Every time I read about yet another unfeasibly large workplace compensation payout, I grow evermore disillusioned. How can they justify such inflated figures?
Fair enough, if someone has been genuinely injured and the workplace is at fault, then some compensation should be expected. But some of the recent high-profile payouts make me wonder if they raise other people's expectations too high.
Surely there should be a clearer distinction between genuine, attributable negligence, and good old-fashioned bad luck? But then who needs to keep things in perspective when there's so much money up for grabs? After all, bad luck doesn't pay.
Where will it all end? Perhaps employers should start covering all their employees in bubble wrap, lest one of them sustain a paper cut and sue for gross negligence? And I don't even want to think about the outlandish claims that could be unleashed by the anti-ageism laws - as employers scurry to cover their backs, the death of the traditional office-signed birthday/retirement card is already in sight.
In an age when you can seemingly claim for anything - and probably win - the real value of compensation has been lost. Compared with real tragedies - such as the London bombings, where compensation for victims was actually capped -disproportionate workplace payouts simply make a mockery of the entire system.
Have your say
020 8652 8694
want to get something off your chest? phone our confidential rant line
Call our rant line on 020 8652 8694 or e-mail your rant to [email protected] Your details will be kept confidential.