Sponsored Blog Post

Family lawyers often talk about how Christmas gives rise to an upsurge in divorce work in the New Year. The same is probably also true of personal injury work, if to a lesser extent. Claims for personal injury usually involve

• an accident at work,
•  Road Traffic Accident
• a slip or trip on a pavement
• injury by a faulty product.

The numbers of road traffic accidents increases in the winter with poor light and icy conditions.

If you have been injured in an accident you may want to take legal advice from solicitors that undertake work on a no win no fee basis. Before you can claim compensation you have to prove that the person responsible for the accident was negligent and that can be very difficult.

Accidents at Work & Occupational Illness

There has been much discussion over the last few weeks about the proposed changes to employment law.  What has been less talked about is another part of the Coalition government’s “bonfire of red tape” and budgetary cuts, being the reduction in the Health and Safety Executive’s budget, which will lead to fewer automatic inspections by the HSE of workplaces.

The HSE published its own Annual Statistics Report for 2010/11 recently and it contained some sobering facts.  In that period 171 workers were killed at work and 115,379 employees suffered injuries that were reportable under the Government’s RIDDOR scheme. In addition a further 200,000 employees suffered workplace injuries requiring more than three days absence.

On average each accident at work led to 15 days lost from work, which grosses up to 22.1 million days lost because of work-related ill health (e.g stress at work, mesothelioma and musculoskeletal disorders) and 4.4 million because of injury.  The number of cases of mesothelioma (caused by inhalation of asbestos) has increased substantially since 1968, when 153 people died, to 2321 in 2009.  The numbers of asbestos related cancers are expected to peak around 2016. The HSE estimates that the number of occupational cancer related deaths is around 8,000 per annum.

The HSE reports that around three-quarters of new work related conditions were either stress, depression/anxiety or musculoskeletal disorders.

Road Traffic Accidents

According to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) Great Britain has one of the best road safety records in the world, but shockingly 1 in 5 people are killed on the roads each day. The main causes of accidents include speeding, drink driving, inexperience and failing to look properly.

Accidents on the road can lead to fatalities and injuries of the utmost seriousness down to more minor (but nonetheless painful and unpleasant) whiplash injuries.

Road Traffic Accidents can raise difficult legal and procedural problems, even in less serious cases.  It is important to take specialist advice from whiplash solicitors if you have suffered a neck or back injury.

Related posts:

1. Accident at Work? The Legal Basics You Need to Know
2. Have You Suffered a Personal Injury?
3. Workplace Accident Claims: the U.S experience

Accidents at Work and on the Roads originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 22/12/2011.

Banks are facing a rising tide of stress at work claims, according to Reuters yesterday. The report refers to anecdotal evidence by GQ Employment Lawyers to the effect that the number of “stress related lawsuits” is on the increase, but doesn’t say what type of lawsuits, nor give any statistics to back up the assertion.

 Never mind, the Health & Safety Executive’s own statistics for 2010/11 state the following;

“The number of new cases of stress, depression or anxiety has fallen from an estimated 254,000 in 2001/02 to 211,000 [in 2010/11]” *

Whether that downward trend will continue in 2011/12 or be broken as the report suggests we will have to wait and see. In my view it is unlikely that we will see a tidal wave of stress claims in the courts or Tribunals for various reasons – see below – but because when the next recession, which looks inevitable now, strikes it will be accompanied by job losses.  The CIPD produced a report yesterday predicting a “slow, painful contraction” in the jobs market in Quarter Four this year as many employers impose a hiring freeze. It isn’t actually predicting a rise in redundancies merely that once you’re out of a job you may find it hard to get another one.

I’ve acted for many employees over the years with occupational illnesses or injuries (including stress cases) and the one factor that usually concerns most, if not all of them, is the reaction of their employer if they bring a personal injury claim or assert their legal rights in some way.  Bankers are prey to this concern just as much as any other workers, arguably more so if they think it might jeopardise their annual bonus. The other concern, which should be ameliorated by the banning of pre-job offer health enquiries by employers under the Equality Act but probably isn’t, is that having a lengthy spell off work with stress will render a job-seeker “damaged goods”.

If I‘m wrong and a flood of stress at work claims does arise there’s another important consideration to bear in mind.  It’s relatively easy to commence a claim, start a protocol or issue proceedings, but quite another to win and recover compensation. Most employers faced with a stress at work claim aren’t likely to simply roll over and pay up.

There are several possible claims; in negligence for personal injury, for harassment under the Protection from

Harassment Act 1997 (PHA), or for injury to feelings at an Employment Tribunal if the stress is caused by harassment on the grounds of sex, race, disability, age, religious belief or sexual orientation (known as “Protected Characteristics”) . All it says is that claims from financial services staff are increasing, in the face of challenging economic conditions, long working hours, the threat of redundancy as well as being the occupation that currently everyone loves to hate (well, it gives estate agents and solicitors a break I suppose).

To sue for personal injury in the tort of negligence (which is the type of claim you would make if you suffered a whiplash injury in a car crash or a back injury from lifting something heavy at work) a Claimant has to have suffered a medically recognised illness or injury.  “Mere” stress won’t be enough, it has to go beyond that and will need to be verified by a medical practitioner, preferably a Consultant Psychiatrist.  That will be expensive.

The first legal issue is whether the illness/injury was reasonably foreseeable to the employer, in other words would the reasonable employer have realised, or should they have realised, that an employee subjected to those particular working conditions would suffer a psychological injury or illness.  That can be a difficult hurdle to overcome because mental illness tends to be “invisible” and most people don’t admit they have a problem until they become very unwell.  An employer is entitled to view his/her staff as being ordinarily robust and able to deal with the ups and downs of the workplace unless they have particular knowledge to the contrary.  It is in those cases where an employee has suffered mental illness, notified the employer of it, been off work as a result and then returned only to have another breakdown later on that have tended to be successful with claim for personal injury.

The second main problem tends to be in proving that the illness/injury was caused by or contributed to by the actions of the employer.  That usually means a forensic examination of the Claimant’[s medical records to see if they have any other stressors in their life – such as a prior history of mental illness, or have been going through a divorce, in trouble with the police etc.

Finally, these type of claims tend to be very expensive to put together, usually vigorously contested by the employer’s EL insurer and, because the claim is taken through the Court (High or County), there is a risk of losing and having to pay the other side’s costs – at least until the Jackson litigation reforms are introduced and we have “Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting”.

Claims under the PHA are, perhaps, slightly easier if the Claimant can show a near criminal standard of harassment from, e.g. their line manager, but that sort of claim doesn’t help an employee who is grossly overworked and trying to do the work of three people.  The ET claims for harassment and victimisation also require a “Protected Characteristic” to be the motivating factor in the employer’s behaviour.

Personal injury law is very unhelpful to people suffering from mental illness caused by the workplace. There won’t be a great increase in the number of claims going through the courts because the substantive law hasn’t changed.

• HSE Annual Statistics 2010/11 p.5

Related posts:

1. Seven Ways for Employers to Avoid Stress at Work Claims
2. Stress at work
3. Seven Top Stress Management Tips for Employees

UK Banks Facing Rising Lawsuits over Stress? Really? originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 15/11/2011.

Sponsored Guest Post

A US railroad company, Metro-North, has been ordered to pay an employee damages in excess of $142,000. In addition, the company must promote him to a senior level as it was concluded that the worker was denied promotion because of a knee injury sustained whilst at work.

Metro-North railroad were found by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to have wrongly classified the injury as being completely unrelated to work, when in fact the injury took place whilst Mr Bill Ordner was on his lunch break.

A news release quoted a New England OSHA regional official by the name of Marthe Kent as saying that, “Metro-North’s policies and actions may deter employees from reporting on-the-job injuries for fear of financial or career consequences”.

There has been a recent clampdown on employers that actively discourage employees from making a workplace accident claim , which until now has focused primarily on private sector companies, such as manufacturers.

The decision was to compensate Mr. Ordner $125,000 in punitive damages,  $11,000 in legal and medical expenses, $5,000 for the suffering he experienced plus any pay backdated amounting to the sum he would have received, should he have been promoted. It has been suggested that the significant punitive damages were applied because of the complete disregard Metro-North had for its employees’ rights and wellbeing as well as their refusal to cooperate with the investigation.

A statement released by Ordner’s lawyer read, “In my situation, management was not willing to listen to my safety concerns and became relentless and purposeful in their efforts to retard my career advancements”.

Related posts:

1. Tesco Rules
2. Unfair Dismissal Without 12 Months Continuous Employment Experience?

Workplace Accident Claims: the U.S experience originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 18/08/2011.

Last week I read a brief summary about a case where personal injury and family law crashed together in the Court of Appeal .  I’ve not read the full case itself and if anyone has the link to it I’d be very interested to read it.  It’s a surprising case because one of the parties, Mr Mansfield had suffered serious personal injuries when hit by a car in an accident in 1992 and had been awarded £500,000 for the loss of a leg and serious spinal injuries.  The couple got together five years after the award was made to him which, if the remnants of my knowledge of matrimonial law still holds good, means that it was property acquired before the marriage and thus not a matrimonial asset.  I’d welcome any comments from any Family lawyers out there reading this who can explain it.

The husband’s award would have included compensation for pain and suffering and loss of amenity, as well as his financial losses and, almost certainly, his anticipated future losses. As he lost a leg that would surely have included the lifetime cost of a prosthetic leg and its replacements, which don’t come cheap.

Unfortunately his marriage broke down, divorce proceedings followed and his ex-wife was awarded a lump sum of £285,000 from his personal injury compensation.  Leaving aside the merits of the ex-wife’s claim it does, at first glance, seem like a surprising decision. The award of over 50% of his compensation to the wife in the financial settlement would thus risk leaving him (literally) legless.

Which takes precedence: the needs of the husband to rebuild his life following a significant injury or the needs of his family?  On the basis of this decision the answer is the latter, the children’s needs trumped those of the father.  The wife’s barrister said “No part of a personal injury awards is sacrosanct”. It seems a very harsh decision to me.

Thanks to the Ramsdens Family Blog for bringing this to my attention

Related posts:

1. Have You Suffered a Personal Injury?
2. Enforcing Unfair Dismissal Awards Part II
3. Should the Government Cap Discrimination Awards?

Personal Injury Awards are “Not Sacrosanct” originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 16/08/2011.

According to research by mental health charity Mind,  workers fear that if they admit to being depressed or suffering from stress they will be selected for redundancy or “forced out of their jobs”.

Their statistics showed that 22% of those surveyed who had disclosed a mental health issue in a previous job had been fired. It’s  a natural reaction and it undoubtedly happens, but proving that the selection for redundancy was because the employee said they were unwell is quite another matter. As the Mind website reveals, sometimes an employer can be very supportive.  Sadly, that often isn’t the case.

• Workers cited the following as being factors inducing stress;
• Excessive workload
• The threat of redundancy
• Poor Management
• Unrealistic targets

Stress is a nasty insidious illness when it becomes more than just being under pressure.  It takes away a person’s ability to cope and lowers self-esteem.  It can make lives utterly miserable.  Not surprisingly employees don’t speak up about it when they fear they are becoming or have become unwell through stress: it’s a stigma and no one likes to think they will be perceived as not being able to cope.

However, if a worker thinks they have been made unwell by work are there any remedies available to them?

1. Termination of employment on the basis that the employee has been suffering from stress is unlikely to be a fair reason for dismissal, unless the employer has followed a thorough investigation and performance management process, which concludes  that the employee is incapable of working.  Selection for redundancy because the employee was suffering from stress would probably constitute unfair dismissal (provided the employee had 12 months continuous employment experience).
2. Dismissal because a person is suffering from stress or any other mental illness may be an act of discrimination under the Equality Act (disability discrimination) if the person would be deemed to be disabled within the meaning of the Act.  It’s a complex definition but note that the illness has to endure for at least 12 months or be permanent  to “qualify”.
3. If the illness has been caused (or exacerbated) by the work environment then it may be possible to bring a claim in the tort of negligence in the County or High Court.  In order to succeed with such a claim the employee would need to show that the work conditions made it reasonably foreseeable that a person would suffer mental illness.  Secondly, the work conditions must have caused the illness and that is often a major hurdle for Claimants because stress, depression etc can have many causes. The case of Sutherland v Hatton in 2001 made it difficult for Claimants to succeed with  these type of claims.
   

   Don't wait until it's too late

4. On the same point, because employees tend not to flag up the fact they are struggling to cope.  Mental illness is often referred to as a hidden illness and it is often not obvious that someone is suffering until too late.  The stress at work cases that have succeeded have often had a history of two bouts of illness: the first sets up that the employee has a problem caused  by overwork etc and the second demonstrates that the employer was on notice that the employee had suffered illness and did not take steps to address the problem – cf: Walker v Northumberland County Council.
5. A claim under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.  An employer can be held vicariously liable for the actions of an employer if there have been at least two incidents of bullying or harassment which have caused the employee distress.  However, the severity of the behaviour needs to be of a “near criminal standard” (Conn v Sunderland City Council) so “ordinary” line management, however assertive or micro-managing, might not suffice to found a claim.
6. An often overlooked remedy, because not that many employees have access to it, is Permanent Health Insurance (PHI) aka, Long Term Disability Benefit or similar.  Some employers provide it as a “perk” of the job and if an employee goes on long term sick leave the employer can apply after a qualifying period (often six months) for the employee to be accepted onto the scheme.  If granted, PHI will pay a percentage of benefit – usually 50 – 60% of full salary until the person recovers or retires or dies.  The contract is between the employer and the insurance company and not with the employee, although it may be possible for the employee to assert their rights if the Contract (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 applies.

None of the above are wholly satisfactory and the law really does not adequately assist employees who have been made mentally unwell by their workplaces.  Claims in negligence at (3) above are highly expensive to run and  have poor success rates. More fundamentally all litigation is an unwelcome prospect, particularly if you’re unwell.The effects of it can be mitigated to an extent by having an early mediation to resolve the issues, but that requires both parties to be prepared to negotiate.

For employees who do not have 12 months continuous employment experience and thus cannot bring a claim for unfair dismissal or do not qualify as disabled under the Equality Act they are in a vulnerable position, assuming they do not have any other employment claims available to them (such as for whistleblowing or trade union membership etc).  The ET does not award compensation for injury to feelings (ie personal injury) in unfair dismissal cases.

Get advice to find your direction

In all these cases though an employee suffering from mental illness faces the prospect of difficult and expensive litigation or negotiations, probably at a time when they feel least able to cope with it.  One answer is to find another job and move on – often that removes the cause of the stress and enables the person to get better but that may be easier said than done.

One strategy we often advocate in situations where the employee is becoming unwell is to either file a grievance and in addition, or as an alternative, to write to the employer on a without prejudice basis setting out the problem and seeking a negotiated settlement.  This can be a quick and relatively cheap solution, but will only work where the employer considers that they are at risk.

Having said all the above, it is no wonder that some employees do think it best to keep their worries to themselves.  Being sacked might seem dreadful (and it is), but suffering from stress or depression can be a whole lot worse.  As ever, if you’re worried about your own personal position, don’t rely upon the above comments but go and get advice – not just from a solicitor but from a charity like Mind where you can speak to people who have “been there”.

Mind is running a campaign at the moment to promote mental health in the workplace – click here for the “small simple steps” you can take to make the workplace a better place.

The above does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon.  Go and speak to a solicitor instead!

Related posts:

1. UK Banks Facing Rising Lawsuits over Stress? Really?

Are Stressed Workers More at Risk of Redundancy? originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 25/05/2011.

Sponsored Post

According to a piece from The Mirror last Wednesday it is. This is because the government is planning “savage spending cuts” at the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) which will reduce the number of workplace inspections carried out, thus increasing the risk of personal injuries occurring.  The article cites a very sad incident to one worker mortally injured on his last day at work.

The government says it wants to “cut red tape” and plans to cut 11,000 workplace inspections as part of plans to reduce the HSE’s budget by 35% by 2014-15. It is all part of the government’s plan to “go for growth”.  As the HSE has statutory responsibility for protecting the health safety and welfare of people at work these cuts may well mean that it fails to fulfil those duties unless there is a significant reduction in scope of them.  That may be difficult because much of the UK’s health and safety legislation in inspired by European law.

Health & Safety Gone Mad?

Where the HSE does carry out a workplace inspection and finds that health and safety laws are not being observed, it can issue an enforcement notice requiring remedial action. The number of enforcement notices issued by the HSE (and by local authorities who retain responsibility for, amongst other things, offices and shops), has been increasing over the last couple of years. Click here for the statistics issued by the HSE. Expect the number of enforcement notices to decrease as a result of these cuts but that won’t necessarily mean the workplace is getting safer. In a recession there may well be more incentive on businesses to cut corners if it saves money and time

It’s a serious issue and one that deserves consideration beyond the usual, predictable, clash of “health and safety is strangling enterprise” and “more work for personal injury lawyers”, although the latter probably will be the result if more accidents at work occur because of a lack of inspections. There will probably be an increase in personal injury claims and whilst many will groan at the prospect of more work for lawyers, do bear in mind that if the HSE isn’t able to enforce health and safety laws in the workplace, it may only be the prospect of litigation that persuades some employers not to ignore it altogether.

“Health and safety” has become a dogma for some, to be trotted out as an excuse not to take any sort of risk, or to obstruct or as a smokescreen for when people can’t be bothered to put themselves out.  The government’s review of Health and Safety law is to be welcomed, but don’t let it put employees lives at risk.

Related posts:

1. Workplace Accident Claims: the U.S experience

Is the Workplace About to Get More Dangerous? originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 28/03/2011.

Yesterday Ian Barratt of Mind Strengths Ltd published his “Seven Top Stress Management Tips for Employees”.  Today I am publishing my “top tips” for employers hoping to avoid claims for stress at work from being commenced against them.   

First, some background. Stress at work is a complex and wide-ranging subject, touching on many aspects of employment and personal injury law. The claims will arise either under the law of personal injury (in negligence) or under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (PHA) or, alternatively for constructive dismissal and/or discrimination.  All four could be raised in the same instance, although it is not possible for an employee to sue in negligence and unfair dismissal unless the circumstances leading to the injury are independent of the facts relating to the dismissal.  Although many employers may feel “under siege” from all the rights that employees have, they should note that the law is not kindly disposed towards employees in this area: stress at work claims are difficult and expensive for employees to pursue successfully.  

No employer can be immune from ever finding themselves facing a claim from an employee, but following the tips below ought to reduce the risk of a claim arising or, if one does, of being successful.  There are many legal aspects to allegations of “stress at work” and care needs to be taken when an employee asserts that the employer has, in some way, caused him/her to become unwell.  Most allegations will state either that the employer has overloaded the employee with work or not provided enough support/resource to do the job properly or that a line manager has bullied/harassed/victimised the employee.  

It is also not uncommon for employees to claim that they are suffering from “stress” when they fall into dispute with their employers or disciplinary/performance management processes are commenced against them.  

How to mitigate the risk of these claims arising?   

1. Adopt best practice  

The Health & Safety Executive publishes a great deal of information on the subject.  In particular it has devised “Management Standards” which “define the characteristics, or culture, of an organisation where the risks from work related stress are being effectively managed and controlled. … The Management Standards cover six key areas of work design that, if not properly managed, are associated with poor health and well-being, lower productivity and increased sickness absence.” There are six management standards covering demands; control, support, relationships, role and change.  The TUC and ACAS also publish useful materials on stress at work.  

2. Be aware.  

Carry out risk assessments of the roles your employees are expected to undertake and the workplace in which the role is to be carried out.  This is not only integral to the HSE’s Management Standards but is a statutory requirement under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (HSWA) and the Management of Health and Safety At Work Regulations 1999 (MHSW).  The HSWA applies to any employer with more than five employees and require “a written statement of his general policy with regard to health and safety at work of his employees”.  The MHSW requires a risk assessment “for the purpose of identifying the measures he needs to take to comply with” his particular statutory duties. Breach of this requirement can make an employer liable at civil law. However, a greater incentive for compliance is that an employer who does carry out a proper risk assessment is going to be better positioned to defeat a claim for stress at work than one who does not because the risk assessment process should uncover any obvious factors potentially giving rise to stress.  An employer will only be liable in negligence if his breach of duty of care to the employee was reasonably foreseeable.     

Take action before it is too late

3. Have a stress policy and adhere to it  

This might include providing employees with access to a counselling service or a telephone helpline. The courts look favourably on employers who do so, but the provision of such facilities won’t be enough on its own to rebut liability.  

4. Act fairly and consistently  

Stress claims can arise from incidents of bullying/harassment and victimisation.  Put in place policies promoting equality in the workplace – and enforce them.  Claims for discrimination can arise, apart from any other considerations over stress and there is no maximum cap for compensation unlike with unfair dismissal claims. We see many claims where the situation has been caused by fellow employees displaying completely inappropriate behaviour in the workplace, or line managers being “over-zealous” in trying to fulfil their roles. Ensure that line managers manage fairly and in a “human” fashion.   An employee suffering bullying at work from other colleagues or line managers may be able to bring a claim under the PHA for “distress” caused.  

5. Contracts of employment (1)   

Ensure that you have the contractual right (either in the contract of employment or the contractually binding section of the Employee Handbook) to require the employee to attend a doctor for the purpose of a medical report.  This can be a useful tool if the employee is off sick for any length of time because it means you can get a medical report from an independent expert rather than relying solely on the letters from the employee’s GP, who will often be very keen to be (too) supportive of the employee.  

6. Contracts of employment  (2)   

They should be drafted so that any entitlement to full sick pay (as opposed to statutory sick pay (SSP)) is in the discretion of the employer or, preferably, full sick pay will not be paid if an employee goes on sick leave immediately after having been asked to attend a disciplinary or performance management meeting.  Employees tend to become well again once they are not being paid.  SSP is payable in most cases (click here for main terms) for 28 weeks at the rate of £79.15.  Click here for more details on SSP.   Amending employees’ contracts of employment can be a complicated process, fraught with challenges of its own.  Please seek legal advice before deciding to do so.  

7. Act decisively  

If a stress at work problem looks like it might be rearing its ugly head, don’t ignore it.  Take legal advice as soon as possible.  

Related posts: Coming Soon … Miserable Monday  

If you are an employer or employee and need advice on your situation please contact me on 0207 464 8433 or at michaelscutt@dalelangley.co.uk.  

 None of the above material (or anything published anywhere on this blog by me or anyone else) constitutes legal advice to you.  You should not  rely on it and if you need legal advice about your situation you should take specific legal advice on your own situation.  I am always happy to provide legal advice via Dale Langley & Co.

Related posts:

1. Seven Top Stress Management Tips for Employees
2. Stress at work
3. UK Banks Facing Rising Lawsuits over Stress? Really?

Seven Ways for Employers to Avoid Stress at Work Claims originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 19/01/2010.

As promised last Monday, I am delighted today to welcome my first guest blogger, Ian Barratt (pictured, right) of Mind Strengths Ltd, to present his Seven Top Stress Management Tips on this third Monday of January, the allegedly most miserable day of the year. Ian is a qualified stress management consultant speaker and author.  His book “The Phoenix Strategy”, co-authored with Amanda Robinson was published last October.  Mind Strengths Ltd is a consultancy company offering workplace strress management , wellbeing and support services.  Tomorrow I will look at how employers can minimise the risk of being sued for stress at work by employees. 

 Today, Ian focusses on how employees can manage stress. 

1. Identify and write down your major stressors 

By taking time to find out what is causing you stress, you will be taking a big pro-active step towards managing your problem areas. Start by writing these down, no matter how trivial they may seem. Then, focus on the top 2 or 3 that cause you the most stress impact and work on a plan to deal with these one at a time. Never try to fix all the problems at once or in an unrealistic timescale. You should also now be able to let go of the trivial stressors as these are not so important. 

2. Establish some goals and objectives  

It can be very satisfying to set some personal goals and objectives to help you kick start the New Year. Make these meaningful and achievable as there is little point in setting personal goals that you either get bored with or you cannot accomplish. Make sure that you set your goals over short, medium and long term timescales to keep you fully focussed throughout 2010. 

3. Develop a Personal Relaxation Plan 

A relaxation programme can be as simple as deciding to walk more, to perhaps joining a gym. Even if you take exercise for just 20 minutes a day, this will help your physical and mental wellbeing. An often overlooked benefit of exercising is that our brains release endorphins, which have as “feel good” effect and gives us feelings of euphoria. If a more mundane relaxation programme is your choice of escape, try meditation, yoga or pilates – all of which will teach you a range of breathing exercises that are critical to relieving and beating stress. 

4. Give yourself some thinking time 

We all need some down time occasionally where we can think more clearly about circumstances and events that may be causing our stress levels to rise. Setting time aside to think about these problems will help you to rationalise what is occurring and provide some clarity to help you move forward. If this proves difficult, step outside yourself and look back in as an outsider. You may find this makes things easier as you are viewing the problems from the outside as a third party. Ask yourself “what would I do if I were advising someone else?” 

5. Be positive 

Many stress related problems can be made worse by low confidence and lack of self-esteem. When you are down and depressed, any issue, no matter how big or small, can have a negative effect on the way you feel. Having low self-esteem generally means that you have negative thoughts about the outcome of a particular situation, event or about yourself. Learn to convert any negative thoughts into positive thoughts and positive energy. Write down any problem areas and you will find that the whole situation becomes less threatening on paper. Change your thinking from “I can’t do” to “I will be able to do.” 

 6. Practice good time management 

Time management isn’t for everyone but even when you can apply some of the theory, you will see noticeable differences in the way you run your life and it will help you reduce stress. For example, making a list of your tasks at work is a great start but not very useful if you don’t know how long each task will take, so remember to do this too. Also, prioritise tasks and ensure that you have a clear picture of what you will be doing today and each day of the working week – and stick to your plan! 

7.  Keep a Stress Diary 

The Stress Diary is a fantastic way to keep track of what may be causing you stress and will help you identify any patterns that may be occurring. To make this a meaningful exercise, you should keep the diary for a minimum of 2 weeks as this will enable you to see any trends. Make a note of anything that causes you stress on a scale of 1-10 (10 being high) but only keep scores of 6 and above. Discard the rest as they should be minor stressors – you need to focus solely on the major stressors. You may find some of the findings surprising! Finally, work on a plan to eradicate the problem areas. 

The Seven Top Stress Tips have been compiled by Ian Barratt, founder director of Mind Strengths Ltd. Ian is a qualified stress management consultant, author and speaker, who specialises in identifying and managing stress and improving wellbeing at both a corporate and individual level. 

For further information, please contact Ian on +44 (0)1634 314090 or via email at ian.barratt@mindstrengths.co.uk.  The website contains some additional useful information and can be found at www.mindstrengths.co.uk.

Related posts:

1. Seven Ways for Employers to Avoid Stress at Work Claims
2. UK Banks Facing Rising Lawsuits over Stress? Really?
3. Stress at work

Seven Top Stress Management Tips for Employees originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 18/01/2010.

Thanks to Annabel Kaye of Irenicon (@AnnabelKaye) for bringing the article in MailOnline to my attention, via Twitter.  The full article can be found at www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articles-1201371/Bosses-risk-lawsuits-staff-swine-flu  .  Apparently, according to the Mail, employers need to be getting worried about the risk of being sued by employees who catch swine flu from doing their jobs .  The article quotes  lawyers and other commentators who  point out the risk of increased litigation.

Whilst some employees may try it on and threaten their employers with claims in most cases they won’t get off the ground and, like Annabel, I don’t buy the need to panic. In her tweet she made the very cogent point that the employee would have difficulty in proving where they contracted swine flu.  For an employer to be at risk of being successfully sued for personal injury arising out of contracting swine flu at work, the employee will have to jump through the following hoops;

1.  The employer was in breach of their duty of care to the employee in  not taking reasonable steps to reduce the risk of contracting the virus
2. The employer’s breach of duty caused the employee to have swine flu
3. As a result the employee suffered personal injury

Whilst there are undoubtedly steps that can be taken to minimise the risks of it spreading (like good hygiene practices) etc   the main reason why employers won’t be taken to the cleaners on this one is because of (2) above – causation.  How is an employee to prove that they contracted the virus at work as opposed to on the train/tube/bus or the gym or from the kids (or the kids’ friends) or the other parents waiting at the school gates, shopping mall etc?  The list of potential sources is endless.  Just because a customer/colleague might sneeze in your general direction (try saying with a French accent for the full Monty Python effect) will not be enough to persuade a wizened County Court District Judge to enter judgment.   

I am also sceptical about what steps an employer can take to reduce the risk – providing soap/antibacterial gel in offices and cleaning phones and keyboards are about the only steps I think an employer can reasonably be expected to take.  Getting staff to work from home might not be possible – for how long?  I’m all for flexible working practices where reasonably required but how long do you send staff home for – months?  Separating desks – so what?  (why do I keep thinking of the Titanic’s deck chairs?) ; switch off the air-con? Now you’re talking, let’s hope we don’t have a heat wave.  A court asked to consider the issue of breach of duty (1) above will want to consider what steps an employer could reasonably have taken to reduce the risk. That won’t include taking steps that will shut the employer’s business down.

 Finally, even if an employee could overcome the first two hurdles, the amount of compensation they would receive for an unpleasant illness that lasted a week/ten days would not be great, probably not more than £1000, which is the minimum limit for Claimants recovering their legal costs plus compensation in the County Court, below that the cases aren’t financially viable for lawyers to get involved. If someone developed secondary problems consequent upon the swine flu then the level of compensation might be higher, but it is all very tenuous.  For this reason the no win no fee merchants won’t get involved.   If a privately paying client came to me and said they wanted to sue their employer because they got swine flu I would tell them to think again, and carefully.

I don’t want to seem flippant about swine flu, or underplay the risk it poses.  It is clearly, for some people, a very nasty, indeed fatal, illness.  But, as Corporal Jones used to say “Don’t panic” and articles such as this one in MailOnline only serve to whip up anxiety, but that’s what the Daily Mail is for, isn’t it?

Related posts:

1. Further advice on swine flu
2. More on Swine Flu
3. What Should Employers do About Third Party Harassment: Equality Act 2010 #4

Swine Flu – should employers worry about being sued? originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 23/07/2009.