TOPIC 3

CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT
In the course of his professional duty, an Engineer may have to engage the services of other
people – for instance, Engineering technologists, technicians or ordinary administrative staff.
This will put an Engineer under the contact of employment.

WHAT IS A CONTACT OF EMPLOYMENT?

The Nigerian Labour Act defines a contract of employment as “any agreement whether oral
or written, express or implied, whereby one person agrees to employ another as a worker and
that other person agrees to serve the employer as a worker. It is A CONTRACT OF
SERVICE and not FOR SERVICE. What then is the difference between A CONTRACT
OF SERVICE and A CONTRACT FOR SERVICE?

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN A CONTRACT OF SERVICE AND A CONTRACT FOR

SERVICE.
A contact of service is an agreement between an employer and an employee while in a
contract for service an independent contractor, such as a self-employed person or vendor is
engaged for a fee to carry out an assignment or project.

In a contract of service there is an employer – employee relationship which is usually a

continuous relationship. A duty of care is owed to the employees by the employer. The
employer is generally liable for the vicarious act of employees. In a contract for service it is
an Employer – independent contractor relationship. It is a relationship organised around the
completion of a once – off piece of work. The employer is generally not liable for the
vicarious acts of independent contractors.

In a contract of service the method of payment are wages and salary while in a contract for
service the method of payment is lump sum per job

LAW OF INDUSTRIAL SAFETY

Manufacturing, mining and civil engineering construction works are particularly prone to
frequent accidents and sometimes, industrial diseases. And because the lives and welfare of
workers are involved, the law tries to ensure that the risk of death or accidents is eliminated
or, at least, reduced to the barest minimum. Therefore, due to the vulnerability of workers to

1
industrial injuries the common law has laid down a tripartite duty for employers in the
celebrated case of Wilson & Clyde Coal Co. v English Thus:
a. Duty to provide a safe system of work
b. Duty to provide safe plant and appliances
c. Duty to employ efficient personnel

In fact to ensure the safety of workers at the factory or construction firm the position of the
law is that, work aids, gadgets, helmets, prime movers, machineries containers, boilers,
goggles, rubber boots, gloves and other materials such as gas explosives and inflammable
dust fire proof wears are required to be provided.

a. Duty to provide a safe system of work.

It is mandatory that the employer who is an engineer must provide safe and healthy
surroundings for the employee to carry out his duties. He is not only duty bound to provide
safety devices but to ensure that the devices are properly used. In Western Nigeria Trading
Co. Ltd v Busari Ajao, a worker had been injured by a splinter of steel which subsequently
blinded his eyes. The company argued in court that it provided plastic goggles for the
workers. It was held that the provision of goggles was not enough to discharge the master’s
duty of care. It was the employer’s duty at common law to ensure not only that goggles were
provided but also that they were used by strict orders followed by reasonable supervision.

b. Duty to provide safe plant and appliances

The employer is under an obligation to provide proper tools, good plants and befitting healthy
premises and environment. The employer will be held liable where he has knowledge of the
dangerous character of the tool or appliances which injures, the employee notwithstanding
the fact that the tools were brought from a reputable dealer. In Taylor v Rov Co. Ltd here the
plaintiff lost his eye where the top of a chisel flew off owing to the excessive harness of the
top of the chisel. Four weeks before, a piece of the top of the chisel had broken off and
slightly injured another employee, the court held that the employer was liable for breach of
their duty to maintain a proper appliance especially when they had earlier notice of the
dangerous state of the chisel. However, the employer may not be liable if he is not aware of
the defect or danger or ought reasonably not to have known

2
e, Duty to employ efficient personnel
An Engineer who employs people must engage men of proven skill, ability and experience,
not quacks or charlatans who do not know the job or cheap hands to do specialised jobs. The
employee must be given adequate instructions by the employer to update his knowledge or
deficiency. Instructions to workers and supervision of their performance are very necessary
for the safety of the workplace especially where experience is lacking. It is also clear from
the provision of section 50 (2) that an engineer employed under section 50 (1) of the Minerals
and Mining Act has the responsibility “to personally supervise the mining operations”

From the above, we can see that the law has imposed a duty on the engineer to at least
provide a safe system of work as well as safe plant and machines. Therefore, if the engineer
derogate from his duties, he will be held negligent as we shall see later, such a state of affairs
entitles the employee or worker to compensation or damages.