DECISIONPOINT (continued from page 7) The Decision


After briefing and argument, the trial court granted Union Pacific Railroad Co motion for summary judgment, based on lack of foreseeability and ability to have prevented the injury. It was deemed that Fosters’ assaultive behavior was outside of the scope of his employment and not in the furtherance of the company’s business. On appeal the judgment of the trial court was affirmed.


Learning and insights from this case:


The Court’s decision upheld the long standing legal principles of foreseeability and behavior within the scope of employment which continue to be a formidable defense for firms against their responsibility for employees’ off duty behavior. Also a key factor in this case was the fact that Foster, the assailant, had no previous record of violent behavior, thus diminishing the likelihood that the firm should have known that he would likely exhibit violent behavior. This case serves as reminder to employers that violent actions or behavior needs to be dealt with appropriately to ensure that past actions of an employee do not come back to haunt them in the future, if an employee does act in a violent manner in the future.


To read more about the Jason D. Morgan, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., ED97130, Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION THREE decision


To read more, click here


What’s Your Worst Workplace Nightmare?


A recent Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics’ energy and utility conference found that many professionals have two major workplace nightmares: fear of a massive financial fraud, and the possibility of a workplace catastrophe that would affect the plant, a community, the environment, and public safety. Despite having policies, hotlines, and training in place urging people to come forward to surface problems, system processes and every other compliance safeguard won’t amount to much if people are afraid to use them and don’t believe what the company says is valued. Unfortunately, many organizations have made a grave error in how they understand what it takes to prevent, detect and correct problems and have ultimately forfeited their credibility. Without credibility, the most serious problems won’t be surfaced. Credible organizations have leaders who welcome complaints, employees who are valued and trained to speak up without fear of reprisal. These leaders establish work environments that have safeguards in place for reasons beyond legal protection. Too often it is forgotten that the nightmares feared from business and public catastrophes are far worse than the costs and penalties of reactive legal claims.


To read more, click here


13


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14