Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh
Difference between "compliance" and ‘assumed guilty"...
I have to have a MOT certificate for any car over 3 years old - is the assumption that everyone would immediately be driving unsafe cars if we didn’t have them, or to ensure that certain standards are met to ensure safety?
|
That’s an example of proving an individual *has* done something - something safety-critical also.
Record-keeping in order to prove you *haven’t* given someone more than an average 48 working hours per week is categorically different. Arguably if you want a valid motoring comparison it’s like you being asked to keep records that you haven’t broken the speed limit, although even that has a much more significant safety angle than working hours. Of course people can install devices that record how they drive, but it’s expensive. So they aren’t compelled to do it.
There are safety critical things businesses must do, and must keep records to prove they are doing. Again, categorically different than keeping records to prove they’re *not* doing something that isn’t safety critical.