Parking at own risk - now workplace parking permit

[tx2online]

We have 2 car parks at my place of work (a school)

One at the front of the premises, and one at the rear.

 

At the rear, there are no designated spaces, just an unmade area which is used for parking. The front car park is tarmaced with marked parking spaces.

 

We are informed we use the car parks at our own risk - fair enough, although there are no obvious signs to this effect.

 

I choose to park my rather shiny and well looked after car in the front car park where students do not have access.

 

The students can get to the rear car park, and tend to use this area at break times. There have been isolated incidents of damage to staff cars, hence why I park at the front.

 

Recently, we have been issued with 'permits' to allow parking, however, I have been designated parking in the rear car park.

 

Previously, there were no permits, and this is a 'campaign' by a member of staff to free up spaces at the front of the premises.

 

I am arguing that until the safety of my vehicle can be assured, I will not park in the rear car park.

 

There is very little street parking in the area as the school is in a village, on a main road, and double yellow lines abound. Parking at the front of the school is now being used for guests and visitors, plus members of the public to use the swimming pool.

 

Given parking is "at my own risk", can I not choose to reduce the most obvious risk of vandalism to my car by parking in a preferred place, i.e. the front car park?

 

If I am being 'forced' to park in a specific location, how can it be at my own risk?

 

Thanks in advance.

[Al27]

Who issues the permits and what happens if you don't display?

 

'At your own risk' doesn't actually mean anything. It just sounds like your employer is instructing you not to park at the front. I'm guessing the most they could do would be to give you an official reprimand, but then you're getting into employment law.

[68904]

Who agreed this parking permits with the staff?

What is the Council policy on staff parking on council property.

normally these types of things should be agreed with the staff representatives, at council level.

What appens if you dunt av a permit?

If you are a member of a Union, have words, as sometimes head teachers will walk al over you and impose things on staff which should be done by agreement.

I have done 27 years as a staff rep with one of the worst employers in this country, and if you let them get away with this, what next?

[tx2online]

Who issues the permits and what happens if you don't display?

 

'At your own risk' doesn't actually mean anything. It just sounds like your employer is instructing you not to park at the front. I'm guessing the most they could do would be to give you an official reprimand, but then you're getting into employment law.

 

The permits are being issued by the school, I presume, or at least by the member of staff who has, with management's blessing, seemingly organised the whole affair.

 

Some staff are being allowed to park in the front car park, these having been identified as needing to leave the premises during normal office hours, i.e. part-time staff, finance office staff, management.

 

The rear car park exit/entrance gate is locked (school policy) and secured with a combination lock, so anyone with knowledge of it can gain entry/exit. I fail to see why this doesn't include the above staff?

 

Yes, my employer is instructing me (and others) to now use the rear car park, but will not accept liability if my car is vandalised. They don't accept liability out the front either, but, in my opinion, there is a reduced risk as no student has access to this area during the day.

 

I have been told nothing official per se, on what action will be taken for a breach of the permit, but I am lead to believe disciplinary action will be taken for failure to adhere to parking 'rules'.

Edited May 6, 2009 by tx2online

[tx2online]

Who agreed this parking permits with the staff?

What is the Council policy on staff parking on council property.

normally these types of things should be agreed with the staff representatives, at council level.

What appens if you dunt av a permit?

If you are a member of a Union, have words, as sometimes head teachers will walk al over you and impose things on staff which should be done by agreement.

I have done 27 years as a staff rep with one of the worst employers in this country, and if you let them get away with this, what next?

 

I have no idea as to who 'agreed' the permits; I know mention of it has been about for many months now, but has only just come to the fore in an 'official' capacity.

 

I do not know the Council's policy, nor do I know what happens if you do not have, or display a permit (the latter of which I intend to also not do as it has been said we must affix the permit to the interior of the windscreen, the holder of such being a permanent 'glue' backed plastic wallet affair)

 

I am a member of a Union, and may well have words, but I wanted to gauge some opinion prior to doing this.

 

My main gripe is that they don't accept liability for damage to vehicles, but insist we park in an area where damage is most likely to occur.

 

Thanks.

Edited May 6, 2009 by tx2online

[lamma]

they can't unilaterally just off load all risk to the driver. don't sign anything that says that you assume all risk.

[tx2online]

they can't unilaterally just off load all risk to the driver. don't sign anything that says that you assume all risk.

 

I have, to my knowledge, signed nothing.

 

Can you cite a legal/official source to support your statement? If I can build a solid case to at the very least ensure the area where I am being forced to park my car is 'safe', it would be useful.

[lamma]

Off the top of my head - no, it probably quite a few different regs. But the rationale yes. A "parking at your own risk" condition is unlawful as it is an attempt by the landowner (in this case employer) to limit their negligence including death and personal injury - this is not allowed It is more than enough to void any contractual claims made by PPCs (yet still the PPCs like to put these signs up) and as an employer also has Health and Safety issues to deal with it is even more 'not allowed'.

[WelshMam2009]

I doubt very much that there is anything in your contract of employment that entitles you to a parking space within the grounds as your mode of transport to and from work is normally your responsibility. Even if you have to use your car for work, this still does not mean than a parking space has to be provided.

 

More often than not, discretionary parking is provided at workplaces and this does not exempt the employer from ensuring that these are fit for purpose.

 

We had a big issue where I used to work about lack of lighting in the car park and, with the Union's assistance, managed to get this installed on safety grounds.

 

Whilst your employer may be liable for damage to your vehicle as a consequence of a pot hole etc (the liability being far less onerous than for a Highway Authority) I doubt very much that they can reasonably be held liable for any theft or vandalism to your vehicle.

 

What you need to establish is the criteria for allocating the permits and whether or not this was done in a fair and equitable manner.

 

EDIT: It may be as well to campaign for the area to be properly made up and marked out with dedicated staff parking, thus segregating students' cars as far as reasonably practicable.

Edited May 6, 2009 by WelshMam2009

[lamma]

the point is they cannot abrogate.

[crem]

 

EDIT: It may be as well to campaign for the area to be properly made up and marked out with dedicated staff parking, thus segregating students' cars as far as reasonably practicable.

 

I don't think it is the student's cars that tx2online was suggesting is the problem, rather it is the students themselves who it appears have access to that parking area during break times!

[68904]

From my experience of school management, some head teachers think they own the world and make decisions which should be dealt with at council level, and if nor checked and stopped, could lead to worse things coming out of the hay.

All the favourite employees will have the gold plated parking spots, and those whose face dunt fit will get wots at the bottom of the barrel.

Stop it know afore it gets weven worse.

[tx2online]

I don't think it is the student's cars that tx2online was suggesting is the problem, rather it is the students themselves who it appears have access to that parking area during break times!

 

Yes, this is my main concern.

 

My car is well looked after, machine polished with a finish to the paintwork I'd like to maintain. I'm not a 'petrol head' per se, but it is a nice car and I like to keep it looking that way.

 

My fear is that students will either wilfully scratch the paint, or innocently damage it by way of a football, mud slinging, stone throwing etc as it is directly adjacent to their 'playground' area.

 

I am being told that to park my car there is at my own risk, certainly in respect of any damage caused, which is why I currently choose to park it in an alternative car park which is less at risk of such acts.

 

I would park off site if there were opportunity to do so, but there isn't as explained earlier.

 

It seems clear my employer cannot refuse liability on health and safety grounds, but they probably can in respect of material damage which may occur.

 

I think I have a case to not be forced to park in a certain area, particularly as other staff are being permitted to park elsewhere when there is no case for them to be able to do so considering the locked exit gate is keypad controlled access.

 

It is unclear as to which angle I can approach this matter, certainly from a legal/lawful viewpoint as opposed to an opinionated one.

[tx2online]

From my experience of school management, some head teachers think they own the world and make decisions which should be dealt with at council level, and if nor checked and stopped, could lead to worse things coming out of the hay.

All the favourite employees will have the gold plated parking spots, and those whose face dunt fit will get wots at the bottom of the barrel.

Stop it know afore it gets weven worse.

 

No-one is being allocated parking spaces as such, more parking 'areas' in which they must park.

 

Those allowed to park in the front car park (my favoured choice as previously explained) are those staff who have to leave the premises either to carry out their roles, or are part-time, arriving later or finishing earlier.

 

The decision for them being allowed to park in the front car park is that they don't have to be concerned with unlocking a gate to enter/exit.

 

The matter seems trivial I know, but to my knowledge, no consultation has taken place, certainly none that I have been involved in and I'm not happy with being told I must park there given the potential for damage to occur.

 

If my employer is prepared to make the area a no-go for students, then I wouldn't have an issue save the state of the ground which consists of what can only be described as hardcore base material in some areas.

[WelshMam2009]

I'm not happy with being told I must park there given the potential for damage to occur.

 

In reality you are not being told you must park there, you choose to park there. The employer is restricting access at the front to visitors as I understand it but is allowing employees (and students) to park in the rear carpark. If you chose to do so then that is up to you.

 

Please don't think that I am unsympathetic, I'm just trying to explain things as I believe them to be. I had £700 of damage inflicted on my car whilst at work and that was more than likely caused by another employee who wasn't prepared to own up to it!!

 

Rather than resisting parking at the rear, I would be campaigning for improvements in terms of the infrastructure and/or restricting student access.

[tx2online]

In reality you are not being told you must park there, you choose to park there. The employer is restricting access at the front to visitors as I understand it but is allowing employees (and students) to park in the rear carpark. If you chose to do so then that is up to you.

 

Please don't think that I am unsympathetic, I'm just trying to explain things as I believe them to be. I had £700 of damage inflicted on my car whilst at work and that was more than likely caused by another employee who wasn't prepared to own up to it!!

 

Rather than resisting parking at the rear, I would be campaigning for improvements in terms of the infrastructure and/or restricting student access.

 

No, I believe you have confused the issue.

 

I am being told to park in the rear car park from now on, whilst other 'preferential' employees will be allowed to park in the front car park for reasons explained earlier.

 

Please note : There isn't really an option to park on the highway due to local restrictions in place. The location is also rural, so car transport is quite necessary.

 

I currently choose to park in the car park where damage is less likely to occur to my car as my employer will not accept liability for such. My employer is now insisting I park my car in a car park where there is much increased risk of damage by a 3rd party.

 

If my employer is going to enforce where I must park, I feel they have a obligation to ensure the risk of my car being damaged is reduced.

 

They may as well say "you must put your hand in a fire. We'll make sure it is nice and hot, but we don't take responsibility if you get burnt".

[raydetinu]

Your employer does not have provide you with parking, is anything written into your contract or conditions? they could just as easily say you cant park anywhere on site, its free is it not! so its your choice to park there.

Now if it was part of contract or you paid for it then they certainly could not excuse themselves from risk, especially if there was known risk. However you also know the risk from students it is not as though they did not disclose the risk. Its your choice really; accept the risk or park of site, which in turn has risks like anything else in life.

take a big cardboard box to work, fill it with cotton wool and park in that:D

[WelshMam2009]

No, I believe you have confused the issue.

 

I am being told to park in the rear car park from now on, whilst other 'preferential' employees will be allowed to park in the front car park for reasons explained earlier.

 

Please note : There isn't really an option to park on the highway due to local restrictions in place. The location is also rural, so car transport is quite necessary.

 

I currently choose to park in the car park where damage is less likely to occur to my car as my employer will not accept liability for such. My employer is now insisting I park my car in a car park where there is much increased risk of damage by a 3rd party.

 

If my employer is going to enforce where I must park, I feel they have a obligation to ensure the risk of my car being damaged is reduced.

 

They may as well say "you must put your hand in a fire. We'll make sure it is nice and hot, but we don't take responsibility if you get burnt".

 

This goes back to my original post where I said that they are under no obligation to provide parking facilities. Hence, you do chose to park there (albeit grudgingly) as that responsiblity rests with the motorist.

 

All your employer has done is to remove the discretionary parking facilities at the front, which is your preferred parking location.

 

Contractually, I don't believe they have done anything wrong, especially given that there appears to be some justification for the permit allocation. (Employee liaison may require some improvement, granted!!)

 

Again, having been denied access to the front carpark, I would be campaigning for improvements/restrictions to the rear carpark as all facilities have to be fit for purpose.

[Lula]

I would be making enquiries as to what the council and education authority have to say about this.

[tx2online]

Your employer does not have provide you with parking, is anything written into your contract or conditions? they could just as easily say you cant park anywhere on site, its free is it not! so its your choice to park there.

Now if it was part of contract or you paid for it then they certainly could not excuse themselves from risk, especially if there was known risk. However you also know the risk from students it is not as though they did not disclose the risk. Its your choice really; accept the risk or park of site, which in turn has risks like anything else in life.

take a big cardboard box to work, fill it with cotton wool and park in that:D

 

My employer is giving me a permit to park. They are therefore providing me with parking.

 

Yes, I choose to park there, but there is little or no other option than to commute by car. Public transport, for example, is not possible.

 

Parking is provided on site for employees. It is neither written, nor it is a verbal contract. It is simply accepted.

 

Whereas I currently choose to park in a 'safe' area, my employer is insisting I now park in an unsafe area without accepting the risk to my property thereon. I don't think that is acceptable.

 

I have to use my car to arrive at my place of work, as do the majority of other employees there due to its rural location, therefore if they are to permit use of onsite parking, they should ensure it is in an area used exclusively for such, and not a communal 'playground' where little Jimmy will be tempted to vandalise my paintwork.

 

I don't see that as unreasonable.

 

You seem to desire to lower the discussion to a personal level re: your comments and cotton wool. If you are unable to make your point without ridicule or belittlement, please resist the urge to post, it does nothing for your integrity.

[tx2online]

This goes back to my original post where I said that they are under no obligation to provide parking facilities. Hence, you do chose to park there (albeit grudgingly) as that responsiblity rests with the motorist.

 

All your employer has done is to remove the discretionary parking facilities at the front, which is your preferred parking location.

 

Contractually, I don't believe they have done anything wrong, especially given that there appears to be some justification for the permit allocation. (Employee liaison may require some improvement, granted!!)

 

Again, having been denied access to the front carpark, I would be campaigning for improvements/restrictions to the rear carpark as all facilities have to be fit for purpose.

 

I absolutely agree with you, but would point out I don't believe I suggested any obligation to provide parking as you perhaps imply.

 

The choice aspect is not quite so clear as whether to choose using public transport or private. Private transport is essential to travel and with the restrictions on public highway parking, there is little else to do but park where facilities are provided.

 

Therefore, choosing to park there is out of necessity rather than perhaps a preference over parking somewhere else.

 

Employee liaison certainly does need improvement. Having spoke (earlier in the day when this 'surfaced') to several other employees who share the same opinion on the matter, I am going to approach my Union rep to start dialogue over whether the facilities can be improved in respect of protection to property.

 

Thank you for your valuable feedback.

Edited May 6, 2009 by tx2online

[lamma]

One last time, the employer cannot abrogate, they are not responsibility 'free'. the issue is the extent of the responsibility.

[68904]

If the vehicles are damaged by the pupils, then security of the vehicle parking areas must be a health and safety issue.

It would follow that the school has a duty of care to students/staff, therefore I would say is that the car park should be isolated so students cannot have access to damage the vehicle or themselves.

Also the school management have a duty to the staff to ensure that criminal damage how ever caused is stopped.

By securing staff car parks, then they are complying with the duty of care they have to employees/students for H and S, and the prevention and detection of unlawful acts of criminal damage to County property and those whom the council employ.

I think the comment about a box full of cotton wool was stupid, ill thought out, and what you would expect from some sorts of people.

[tx2online]

If the vehicles are damaged by the pupils, then security of the vehicle parking areas must be a health and safety issue.

It would follow that the school has a duty of care to students/staff, therefore I would say is that the car park should be isolated so students cannot have access to damage the vehicle or themselves.

Also the school management have a duty to the staff to ensure that criminal damage how ever caused is stopped.

By securing staff car parks, then they are complying with the duty of care they have to employees/students for H and S, and the prevention and detection of unlawful acts of criminal damage to County property and those whom the council employ.

 

I need to cite this, as I fear challenging my concerns with opinion alone is going to fall on deaf ears.

 

But we are heading in the right direction

[WelshMam2009]

There is a general duty of care under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 which covers employees and obviously specific secondary legislation. However, I am not aware of anything that would extend specifically to covering employees possessions.

 

We managed to get lighting installed in the carpark on safety grounds as it was deemed unsafe for employees to walk to their cars in the dark.

 

Also, as we were attached to the local magistrates and crown court, we regularly experienced vandalism, damage and frequently theft. In fairness, patrols of the car park were undertaken periodically but this was done more as a gesture of good will than arising from a statutory requirement.

 

Personally, I think you stand a better chance if you cite the students health and safety as being a concern as opposed to concentrating on vandalism to vehicles.

 

On a different but related note, restricting car parking facilities at work places is being actively encouraged, thus motivating us all to use this wonderfully integrated transport system of ours!!