|
|
Psychiatric Illness - When is an employer negligent? |
A doctor working for a major industrial company claimed his employers had failed to take reasonable care to prevent him being exposed to risk of harm at work. |
The doctor had attended a leadership course where, he alleged, he was exposed to significant emotional distress prior to, during and after the course, which caused severe psychiatric injuries. |
He argued that the company had breached its duty of care in that a colleague had subjected him to abusive, sarcastic words and aggressive, humiliating conduct. In addition, certain events during the leadership course, he felt, had caused him psychiatric harm. One of his colleagues had been asked to create a human sculpture, placing co-workers in positions that reflected their worth to him, and he had been placed in a position that showed his lack of importance to the colleague. Further, the colleague had told him he was the cause of all his problems. |
Finally, the doctor said that because the company had failed to provide immediate or ongoing medical assistance, he suffered severe psychiatric injury which continued to cause him loss. |
The court pointed out that attendance at the course was voluntary, and reiterated the principle that if an employee contractually consents to performing particular tasks it will be harder to prove negligence. |
The court also found that it was significant whether or not the employee showed any signs of susceptibility that ought to have put the employer on notice that it was possible its act or omissions might create a risk of psychiatric harm. This, and not the employee's subjective feelings and perceptions, were significant to the issue of negligence. It is then that an employer would have to take reasonable steps to prevent that risk from eventuating. |
It appears that these indicators have to be more than mere signs of anxiety and stress, especially when the person behaves normally otherwise. The signs must of themselves demonstrate an onset of mental illness. |
The courts found that the employer had not breached its duty to provide a safe system of work and the employee's appeal was dismissed. |
