In our last lecture we stated some of the principles relating to the
liabilities of employers to their employés; in this lesson the subject
will be continued. _An employer is bound to use some care or
precaution, and if he does not will be responsible for his neglect._
One of these is he must employ persons who are fit for the work they
are set to do. If an employer in mining should put a man to work by
the side of another to mine coal who he knew was not a skilful
workman, and, in consequence of this unskilful workman's
unskilfulness, other miners were injured, he would be responsible for
hiring such a man. Every one will see the justice of this rule.
_The employer must also give proper instructions to the person
employed whenever he does not understand his duties._ If a person is
employed to run a laundry machine who does not understand how to work
it, and other employés are injured through his ignorance, the employer
would be liable. He must, therefore, tell such a person what to do; he
has no right to hazard the lives of others by putting any one who has
no knowledge of a machine to work without instructing him properly.
Again, if a person pretends to be capable, and the employer,
believing him, engages him, and it is soon found out that he is not,
then it is the duty of the employer either to dismiss him or to give
him proper instructions. The rule, however, on this subject is not the
same everywhere. It is sometimes said that if an employé continues to
work by the side of another after knowing that this other is
incompetent, it is his duty to give notice to the employer, and if the
employer continues to employ him, to quit. If he does not he assumes
the greater risk arising from his knowledge of the incompetency of the
other.
_It is the duty of the employer to furnish proper appliances for his
workmen._ He must furnish proper tools and machinery and safe
scaffolding, and in every respect must show a reasonable degree of
care in all these particulars. But the courts say that he is not
obliged to exercise the _utmost_ care, because the employé takes on
himself some risk with respect to the tools and machinery he uses. For
example, it is said that employers are not obliged to use the latest
appliances that are known or appear in the market for the use of their
workmen. If an employer has an older one that has been in use for
years, and the employés have found out all the dangers attending its
use, and a new one appears that is less dangerous to use, the law does
not require the employer to throw the older one away and get the
other. It is true that in many States within the last few years
statutes have been passed by the legislatures requiring employers to
be much more careful than they were formerly in protecting their
machinery. Many injuries have happened from the use of belting, and
the statutes in many cases have stated what must be done in the way of
enclosing belts, and of putting screens around machinery, and in
various ways of so protecting it that persons will be less liable to
suffer. Furthermore, inventors have been very busy in inventing
machinery with this end in view. The old-fashioned car-coupler was a
very dangerous device, and many a poor fellow has been crushed between
cars when trying to couple them. A coupler has been made in which this
danger no longer exists; in truth, there has been a great advance in
this direction.
_An employer must also select suitable materials on which to work._
This is a well-known principle. If he does not, then he is responsible
for the consequences. In one of the cases a person was injured while
erecting a scaffolding from the breaking of a knotty timber. The
testimony was that the knot was visible on the surface and if the
stick had been examined the defect would have been seen. That seemed a
slight defect, surely, but the consequence of using the timber was
very serious, and the court rightly held that as this defect could
have been seen, had the timber been properly examined, the employer
was responsible for the injury to a workman who was injured by the
breaking of it.
_An employer must also select suitable places for his employés._ In
one of the cases a court said a master does not warrant his servant's
safety. He does, however, agree to adopt and keep proper means with
which to carry on the business in which they are employed. Among these
is the providing of a suitable place for doing his work without
exposure to dangers that do not come within the reasonable scope of
his employment. In one of the cases a company stored a quantity of
dynamite so near a place where an employé was working that he was
killed by its explosion. The court held that it was negligence on the
part of the company in requiring its employé to work so near the place
where this explosive material was kept.
It is said that if an employé knows that a machine which he is to
operate is defective when accepting employment he can recover nothing
for the consequences. He assumes the risk whenever he thus engages to
work. If the service be especially perilous and yet he clearly
understands the nature of it and is injured when performing it, he can
get nothing. Doubtless in many of these cases he is paid a larger sum
for working under such conditions. Whatever may be the truth in this
regard, the principle of law is well understood that, if he has a full
knowledge of the risk of his situation and makes no complaint about
the nature of the machinery that he is to operate, he accepts the
risks, however great they may be. In one of the cases an employé was
injured by the kick of a horse belonging to his employer, but he
recovered nothing, because he understood the vicious nature of the
animal. The horse had kicked others; in fact, its reputation for
kicking was well known, and the employé began work with his eyes wide
open.
This rule also applies if tools, machinery, etc., become defective and
the employé continues to work after the defects are found out. Of
course, every one knows that tools wear out and machinery becomes
weaker, and that is one of the natural consequences of using them. And
so it is regarded as one of the risks ordinarily taken by an employé,
and therefore he can get nothing whenever he is injured through the
operation of a defective machine caused by the natural wear and tear
of time.