Do clubs need Employers Liability insurance?

[Aubrey]

This afternoon I had a call from the NFU insurance rep. (Our club property is insured by NFU).
The lady called on the pretext of reviewing our policy and level of cover and was obviously trying to 'sell' more insurance but I was surprised to be told that we should have Employers Liability Insurance even though we do not employ anyone.

Her argument is that legally anyone doing work (e.g. cleaning or maintenance) around the club property can be considered to be employed by the club, whether or not they are club members and whether or not they are paid for the work. As an example she said that a volunteer hut warden would be an employee, as would anyone who cut the grass on the club lawn.

Has anyone else been advised about this?

Does the BCA insurance cover the club for claims by these "employees"?

 

[martinr]

See this

A quick scan would seem to suggest [clubs] are only required by law to have employers? liability insurance for people who
they employ under a contract of service or apprenticeship, and not for volunteers. I could be wrong.

 

[martinr]

Does the BCA insurance cover the club for claims by these "employees"?

Public liability insurance is different. It covers you for claims made against you by members of the public or other businesses, but not for claims by employees.

 

[nickwilliams]

Aubrey,

She's talking bollocks.

BCA's policy will cover volunteers.

 

[Over the Hill]

So extrapolating this, if my mate comes and cuts the grass at my house as a favor I need to take out employers liability insurance. I assume you said you are talking complete bollocks. 

 

[cap n chris]

If a club offers members of the public caving trip(s) (i.e. not as volunteers-to-friends, but pro bono "professional services", on a subsidised/free basist to punters/passers-by) the public noob would surely have every reason to presume (from their point of view) that they will be treated identically to a customer going to an outdoor pursuits company; in such situations (which are relatively commonplace) does the club member providing the services need to be insured to a professional level or does BCA insurance cover them to the same extent as an outdoor pursuits insurance policy would for an instructor providing the same kind of services in a business set-up, presuming the punter is not a BCA member and hence caver-to-caver cover wouldn't be applicable?

 

[graham]

So extrapolating this, if my mate comes and cuts the grass at my house as a favor I need to take out employers liability insurance. I assume you said you are talking complete bollocks. 

I have a gardener, my mother has a gardener. Neither of us have employers liability insurance as it ain't necessary, any more than if an electrician is contracted to repair a broken plug socket or a glazier repair a broken window.

 

[nickwilliams]

This is going wildly off topic, IMHO, but since you asked:

If a club offers members of the public caving trip(s) (i.e. not as volunteers-to-friends, but pro bono "professional services", on a subsidised/free basist to punters/passers-by) the public noob would surely have every reason to presume (from their point of view) that they will be treated identically to a customer going to an outdoor pursuits company;

I don't see why the punter should have that expectation at all. Caving clubs are not professional providers and I can't think why they would want to be seen as such. 'Pro bono' doesn't come into it because cubs are never doing it 'pro'.

in such situations (which are relatively commonplace) does the club member providing the services need to be insured to a professional level

No, they are not acting in a professional capacity.

or does BCA insurance cover them to the same extent as an outdoor pursuits insurance policy would for an instructor providing the same kind of services in a business set-up, presuming the punter is not a BCA member and hence caver-to-caver cover wouldn't be applicable?

You'd obviously need to compare the wording of the specific policies, but in my view BCA cover would, for all practical purposes, be as good.

 

[graham]

There's a sort of parallel, Nick.

If you 'hire' someone, be it a caving instructor or a gardener, you expect them to carry the relevant professional cover.

If you are not 'hiring' them, be it someone to go caving with or a mate sorting out that pile of crap behind the shed with you, then you do not have that expectation.

 

[cap n chris]

If you 'hire' someone, be it a caving instructor or a gardener, you expect them to carry the relevant professional cover.

Indeed. Even if there is no attendant fee, a member of the public being offered (free) services (a caving trip/try caving) would reasonably expect it to be delivered to a standard approaching that of an outdoor pursuits company. Come to think of it, a caving club/organisation should (a member of the public would reasonably presume) be offering such an experience at a high level of competency and safety precisely because it is their purported area of expertise.

 

[cavermark]

I seem to remember that when universities were worried about liability/litigation in their "dangerous sports clubs" (and trying to close those clubs down) the advice was that if the clubs followed "established best practice" they would be meeting their duty of care to beginners.
NCA helped draw up generic good practice guidelines and CHECC was formed to help share knowledge/skills.

 

[graham]

Indeed. Even if there is no attendant fee ...

The relevant phrase here, Mr B. is hire or reward.

 

[Ed W]

Aubrey,

We had exactly the same issue at the MCG.  When renewing the buildings insurance, the club secretary had the bejesus scared out of him by the NFU saleswoman saying that should a member carrying out hut work fall an paralyse themselves that the MCG would be liable, and that we therefore needed to spend a small fortune on employers liability insurance premiums.  It could well be the same person you have been talking to.  Luckily the secretary was persuaded that the view held by Nick Williams was the correct one, and all we required was protection for the buildings and contents - the premiums are still rising significantly though.  We have started looking at other suppliers for our buildings insurance now.

As to the point about professional levels of liability insurance for taking novices caving, I think this would be a very sad day indeed for British caving.  As long as the novice is made aware of what they are letting themselves in for (i.e. that they are taking their own responsibility) and no money is charged I can't see the problem.  Note that there have been times when the MCG has been approached by people wanting to go caving, who clearly just want a one off experience on the cheap as part of their "bucket list", we tend to point these people in the direction of professional instructors.  Also, where does the principal stop?  Is the most experienced/technically knowledgeable person on any trip now "responsible" for all the others?

 

[Over the Hill]

where does the principal stop?  Is the most experienced/technically knowledgeable person on any trip now "responsible" for all the others?

Same goes for the hills, I took a MLC qualification years ago and never use it but you bet if the shit it the fan in the hills some smart arse would say I was the responsible person.

 

[cap n chris]

Is the most experienced/technically knowledgeable person on any trip now "responsible" for all the others?

Yes.

I asked this same question many years ago about an expedition trip where I was going to be the most qualified person, but the least experienced in that region - there would be plenty of other people there with loads more local knowledge/trips on their tally than me and yet I would be the first in the litigation firing line.

 

[cap n chris]

the advice was that if the clubs followed "established best practice" they would be meeting their duty of care to beginners.

Quite a big if.  e.g. established best practice for ladder and line is harnesses; belts still seem to be default.

 

[graham]

Is the most experienced/technically knowledgeable person on any trip now "responsible" for all the others?

Yes.

I asked this same question many years ago about an expedition trip where I was going to be the most qualified person, but the least experienced in that region - there would be plenty of other people there with loads more local knowledge/trips on their tally than me and yet I would be the first in the litigation firing line.

And yet there was no litigation, 'cos their experience avoided it. 

 

[cavermark]

Harnesses were used in Sheffield

 

[cap n chris]

 

[Fred]

Capn Chris wrote on June 24, 2015, 11:09:13 PM

I asked this same question many years ago about an expedition trip where I was going to be the most qualified person, but the least experienced in that region - there would be plenty of other people there with loads more local knowledge/trips on their tally than me and yet I would be the first in the litigation firing line.

Surely you would only be liable if it could be proven that you were responsible (by action or omission) for the incident, which would be much like anyone else? Could you really be expected to to oversee all the rigging and supervise all the trips just because you are more professionally qualified and if an incident occurred and you had not that you would be judged to be negligent ? You'd have to be a genuine superhero, not just a forum one, to achieve this  !