Liabilty cliam against an apprentice

[tec0]

There is no grey area when it comes to who is liable between the customer and the company.

The grey area, is the part where the company must recover the cost of the repairs involved, from the apprentice. Is the "apprentice liable" for the cost of the repairs and can the company fire the apprentice, yes or no.

Basically we cannot say yes or no because we don’t know all the facts. However I would also recommend seeking professional help. That said an apprentice is well protected by the CCMA and you need all your facts to be 110% as stated above. The second truth was also mentioned by dfsa, if you fire this person you will need to fire the next person that did the same thing. Fact is if you didn’t fire a previous employee for the same and or similar mistake you can face being accused of victimization and then it is all new ball game… and a very problematic one at that.

Sorry I know you expected more but the truth is as it stands. First truth is you need to work through the CCMA secondly an apprentice "normally" isn't protected by a union thus they enjoy the full protection of the CCMA.

[dfsa]

and this is why we have so much unemployment, and will continue with large numbers of unemployment.

It is always the employers fault.......

No disrespect Justloadit, but statements and an outlook like that is the exact reason we have a untrained work force. Unemployment has nothing to do with the fact "It is always the employers fault"

Why do companies employ people? I can guarantee you they do not do it to get rid of unemployment,no Sir! They do it to make money and their pure goal is to make as much as they can with as low a cost as possible.

Now they employ people that are not properly trained for the job, because the cost/wage is low. If they employ properly trained people their cost go through the roof, as they now have to pay proper rates according to qualification. They also do nothing in their respective industries to train people as again it cost money.

Not long ago virtually all companies in the engineering & building industry had consistent apprentice ships running. We are talking here of thousands per Year. Starting with new intakes every six Months or at least every Year. Even small companies had 2-3 at any given time. These Days nobody have apprentices. In fact there are no real true apprenticeship program running that I know of. It is all just learner ship programs where the company purely train the person on a limited basis to suit the company environment.

The same go for any other industry, they send people to so-called training sessions ( Load of crap) and then expect them to know everything.

The government is also not doing the economy any favors either. They should bring COT back and force companies to do proper training. Give companies a rating like the BEE rating system work. If they do not comply, then they simply do not qualify to tender.

The statement you made above is typical of what is happening throughout the country. That is the mentality that people walk around with, yet nobody do some sort of effort to make a difference.

If the company owner is the ultimate perfect person, I would not have a problem if he punish the employee. It is proven over and over that top management and company owners are causing the most damage to their companies.

[Dave A]

I have to say that's not exactly the hard evidence of an absolute right that precludes recovering losses from the employee that I was looking for.

I'm happy to concede that such an action must be substantively fair.
I'm happy to concede the company must have taken all reasonable steps to mitigate the risk that led to the loss.
I'm happy to concede that such an action might be aggressively interrogated at the CCMA.
I'm happy to concede pursuing such an action might at times not be practical, or wise.

However, I remain unconvinced that it is not permissable under any circumstances at all.

My recommendation to any company contemplating doing so though is first ask yourself is there anything the company should have done that was not done to prevent this loss from happening?
Are your policies on the issue clear and have you been applying them consistently?

I'd also suggest you step back and take a holistic view.

Is such a step in the best interests of the company?
Is the cost going to be higher than the recovery? (Not only in monetary terms, but in terms of the employer / employee relationship).
Is it a cost that should really be considered part of the risk inherent in being in your line of business.

I'll say from my experience, most often the best course is taking the nescessary steps to reduce the prospects of a re-occurence, be that retraining, redefining, refining, warning or dismissal.

And realistically that is the road most often taken.

[ians]

For the record, this is an actual case just not for a motor bike, I cannot go into too much detail because the company is a well known company and i dont have all the facts.

The apprentice is still employed, and has been given a final warning, and has been instructed to pay for all the damages, including the towing of the vehicle.

[tec0]

For the record, this is an actual case just not for a motor bike, I cannot go into too much detail because the company is a well known company and i dont have all the facts.

The apprentice is still employed, and has been given a final warning, and has been instructed to pay for all the damages, including the towing of the vehicle.

***edit***

Here are the facts as I see them

Fact one: He still works for the company now if he was deliberately messing up after the inspections were done he would have been criminally charged and dismissed.

Fact two: He is still working and must pay for the damages… Where is the insurance? Where is the procedures? Where is the checklists? Where is the responsible person? Was the CCMA involved?

Fact three: He is paying that suggest that a lot of things didn’t happen and herein is my problem.

Now how I feel is irrelevant but condoning this… I am sorry I can't…