Tweet
Re: caught shoplifting help
Denying you access to essential medication, especially to a diabetic, is endangerment to health of a member of the public, contrary to Section 3, Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. The local authority health and safety inspectors who deal with health and safety matters as they relate to retail premises may well be interested in hearing about Tesco's attitude towards you. A first aider with an Approved Person's certificate, which only covers basic life-saving techniques, which most retail first aiders hold, would not be expected or be likely to be familiar with the complications or management of diabetes and having qualified in first aid to Advanced Level in the past, I am horrified by the attitude of the first aider in your case. The basic and overriding principle of First Aid is the protection and preservation of life, not endangering it as the Tesco idiot did.
Notwithstanding, diabetes can affect a person's rationale, state of awareness and consciousness, depending on their blood-glucose level. I speak from experience of having a family member with diabetes of 16 years' standing and having been instructed by a Diabetic Specialist Nurse in taking blood-glucose readings, interpretation of readings, complications, etc.. Also, diabetes can change a patient's blood chemistry, depending on how well it is managed, but it is an unpredictable illness and can change, without warning, necessitating medical intervention.
As for RLP's fatuous claims, they need to be told that they and Tesco can go whistle unless they wish to explain their questionable actions to a judge.
And finally, a message to Whacky Jacky. You've been told by the Law Commission and a court of law that your company's claims have no legal basis. So stop behaving like some sort of corporate vigilante.
Denying you access to essential medication, especially to a diabetic, is endangerment to health of a member of the public, contrary to Section 3, Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. The local authority health and safety inspectors who deal with health and safety matters as they relate to retail premises may well be interested in hearing about Tesco's attitude towards you. A first aider with an Approved Person's certificate, which only covers basic life-saving techniques, which most retail first aiders hold, would not be expected or be likely to be familiar with the complications or management of diabetes and having qualified in first aid to Advanced Level in the past, I am horrified by the attitude of the first aider in your case. The basic and overriding principle of First Aid is the protection and preservation of life, not endangering it as the Tesco idiot did.
Notwithstanding, diabetes can affect a person's rationale, state of awareness and consciousness, depending on their blood-glucose level. I speak from experience of having a family member with diabetes of 16 years' standing and having been instructed by a Diabetic Specialist Nurse in taking blood-glucose readings, interpretation of readings, complications, etc.. Also, diabetes can change a patient's blood chemistry, depending on how well it is managed, but it is an unpredictable illness and can change, without warning, necessitating medical intervention.
As for RLP's fatuous claims, they need to be told that they and Tesco can go whistle unless they wish to explain their questionable actions to a judge.
And finally, a message to Whacky Jacky. You've been told by the Law Commission and a court of law that your company's claims have no legal basis. So stop behaving like some sort of corporate vigilante.
Comment