Hennessy Industries, Inc.: Case Summary

873 Words4 Pages
Upon reviewing the case file, I would say that Hennessy Industries, Inc. had a responsibility to protect Barker and others employees that may come into contact with anything that came be harmful to their wellbeing or not safe. Even through Hennessy Industries, Inc. argued “that it could not be held liable for injuries caused by another manufacturer’s products even if it was foreseeable that its machines would be used to repair products that contained asbestos” (Melvin, S., & Katz, M. , 2015) they still should have taken steps to protect their employees. I understand that they could never know what was going to come through their doors, but they should have plan for the worst and have the proper protective equipment available. They would…show more content…
That would be the management team and safety officer at Hennessy Industries, Inc. For according to OSHA guidelines that all workers have the right to a safe workplace environment which includes no serious risk of any harm. “The law requires employers to provide their employees with safe and healthful workplaces. The OSHA law also prohibits employers from retaliating against employees for exercising their rights under the law (including the right to raise a health and safety concern or report an injury).” (Osha.gov,…show more content…
For Hennessy is an industry that does tire changers, brake lathe, and wheel balancing machines that is consider the world 's foremost wheel-service manufacturers. With that being said they ones running company should have known that they could have to deal with asbestos one day. They should have checked with whomever they had gotten the material from and been informed of any hazards in the items that they were buying or working on. With all this information present to a jury they would more than likely see that Hennessy was clearly at fault and would be responsible for harm that they had caused Barker and his
Open Document