Duty of Care in Humanitarian Crises
Recently, I visited a very informative conference on Duty of care in London. Visitors and presenters came from both the non-profit and commercial sector, which created a lively interaction on topics such as managing foreseeable risk, legal obligations, and employee responsibilities. I will share some of the key lessons[1] with you by using the example of the recent “humanitarian” deal for Homs in Syria.
On Thursday 6 February, an agreement was reached to evacuate civilians from the besieged Syrian city of Homs and to provide humanitarian aid. UN workers are able to access the Old City of Homs to deliver the much-needed humanitarian aid, but the situation remains unstable. Negotiations about the delivery of aid continue to be difficult. Lack of trust and fear of losing control over territory are important reasons for the reluctance of government and rebel forces to provide access for humanitarian aid. Mortar rounds and gunfire have struck nearby aid convoys, vehicles have been damaged and snipers have fired on civilians as they fled the Old City.
Imagine that your NGO was in a position to provide support that is currently needed in Homs, and you therefore have to organize the safety conditions for your eager and professional team of aid workers who are to be deployed. According to most national legislation, employers need to prevent their employees from danger in the workplace, which is obviously going to be a challenge in Homs. What does the duty of care entail in such a situation?
First of all, an existing proper organizational safety-and-security infrastructure is an absolute prerequisite. Building on your adequate security policy, the next step to deployment for Homs is a risk assessment. What risks are specific for the local situation? What is the probability that these occur and what would be their impact? Moreover, what measures can your NGO take to mitigate those risks? This cannot be only a head office exercise. You must organize due diligence of your findings with reliable local sources. Also, you have to take measures to keep the information up to date.
Second, the future Homs team must be trained. Most internationally operating organizations provide their staff with (basic) safety and security courses, which include, at a minimum, modules like security awareness, emergency first response, and dealing with several types of threatening situations. Such training provides them with the basic skills, which are necessary in any unsafe area. On top of the generic basic training, your aid workers must be specifically briefed on Homs. This is the moment to explain the different protocols (use of transport, communications, etc.), to talk about foreseeable health issues, and to be very explicit regarding employee obligations.
The employees, in turn, have a so-called duty of loyalty. They need to behave in a cautious manner and do as they are told by their manager. Regardless of brilliant security policies and fabulous training facilities, reckless behavior will cause risk to the person in question and – even worse – to others. It is estimated that some 3/ 4 of all security incidents are basically the result of employees who are not following the rules. A useful way of (legal) proof that employees have understood the information is to let them do some kind of written or oral test. Moreover, your NGO should put a management process in place to enforce all the clearly communicated rules.
A next important pillar of duty of care is incident reporting. While the team is operating in Homs, you should receive timely information on incidents, which enables you to adapt – if necessary – your risk mitigation plan and briefing to the staff. Now we all know how difficult it is to maintain the reporting discipline in NGOs (my next column will be on this topic). In regard to duty of care it is important to realize that your duty of care does continue during the mission, and that your Head Office need information to carry out that responsibility.
Not all risks can be mitigated. Some must be transferred to others, or insured. Most national insurance policies do not cover the specific risks that staff encounters in places like Homs. Thus, the employer should select specialized insurance providers who help you out when – notwithstanding all your own measures – “the shit hits the fan.”
Lastly, an often forgotten but highly important component of duty of care is the mental and physical health of staff. Your team will have to work under extreme conditions, which asks for specific measures. Sound preparation helps to identify potential health risks early, meaning that they are less likely to be encountered during the project. But aftercare is equally important. Ideally, all staff returning from any significant time in resource poor or insecure environments should have a medical check-up and an opportunity for a confidential review. Discontinuing care at this crucial time can cause stress for returning staff.
All these preparations will not make the security situation in Homs any better. However, by taking your duty of care seriously, you definitely reduce the probability or impact of security incidents for the members of your team. Thereby, you avoid sending the unintended message that employees are seen as “disposable assets” to you, resulting in unnecessarily high staff turnover. Finally, well organized duty of care results in lower legal claims, insurance premiums, and damage to your valuable assets.
I would therefore argue that the moral and financial “return on investment” of duty of care is always positive.
[1] The key lessons are for general information purposes only and should not be relied on as legal advice