unworkable.

Instead, a new law on corporate killing - which could be included in this autumn's Queen's Speech - will concentrate virtually all the punishment on the companies, rather than their managers and directors. Government proposals to disqualify automatically any individuals who had "some influence on, or responsibility for" the management failure that caused the fatal accident have been dropped.

The U-turn is revealed in a Home Office letter sent this month to companies in industries with relatively high fatality rates - including transport, mining and construction - and to some unions and public sector bodies. It suggests the government is preparing to legislate to fulfil its manifesto commitment to introduce a new corporate killing offence - first mooted by Jack Straw, then home secretary, within days of the 1997 Southall train crash.

The Home Office refused to give a target date for the new law after government proposals issued in 2000 caused a storm of protest from industry, not least because of the disqualification risk for directors.

But companies are now being asked to help complete a regulatory impact assessment, a standard procedure for draft laws nearing the statute book.
The law will create a new criminal offence of corporate killing for deaths caused by management failure, where the company's conduct fell "far below what could reasonably be expected". The Confederation of British Industry has objected to this test, claiming it could "leave companies defenceless".
Flaws in the manslaughter law have resulted in several failed prosecutions against large corporations. Only three small companies have been convicted of criminal manslaughter since the second world war.

The new corporate killing offence could result in more prosecutions and heavier fines than current legislation, according to Daniel McShee, a partner at Kennedys, the law firm. Convictions could cause severe damage to a company's image. He said: "The label of being a corporate killer is likely to have major effects on the reputation and goodwill of an undertaking."
The letter, from Valerie Keating, head of the sentencing and offences unit, states: "The relatives and friends of victims . . attach considerable importance to the 'labelling' which results from a criminal conviction."

Click on subjects below to see further News Links

What do you think about our Newslink page. What other categories of articles should we index? Please E-mail us us with any comments