Who is the ultimate responsible party
Thread Content
Today, while conducting training for supervisors in a certain workshop, an operator came to ask me about something: his colleague, Chen, was involved in an accident and as a result had his monthly bonus deducted. I feel very frustrated. The case that occurred was as follows: One day, Chen was responsible for supervising a digging operation as required by the workshop, and mechanical excavation was used at the site. When digging to 2m depth, the excavator damaged a new underground water pipeline at that depth, resulting in a disruption of water supply to some facilities for several hours. In the accident analysis, Chen, the supervisor, was identified as the primary responsible party. During the investigation, Chen reported that the person in charge of the workshop project had not provided him with any instructions, and he was completely unaware of the existence of such an underground pipeline. So the question is, who is really responsible for this accident – Chen, or the person in charge of this excavation project, or someone else? Everyone can engage in a discussion~
Damn, how can one dig without any instructions? Don’t you have the work order? How can a guardian be made to take responsibility? That’s ridiculous
The excavation permit requires joint approval; when issuing the permit, one should be aware of the conditions underground. If this information is not available, the main responsibility lies with the water supply workshop or the technical management staff of that workshop. If it is known and has been communicated, then it is the construction unit and the supervisor. The supervisor should read the contents of the work order and be clear about their supervisory duties; however, the management responsibilities of the workshop remain no less important than those of the supervisor.
The person in charge is responsible, and the project leader is the primary accountable party.
I checked again today, and our excavation work permit does not indicate the presence of such pipelines underground. During the construction briefing, the supervisor was unaware of the existence of this buried wire. When determining liability for the accident, there was definitely a problem with that workshop. It was believed that even if the risk was not identified, the supervisor present on site must take responsibility for that work and ensure that no construction-related issues arose; therefore, the supervisor was designated as the primary liable party. In my opinion, the primary person responsible for this accident should be the project manager; the workshop supervisor bears the main responsibility, while the supervisor plays only an important role in this regard.
In my opinion, the operator of the excavator is the direct responsible party, while the supervisor is the indirect responsible party. The person in charge of the excavator can be considered the management responsible party, and the workshop manager is the indirect management responsible party~
The person in charge of the workshop project should be the primary responsible party.
In my opinion, whether this accident occurred depends on whether the relevant permits were issued and whether the approval procedures for starting construction were followed. Below are the items that need to be signed by various departments of a company, depending on their respective responsibilities. Opinion of the person in charge of the construction department: “Agree” or “Disagree” by the responsible person; Signature: Date, Month, Day, Hour, Minute. Opinion of the person in charge of the Production and Technology Department: Comments regarding the impacts on the site and production processes; Signature: Date, Month, Day, Hour, Minute. Opinion of the person in charge of the Equipment Department: Comments regarding equipment and facilities, the working environment, and the factory building’s foundation; Signature: Date, Month, Day, Hour, Minute. Opinion of the person in charge of Workshop 103: Comments regarding public pipelines and electrical circuits; Signature: Date, Month, Day, Hour, Minute. Opinion of the person in charge of the General Office: Comments regarding landscaping, factory cleanliness, and public roads; Signature: Date, Month, Day, Hour, Minute. Opinion of the person in charge of the Security Department: Comments regarding fire safety and **chemical safety; Signature: Date, Month, Day, Hour, Minute
The ticket approval has been completed, so the guardian certainly is not the primary responsible party. It’s indeed difficult to evaluate the approach taken by the local workshop; such a handling method is quite inappropriate.
So, in terms of the amount of money deducted, how should the cards be ranked from highest to lowest?