Comments on: Rights to compensation, not alms and charity

By: Calculator

Calculator — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 12:25:07 +0000

In reply to random. "A man of many talents its seems" Either way he always seems to be dealing with trash.

By: George

George — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 01:18:24 +0000

In reply to Alexander Ball. 24hrs in case of grievous injuries. 10 days in case of non grievous injuries which keep him/her away from work for 3 days and over.

By: Alexander Ball

Alexander Ball — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 22:16:51 +0000

In reply to Rumplestiltskin. Who is responsible for informing the police? Is there a time limit?

By: Banana Republic .... again

Banana Republic .... again — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 17:47:30 +0000

It’s against the law (the Voluntary Organisations Act) to collect donations without a permit and proper charity status. The commissioner of voluntary organizations is due to bound to investigate and take legal action.

By: Rumplestiltskin

Rumplestiltskin — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 15:18:45 +0000

If a structure collapses and somebody is hurt it is incumbent on the police to carry out an investigation.

If it is found that there was negligence by the designer and/or the contractor then criminal proceedings should be taken against the proper parties. This is irrespective of whether the victim insists on compensation or not.

By: H.P. Baxxter

H.P. Baxxter — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 15:06:13 +0000

Imagine for a moment, if you can, that it was a Nationalist government that was organising a propaganda concert, calling it a “national event”. Imagine too that someone had been killed while working on a space-frame belonging to a bazuzlu company.

Imagine too, that the government had decided to go ahead with the show regardless.

The screams of “hnizrijiet” and “idejhom imcappsa bid-demm” and the protesti nazzjonali would have been loud enough to melt our faces.

By: Aunt Hetty

Aunt Hetty — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 11:17:44 +0000

Peppi and Lou should have hosted a Xarabank program on this issue and not help promote Gensna whilst the injured worker is to be given peanuts as charity.

By: gaetano pace

gaetano pace — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 11:13:03 +0000

As we all know, the workmen who sustain injury in the course of executing their duties, shall be subject to compensation from the Social Security Department. This arises from the fact that all employees are legally obliged, as are employers, to pay social security contributions.

It may not be a hefty compensation but it is there for the occasion.

Now in such a venue as the Ta Qali Centre, the owners would be foolish not to take out a policy of insurance. A policy that indemnifies them from claims to injury compensation from employees or third parties injured on the premises. Costs of compensation nowadays is quite considerable and could have serious effects on the cash of the company or person forking it out.

Then obviously, there is the solidarity shown by all others.

This usually takes the pecuniary form as is the case here. The thing is that while all three possibilities are worth commending, it will be a sorrowful, disgusting thing if anyone is going to attempt to make this “beneficiary collection” a political event where some Minister or VIP turns out on media to be shown presenting the cheque.

Solidarity of workmen with fellow workmen is to be expressed by the workmen themselves and none other for any other purpose or personal gain.

By: Freedom5

Freedom5 — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 11:09:17 +0000

Should be MFCC not MCCP

By: gaetano pace

gaetano pace — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 11:02:54 +0000

I express solidarity with the injured workmen. But come to think of it, were not the premises, the owners, insured against third party liabilities and injuries? Nowadays the grocery shop round the corner does take out such a policy of insurance. Will the workmen benefit from such a policy in this case?