The duty of care for Nordic companies
If News 5/2017 What do you need to do to meet your employer's obligations towards your employees both home and abroad?
If News 5/2017 What do you need to do to meet your employer's obligations towards your employees both home and abroad?
An employee of yours was injured and kidnapped, along with three colleagues, following an attack during a work related trip to Kenya. After four days as hostages, they were set free. Three years later, the employee sues you, his employer company, for compensation for economic and non-economic loss following the kidnapping. The case goes to court. The employee wins.
The above is not hypotheticals; it is a ruling from the District Court of Oslo in the case of Steven Patrick Dennis vs. the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC). On the 25th of November 2015, the District Court of Oslo delivered its judgement in the case of Steven Patrick Dennis vs. NRC. The court ruled that the NRC acted with gross negligence in relation to this incident and found the NRC to be liable for compensation towards its employee.
The ruling has been discussed widely in local and international media. Internationally, some describe it as precedent setting(1), a game-changer(2) as well as a wake-up call(3) for employers sending employees on international assignment.
Nordic companies are becoming increasingly international(4). In Norway for instance, the 30 largest companies as of 2014 had over 75% of sales from abroad. Representing an increase of nearly 60% compared with the 1990s.(5) It is not only sales, in recent years, many of these Nordic companies have also established units abroad.
Increased international business activity by Nordic companies has resulted in a higher number of employees working abroad. Many Nordic companies have extensive experience in assigning their employees internationally, particularly in the oil and gas and shipping industries.
Employees who are sent on these international assignments face many risks and threats; in health and safety risk as well as their wellbeing, particularly to those who travel to remote areas with poor conditions compared to what they are used to in Scandinavia.
Typical examples of this include the recent unexpected outbreak of Ebola, Zika and terrorist attacks in some African, South American and European cities. All have increased the health and safety risk to employees working abroad.
Employers sending employees abroad on short or long stays must therefore take into consideration the implications, both ethical and legal of these developments to their business and the wellbeing of their employees. Duty of care is both a legal and a moral obligation for employers.
It is about the employer ensuring that the employees are adequately protected while under employment, be it at home or abroad.
Nordic governments have tried to regulate the responsibility of employers sending employees abroad. In Norway for instance, the Working Environment Act from 2005 (WEA) lays down the obligation employers have towards their employees that would be considered pertinent when sending employees on international assignments.
To Norwegian authorities, one of the aims of the WEA is to secure a work environment that is both physically and mentally secure and has a welfare standard in line with the technological and social evolution in society, c.f Section 1-1.
The WEA applies to all employees performing work for an employer, both permanent and on contract. According to the WEA, the employer has to deal with working environment issues in a systematic and orderly way.
That is, the employer must put in place action plans; risk analysis, routine documents and follow-up procedures to prevent work-related illness and accidents, and by doing this achieve a safe and sound working environment both physically and mentally.
Broadly speaking, duty of care responsibilities can be grouped into three categories, before, during and after travel.
The above shows that, as employers, duty of care responsibilities are both a moral and legal obligation what we owe to our employees.
Underwriter
(1) Precedent setting case: Aid worker successfully sues NGO. (2016). Radio Canada International. Retrieved 12 December 2016, from NGO http://www.rcinet.ca/en/2015/12/01/precedent-setting-case-aid-worker-successfully-sues-ngo/
(2) Game-Changer. (2016). AidSpeak. Retrieved 12 December 2016, from https://aidspeak.wordpress.com/2015/11/27/game-changer/
(3) NRC kidnap ruling is 'wake-up' call for aid industry. (2016). IRIN. Retrieved 12 December 2016, from IRIN http://www.irinnews.org/report/102243/nrc-kidnap-ruling-'wake-'-call-aid-industry
(4) Heum, P. (2013). Vekst og internasjonalisering i norske storforetak. Brage.bibsys.no. Retrieved 12 December 2016, from Brage https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/166734/A39_13.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
(5) ibid
(6) The Working Environment Act from 2005. (2005). Arbeidstilsynet.no. Retrieved 12 December 2016, from Arbeidstilsynet
http://www.arbeidstilsynet.no/binfil/download2.php?tid=92156