leszkoss
Junior Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2011
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- Polish
- Home Country
- Poland
- Current Location
- UK
Could you tell me what are your thoughts on the following paragraphs. Especially as to the logical coherence of the argument made.
- A person of ordinary intelligence and circumspection, having that knowledge (considering the nature of my previous grievance and how much I suffered because of extremely offensive and obscene language and phrases targeted at me), should have reasonably foreseen the consequences that would result because of sending pornographic material obtained from a pornographic website. DT had time to contemplate that harm was very likely to follow from his act. If it was reasonably foreseeable that this act could cause distress and harm, then it renders the employer vicariously liable.
- The duty of care that the employer owes to their employees compels them to provide a safe working environment. One of the requirement under the employer’s duty of care is to protect staff from bullying and harassment. They also have a moral and ethical duty not to cause, or fail to prevent, physical or psychological injury. An employer can be deemed to have breached their duty of care by failing to do everything that was reasonable in the circumstances to keep the employee safe from harm. Sending pornographic material in an envelope to my home address was a blatant breach of the employer’s duty of care, and the harm that it caused was a foreseeable consequence of that breach.
