Responsibility for violations of safety rules. Accused of violating tb. Causing grievous harm

Violation of safety regulations under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is a crime expressed in a disdainful attitude to the rules for performing work or failure to comply with the requirements fixed in local regulations and other legislative documents.

Conditions for recognizing an act (action / inaction) as a violation of TB:

Familiarization of the person who violated the rules with the requirements of local instructions (under signature).
Establishing the fact of violation of safety requirements established by federal law and not requiring personal communication to citizens.

It is important that the basis for bringing to responsibility is directly the fact of committing a crime. It doesn't matter if negative consequences follow.

Types of violations

note

Punishment for violation of fire safety requirements involves administrative or criminal sanctions.
So, if in the first case the perpetrator gets off with a fine of 1,000 to 5,000 rubles as an individual or from 15,000 to 200,000 rubles as a legal entity, then the maximum criminal penalty is imprisonment for up to 7 years with a possible ban on engaging in a certain type of activity up to 3 years. Read the details

Violation of safety regulations is fraught with consequences and the threat of their occurrence - causing harm to the health and life of people, damage to the property of the employer, etc.

Classification of criminal acts (according to the rules violated):

Non-compliance with the technological regime that maintains the parameters of the equipment at a safe level.
Ignoring the requirements for the use of equipment, devices and communications in terms of their launch, current operation and shutdown.
Neglect of performance discipline affecting the protection of labor rules, personal and group security.
Failure to comply with the established procedure for organizing the workplace and maintaining the adjacent territory, if these violations make it difficult to respond.
Non-compliance with the fixed sequence of performing an action or work that is characterized by a high level of danger.

Accountability

Violation of safety regulations at work entails bringing to legal liability.

There are the following types:

Criminal liability (Article 143 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). It occurs when an unintentional harm to the health of a citizen or at his death, which occurred as a result of a violation.
Administrative responsibility. Managers, officials and appointed responsible employees are involved in administrative punishment measures. The amount of the fine is:
- For citizens - up to 40,000 rubles.
- For organizations - up to 200,000 rubles.
Civil liability. May be administered in conjunction with the above penalties.
Material liability. Occurs when the property of the employer is damaged.
Disciplinary responsibility. In the form of a remark, reprimand or dismissal.

More about criminal liability

A prerequisite for the onset of criminal liability under Art. 143 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is the status of the victim - he must be an employee who is in labor relations(official or actual) with an employer who has a labor safety violation.

Violation of safety regulations under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation entails the following liability measures:

Review of jurisprudence

Judicial practice knows many examples related to violations of labor protection provisions. So, in September 2016, the leading engineer of a large organization, appointed as the person responsible for monitoring the technical condition of vehicles, in violation of the current legislation, allowed the driver to use the tractor without a protective shaft cover.

As a result of his actions when refueling vehicle the driver fell on an unprotected cardan shaft and was fatally injured. The district court of the Orel region found the accused guilty of committing a crime under Art. 143 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and sentenced him to a sanction in the form of corrective labor for a period of 2 years.

Criminal liability for violation of labor safety requirements, in contrast to material and disciplinary liability, is established only by the court.

The specialist will answer your questions in the comments to the article.

1. Violation of safety rules or other rules of labor protection, committed by a person who was responsible for observing these rules, if this caused by negligence the infliction of grievous harm to human health, -
(as amended by Federal Law No. 162-FZ of 08.12.2003)
shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of up to 200 thousand rubles or in the amount of wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to eighteen months, or by corrective labor for a term of up to two years, or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to one year.
(as amended by Federal Law No. 162-FZ of 08.12.2003)
2. The same act, which negligently caused the death of a person, -
shall be punishable by deprivation of liberty for a term up to three years, with or without deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term up to three years.
(as amended by Federal Law No. 162-FZ of 08.12.2003)

Commentary on article 143

Constitution Russian Federation guarantees the right to work in conditions that meet the requirements of safety and hygiene (part 3 of article 37 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). The Constitution also guarantees the right to health care (Article 41 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation).
Thus, the generic object of the encroachment of this corpus delicti is the constitutional right to health protection.
The right to work in conditions that meet the requirements of safety and hygiene will be the direct object of the encroachment.
The Fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation on labor protection of August 6, 1993 gives the concept of labor protection as a system for ensuring the safety of life and health of workers in the course of work. This system includes legal, socio-economic, organizational and technical, sanitary and hygienic, medical and preventive, rehabilitation and other measures. But the most important thing is that by this Law the obligation to ensure labor protection is assigned to the employer, who, in addition to labor protection measures, is also obliged to ensure personal responsibility from among his subordinates in specific areas. Otherwise, he himself acts as a subject of offenses for non-compliance with the rules for ensuring labor safety and hygiene.
Fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation on labor protection, approved. The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation dated 08/06/1993 N 5600-1, became invalid due to the adoption of the Federal Law of 07/17/1999 N 181-FZ "On the Fundamentals of Labor Protection in the Russian Federation". The Labor Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Labor Code of the Russian Federation), which entered into force on February 1, 2002, more clearly and definitely outlines the general, one might say, "framework" requirements for labor protection, hygiene and industrial sanitation.
Chapter 36 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation is devoted to ensuring the rights of workers to labor protection. In accordance with the fact that everyone has the right to safe conditions labor, regardless of the form of ownership of the enterprise, organization, institution, the state guarantees employees the protection of their right to work in conditions that meet the requirements of labor protection (Article 220 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). These state guarantees are also provided by various forms of state coercion, sanctions for failure to comply with labor protection requirements, including the onset of criminal liability under the commented article of the criminal law.
When considering this composition, it should be taken into account that the law provides for criminal liability for violation of safety regulations or other labor rules, which is much narrower than the concept of labor protection. Labor protection involves a whole range of measures, not only entailing any types of responsibility for their failure, but also preventive, preventive, restorative measures, organizational, economic and other measures. Safety regulations and other labor protection rules are those rules that create, determine and regulate the system for ensuring the safety of life and health of workers directly in the course of their work.
The disposition of the first part of the article under consideration was amended by the Federal Law of 08.12.2003 N 162-FZ, and the qualifying sign was excluded from it - the infliction of harm of moderate severity to human health. Currently, criminal liability under Part 1 of Art. 143 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation may be of a blanket nature, referring to special regulatory legal regulations on safety and other labor protection rules. These rules may be contained directly in federal laws, laws of subjects of the Federation, decrees of the President of the Russian Federation, decrees of the Government of the Russian Federation in relation to certain areas of production and types of especially hazardous work. But usually they are contained in legal acts. federal bodies executive power, legal acts of executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Federation, acts of local governments, in normative acts of an interdepartmental nature, as well as in local legal norms. The latter are of great importance, they determine the names and lists of persons who are personally responsible for ensuring the safety and labor protection rules in certain areas of production or in specific areas of work, including in the production of certain types of work requiring increased safety measures. Finally, individual legal acts of the heads of ministries, committees, departments, heads of enterprises - on the assignment of duties to ensure safety rules or other labor protection rules to specific individuals.
The objective side can be executed both by action, i.e. deliberate violation of the rules of safety or labor protection, and by inaction, when the observance of these rules is ignored by the subject or he does not take measures to comply with them.
The most difficult is the question of causation. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation requires that, when considering each criminal case on violation of labor protection and safety rules, special attention should be paid to a thorough and comprehensive study of the causal relationship between these violations and the harmful consequences that have occurred, which should be justified in the verdict. The court is obliged in the judgment to refer to the specific clauses of the current work safety and labor protection rules, the violation of which entailed the consequences specified in the law.
A typical mistake in cases of this category is to confuse the conditions that contributed to the occurrence of harm with the cause. In the doctrine of criminal law, there was once a theory of equivalent conditions (conditio sine qua non), according to which any of the conditions that contributed to the occurrence of harm to law-protected interests was interpreted as the cause of such harm. Impressed by the grave consequences and ascertaining the violations committed, which in reality served only as a condition for the onset of harm, the courts often took these conditions as a reason and issued guilty verdicts. So, in one of the cases, K. was convicted, who did not de-energize the transformer cell, although he hung out a warning poster, put up a barrier and conducted oral instruction among workers with a direct ban on entering this cell. However, one of them, who had a long experience as an electrician, ignored all these measures to prevent an accident, entered the transformer cell without permission and was mortally injured by the current. According to the safety rules, the cell really had to be de-energized during maintenance work, which the court referred to in the verdict. It seems to us that in this case there was no direct and immediate causal link between the failure to comply with this paragraph of the safety regulations and the onset of grave consequences. The convict, without de-energizing the cell, only created the conditions for the accident to occur, but they were not its cause, since K. took all possible measures to ensure that the accident did not occur.
Another mistake that can sometimes take place is to ignore incidental causes, i.e. when a third force is mixed into the development of a causal relationship between the committed violation and possible consequences, which becomes the immediate cause of the event. It could be the forces of nature. For example, as a result of the rising wind, an electrician fell from a pole and was fatally injured, who, as stated by the conclusion of the technical examination, worked without proper means of protection against electric shock. The criminal case was justifiably dismissed because this case the direct and immediate cause of his death was not an electric shock, but a fall from a height for reasons beyond the control of those responsible for observing safety precautions.
However, most often such an incidental cause is negligence on the part of the victim himself. The position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on this issue is quite definite. As early as paragraph 5 of its Decree of April 23, 1991 "On judicial practice on cases of violation of the rules of labor protection and safety of mining, construction and other works "The Supreme Court recommended to find out for each accident the role of the victim in the incident. When establishing that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the victim, the court must, if there are grounds for this, decide the question of issuing an acquittal against the defendant, and if he is found guilty, to take into account the fact of negligence committed by the victim himself when imposing punishment. despite the categorical prohibition, he started smoking. job descriptions he was not assigned the duty to be continuously with the workers. The latter periodically underwent safety briefings, which were timely signed in the magazine.
Sometimes workers come to work in a state of intoxication and die or are seriously injured due to their own negligence. The fact that the employee is in the performance of his job duties in a state of intoxication does not always relieve their immediate superior from criminal liability. The question is whether the subject knew that the employee was in a state of intoxication, whether he was obliged, in accordance with the job descriptions, to systematically check the condition of the workers before the start of work. According to labor law, an employee who appears in a state of intoxication must be suspended from work. If this was not done and a person known to the subject to be in a state of intoxication was allowed to perform the work, then the subject may be held criminally liable. In one of the criminal cases, a shift foreman was quite justifiably convicted of allowing a drunk worker, knowingly for him, to perform his labor duties, who then fell from a height, having received a mortal injury. In this case, despite a fall from a height due to one's own negligence due to intoxication, the onset of serious consequences would have been excluded if the employee had been suspended from work in a timely manner. For these reasons, the inactivity of the shift foreman is in a direct causal relationship with the ensuing consequences. Here, the necessary causal relationships are built in one chain - the admission to the performance of the work of a drunk worker and then his own negligence. It goes without saying that the punishment imposed by the court in this case was very lenient, the court also took into account the gross negligence of the victim himself.
The subjective side of the corpus delicti is characterized by a careless form of guilt in relation to the ensuing consequences, which is directly indicated in the disposition of the commented norm. The very violation of safety regulations or other labor protection rules can be both intentional and reckless. Accordingly, depending on the content of guilt in relation to the violation of safety regulations or other labor protection rules, the type of negligence is determined in relation to the consequences that have occurred. Frivolity - in case of deliberate violation and ignoring of regulatory requirements, when the subject foresees the possibility of harmful consequences, but arrogantly, without sufficient grounds, counts on preventing these consequences. In case of negligence, the subject, for various reasons (owing to ignorance, although due to his official position, was obliged to know, underestimation, etc. of the rules of safety and labor protection), not fulfilling these requirements, does not foresee the possibility of harmful consequences, although with the necessary care and foresight should have and could have foreseen these consequences. In practice, negligence manifests itself from the subjective point of view of making so-called minor deviations from compliance with safety regulations or other labor protection rules on the basis of the “everyone does it” principle. In one case, a worker was seriously injured, who, instead of using a hoist as prescribed by safety regulations, used improvised means with other workers, as a result of which the load jumped off and this led to serious consequences. The head of the section was well aware of such an established practice of moving weights, but did not foresee such an outcome, although with the necessary discipline and forethought he should have and could have foreseen. Here his fault appears in the form of negligence.
Negligence requires the presence and simultaneous combination of objective and subjective criteria. An objective criterion of obligation exists in almost all cases; it is a prerequisite for the onset of criminal liability. But this requires the existence of a subjective criterion. Based on the individual qualities of the alleged subject of the crime and the situation of the incident, it should be determined whether this person could foresee the possibility of harmful consequences. Taking into account only one objective criterion - obligation, which sometimes occurs, leads to objective imputation and the ruling of an unjust verdict.
Content of guilt this composition is of a complex nature, the development of a causal connection must also be covered by the guilty relation. As noted by Prof. N.S. Tagantsev: "For the application of punishment, not a single guilt, not a single causality is enough, but a guilty causality is necessary" (N.S. Tagantsev. Russian criminal law. Lectures. Part general. T. 1. M., 1994. P. 284).
The study of the content of guilt in cases of this category requires an in-depth analysis. In law enforcement practice, it is imperative to take into account the provisions contained in Part 2 of Art. 28 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: “An act is also recognized as committed innocently if the person who committed it, although he foresaw the possibility of socially dangerous consequences of his actions (inaction), could not prevent these consequences due to the inconsistency of his psychophysiological qualities with the requirements of extreme conditions or neuropsychic overload".
Let's try to explain this on one specific case. During the liquidation of the accident at the enterprise, work was carried out around the clock and the person responsible for compliance with safety regulations, being extremely tired, could not properly respond to violations of safety regulations and an accident with a serious outcome occurred. Given these specific circumstances, this person was not prosecuted. According to the above norm of the criminal law (Article 28 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), the subjective criterion of guilt is neutralized by the presence of an extreme situation or neuropsychic overload.
In the aspect under consideration, it is very significant to cite an excerpt from the speech of the famous Russian lawyer N.P. Karabchevsky in the case of the wreck of the steamer "Vladimir", in which Captain Kriun was accused: "It was proclaimed here:" The captain should not be lost, whoever is confused is not the captain. "N.P. Karabchevsky states: "Some of the gentlemen of the experts to questions addressed to them on this occasion, stated: the captain is not a machine, and, within the limits of that onerous and exceptional position in which Captain Kriun was, he, for his part, did everything possible "(Judicial speeches of famous Russian lawyers. M., 1958 347).
In law enforcement practice, it is necessary to take into account other circumstances that exclude the criminality of the act: Art. 39 of the Criminal Code (emergency), Art. 41 of the Criminal Code (reasonable risk) and art. 42 of the Criminal Code (execution of an order or instruction).
Let us explain this with practical examples. The enterprise carried out work of increased danger, and at the same time, according to the safety regulations, a responsible person had to be constantly present. However, in the course of work at another site of the enterprise, an emergency situation arose, threatening the release of harmful chemical substances and posing a threat to the health of the population in the area. The person responsible for the production of work, after a quick safety briefing, was forced to leave for the emergency site, and in his absence an accident occurred with serious consequences. Here there was an extreme need and at the same time a reasonable risk, which was taken into account when making a procedural decision to terminate the criminal case against this person.
In another case, the superior manager orally ordered to immediately transfer the person responsible for compliance with safety regulations to another site for the duration of urgent work. In the absence of the latter, an accident occurred, and this person was released from criminal liability for the absence of corpus delicti on the grounds of Art. 42 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - execution of an order or instruction.
The subject of the considered corpus delicti is special. This is a person who has been assigned the responsibility to comply with safety regulations or other labor protection rules. These obligations arise from official position or by special order.
The heads of enterprises and organizations, their deputies, chief engineers, chief specialists of enterprises and organizations can also be subject to criminal liability, if they did not take measures to eliminate the violation of safety rules known to them or other labor protection rules, or gave instructions that contradicted these rules, or by taking direct control certain types works, did not enforce the same rules. This is the position of the Supreme Court, set forth in the Resolution of April 23, 1991. In many respects, the terminology and conceptual apparatus of this explanation are outdated from the standpoint of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. According to the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the bulk of the subjects of criminal liability are not officials. For this reason, it is advisable to divide the subjects of responsibility into several types.
First of all, these are, first of all, persons who, by virtue of their official position or by special order, are entrusted with the duty to ensure compliance with labor protection rules in a certain area of work. Such persons, as a rule, are available at large enterprises.
Secondly, these are heads of enterprises and organizations. This is very important with a large number of small and medium-sized private enterprises. Many, starting to do business, do not show any concern for the elementary provision of safety regulations or other labor protection rules. These leaders, having assumed direct management of not only individual, but also all types of work of their enterprise, should act as subjects of responsibility under this article.
Thirdly, where there are chief engineers, they should act as a subject of responsibility in the absence of persons who are specifically entrusted with the functions of observing the rules of safety and labor protection, as well as in cases where they were aware of violations or they gave instructions that were contrary to the rules on labor protection, or took over the direct management of these types of work.
Fourthly, deputy heads and chief specialists are responsible for non-compliance with safety or labor protection rules in the work areas they lead.
In one of the cases, the head of the section Ts., the head of the enterprise and Chief Engineer association to which the company belonged. It was found that for a long time the head of the enterprise and the chief engineer were aware of the constantly repeated violations of safety regulations, but they did not take measures to eliminate them. All three were found guilty by the court, the cassation instance confirmed the verdict.
In cases where the head of the enterprise does not take measures to ensure safe working conditions (does not develop appropriate instructions, does not ensure proper control, etc.), he may be held liable under this rule. This approach is consistent with the provisions of the Fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation on labor protection, according to which the obligation to ensure labor protection is assigned to the employer, which is the head.
Fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation on labor protection, approved. The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation dated 08/06/1993 N 5600-1, became invalid due to the adoption of the Federal Law of 07/17/1999 N 181-FZ "On the Fundamentals of Labor Protection in the Russian Federation". The main feature of the victim in cases of the category under consideration is the permanent or temporary performance of duties by him at this enterprise, arising from employment contract.
In many small private enterprises, in violation of labor legislation, work is practiced without concluding an employment contract (contract) and without maintaining work books. In such cases, one should proceed from the provisions of labor legislation, when the actual admission to work is considered the conclusion of an employment contract and the manager is obliged to ensure safe working conditions, i.e. he may be subject to liability under this article.
Sometimes actual labor relations are masked by various types of civil law contracts. In these cases, one should carefully check whether the employee obeyed the internal labor regulations, whether he was subordinate to the head of the enterprise, organization, heads of the relevant structural divisions, etc.
The infliction of grievous bodily harm or death to third parties who are not employees of the enterprise, as a result of a violation at this enterprise of the rules of safety and labor protection, is subject to qualification as a crime against life and health, committed through negligence (Articles 118 and 109 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
The composition is considered completed upon the occurrence of the consequences specified in the law. Signs of a crime will also occur with a somewhat distant onset of consequences, since in these cases the development of a causal relationship between the committed violations and the consequences that have occurred is not eliminated. However, if these consequences are caused by inadequate or erroneous methods of treatment, then other causal relationships already operate, the development of which cannot be qualified according to the considered norm of the criminal law, and it is impossible to impute to the person responsible for compliance with safety regulations or other labor protection rules.
In part 2 of Art. 143 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation establishes increased criminal liability for the same act, which negligently caused the death of a person. Signs of a crime are similar to the basic structure considered above.
It is appropriate to note that the Federal Law of 08.12.2003 N 162-FZ significantly softened the sanctions on both parts of the norm of the criminal law under consideration.
In conclusion, it is advisable to say a few words about the delimitation of liability under this article from the corpus delicti provided for in Article 216 - violation of safety rules in the conduct of mining, construction or other work. In practice, there are individual cases of erroneous qualification of an act under Art. 216 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the basis of violation of safety rules in the conduct of "other works". At the same time, it is not taken into account that the legislator speaks in one norm about violation of safety rules in the conduct of "other works" along with violations of safety rules in the conduct of mining and construction work. This norm, in comparison with the commented one, provides for more serious sanctions. It follows from this that, according to Art. 216 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on "other works", the legislator does not mean any work, but works of increased danger, which are similar in nature to mining and construction work. For this reason, in each specific case, it is necessary to study the regulatory material governing the production of a particular type of work, use the advisory opinion of specialists, involving them in the case on the basis and in the manner prescribed by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, and if there are grounds, appoint an forensic examinations.
When addressing issues of criminal liability under Art. 143 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, one should be very critical of the conclusions of various kinds of departmental and non-departmental inspections of the circumstances of the accident, as well as the conclusions of the examinations. Often they state a lot of violations of safety and labor protection rules, many of which are not in a direct causal relationship with the consequences. The conclusions of such departmental and intersectoral accident investigations, as well as expert opinions, often illuminate the technical side of the event under investigation. The assessment of causal relationships is within the competence of the investigator and the court.

On the industrial enterprises and in other organizations of the Russian Federation, there are certain labor protection standards, the main purpose of the existence and application of which is to ensure the safety of working conditions for employees carrying out their activities in any field. Responsibility for their implementation lies with the heads of organizations, branches and institutions, as well as specially authorized persons. Violation of labor protection rules, depending on the circumstances and consequences, provides different kinds responsibility. Some of the violations can result in punishment even in the form of imprisonment.

Liability and regulations

Responsibility for violation of labor protection requirements is reflected in the following regulatory acts and laws of our country:

Labor Code of the Russian Federation;
Code of Offenses of an Administrative Nature;
the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation;
Federal Law "On industrial safety".

Violation of safety regulations provides for the following types of responsibilities both for persons holding certain positions and for other employees who have allowed such a fact intentionally or through negligence:

Disciplinary - consists in reprimanding (possibly with entry in the employee's personal file). The rules for attracting are regulated by the Labor Code and the internal regulations of the enterprise;
Material - this type of liability can be imposed on those employees who, in connection with their actions, caused damage to the property of the employer (broken equipment, damaged consignment of goods, fire, etc.);
Administrative - both employees of the organization and various officials can be involved in such responsibility. The main punishment is the obligation to pay a certain amount of the fine;
The most severe form of liability, which is provided for especially significant violations that caused harm to the health of one person or group of people and possibly caused death at work, is considered criminal liability.

Who can be held liable, features of committed actions

Article 143 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation clearly defines the list of persons who may be held liable for non-compliance with labor protection standards (intentional or through negligence):

Heads of a company or enterprise;
Deputy managers, if as a result of their action (or inaction) there was a violation of the requirements provided for by safety regulations;
Heads of individual divisions of the organization (department, workshop, separate unit of the enterprise, branch);
Chief engineer, specialist in security measures in the organization;
An employee of an enterprise who is obliged to ensure compliance with the norms in accordance with his official duties or a separate internal order.

The Criminal Code indicates the following circumstances that must be present in order to be able to determine the actions of persons as corpus delicti:

Lack of actions to take measures to eliminate factors in the organization, the presence of which is contrary to the rules of labor protection;
Issued orders and instructions that are contrary to existing norms. For example, when an employee was instructed to manufacture a part on a machine from a material that cannot be processed on it (naturally, if such an instruction led to injury or death at work);
Causing serious harm to the health of employees of the organization or other persons who, for any reason, were in the organization;
Death of one person or group of persons due to violated safety standards;
Possibility to prove that harm or death of a person occurred as a result of violations of the rules;

With regard to the reason for the commission of actions, the legislation does not provide for various types of liability depending on whether the violation was committed through negligence or ignorance. This fact is due to the fact that the responsible person initially signs the document, which automatically determines his full awareness of the labor protection requirements and the necessary measures to ensure them.

Types of punishments for committed actions

In accordance with the text of Art. 143 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as separate comments to them, depending on the composition of the crime, as well as its consequences, the following types of punishments can be applied to a person:

Part 1 of the article describes the penalties for committing acts that entailed the infliction of grievous bodily harm. In particular, the very concept of causing grievous harm can be applied in such cases:

When causing harm that is dangerous to human life;
With consequences after an injury in the form of loss of hearing, speech, vision;
In case of harm to the health of a pregnant woman (miscarriage or the onset of premature birth);
When contributing to the development of an employee’s mental disorder (due to emotional or other shock due to a traumatic situation at work);
In case of damage to parts of the face (irreparable);
With a significant disability of a person (not less than 30%);
With the loss of professional abilities in the main specialty or occupation of the employee.

As a result of such consequences, the current legislation, as well as examples from judicial practice, provides for and applies the following types of punishments:

The imposition of a fine, its maximum amount can reach 400 thousand rubles. The amount of the fine can also be calculated in proportion to the person's income and amount to up to 18 monthly wages;
Carrying out mandatory work maximum duration 240 hours;
Obligation to perform corrective labor (within 2 years) or forced labor for up to 1 year;
Serving a sentence in places of deprivation of liberty for an act qualified as a crime for up to a year (possibly with a simultaneous ban on holding certain positions)

Part 2. The article reflects the possible punishment that a person will bear if his actions, instructions, negligence, which goes against the requirements of labor safety, will lead to the death of a person due to an injury. Such an article can consider both cases of direct death at work, and in the treatment of the consequences of the resulting injury:

The need to work in forced labor for up to 4 years;
Serving a sentence in places of deprivation of liberty up to 4 years. In parallel with such a measure, a restriction on the performance of work and occupation of certain positions for 3 years may be applied to a certain person;

Part 3 contains a certain measure of punishment, which is applied in especially severe cases - when two or more people died due to the fault of an official or responsible person (for example, an accident at a mine, an explosion in a workshop, a collapse of a part of a building due to unaccepted measures, etc.). etc.):

Obligation to perform compulsory work. The duration of such punishment may be up to five years;

Imprisonment of a responsible person with a stay in a correctional institution for up to five years. Also, simultaneously with such a measure, a ban on employment in specific positions is often applied.

Video: Punishment for violation of labor protection legislation

Good afternoon.

The current Criminal Code contains the following article:

Article 143. Violation of labor protection requirements
1. Violation of labor protection requirements committed by a person who is entrusted with the obligation to comply with them, if this negligently entailed the infliction of grievous harm to human health, - eighteen months or compulsory works for a term of one hundred and eighty to two hundred and forty hours, or by corrective labor for a term of up to two years, or by forced labor for a term of up to one year, or by deprivation of liberty for the same term with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to one year or without it.
2. The act provided for by paragraph 1 of this article, which negligently caused the death of a person, is punishable by forced labor for a term of up to four years, or by deprivation of liberty for the same term, with or without deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to three years. .
3. The act provided for in paragraph 1 of this article, which negligently caused the death of two or more persons, is punishable by forced labor for a term of up to five years, or by deprivation of liberty for the same term, with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to three years. or without it.
Note. The requirements of labor protection in this article are understood as state regulatory requirements for labor protection contained in federal laws and other regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation, laws and other regulatory legal acts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

I draw your attention to the fact that this article provides for a special composition of persons who may be held accountable.

Plenum of the Supreme Court clarified that liability under Art. 143 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation may be borne by persons who, by virtue of their official position or by special order, are directly responsible for ensuring compliance with the rules and norms of labor protection in a certain area of work, as well as heads of enterprises and organizations, their deputies, chief engineers, chief specialists of enterprises, if they did not take measures to eliminate the violation of labor protection rules known to them, or gave instructions that contradicted these rules, or, having taken direct control of certain types of work, did not ensure compliance with the same rules. (paragraph 3 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of April 23 .1991 N 1 (as amended on 02/06/2007) “On judicial practice in cases of violations of labor protection and safety rules during mining, construction or other work”)

Moreover, if a violation of the rules and norms of labor protection was committed by an employee who was not a person specified in Art. 143 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and entailed the consequences listed in this article, the deed should be considered as a crime against a person, regardless of whether the victim is related to this production or not.

A person may be held criminally liable if it is established that his actions contain elements of a crime.

The labor protection system at the enterprise acts as a guarantor of the safety of its employees and a method of preventing accidents and other dangers to the life and health of people involved in production and performing office functions.

Dear readers! The article talks about typical ways to solve legal issues, but each case is individual. If you want to know how solve exactly your problem- contact a consultant:

APPLICATIONS AND CALLS ARE ACCEPTED 24/7 and 7 days a week.

It's fast and IS FREE!

That is why responsibility for violation of labor protection is provided for both employers and employees themselves, and this issue is controlled not only at the local, but also at the state level.

Normative base

The main documents regulating the sphere of labor protection are the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which establishes the right of an employee to work in safe conditions for life and health, and the Labor Code, in which a separate section is devoted to aspects of labor protection.

In addition, there are federal laws, which are tools for regulating certain areas of labor protection:

"On trade unions, their rights and guarantees of activity", where legal status trade unions and their role in shaping labor protection policy;
"On the obligatory social insurance from accidents at work and occupational diseases”, fixing the right of employees of the organization to benefits and compensation in connection with working conditions.

Documents can be downloaded here:

Who should be responsible?

In any organization, you must without fail circle be defined officials who will be responsible for the field of labor protection in the following segments:

the enterprise as a whole - in this case, the head or his deputy is appointed as the responsible person;
separate sections of the production of works and specific divisions of the enterprise;
electrical equipment;
safe operation of high-risk facilities;
other industries in accordance with the specifics of the enterprise.

The responsibility of the employee as a performer is to comply with the following requirements prescribed by the labor protection system:

compliance with the norms prescribed by the labor protection system in the company as a whole;
correct use of personal protective equipment;
training in safe work practices;
timely notification of higher management about incidents;
passage medical examinations in accordance with the regulations on occupational hazard.

Liability for non-compliance with labor protection standards is divided into 4 categories - it can be disciplinary, administrative, criminal or material.

At the same time, there are certain nuances of bringing to each of these types of liability.

Thus, an employee can be brought to disciplinary liability for one violation only once. Liability, as a rule, should not exceed the amount monthly salary employee. Administrative responsibility by default implies the intentional nature of actions.

The subject of criminal liability can only be a natural person. This means that if a particular organization does not comply with labor protection standards, its head will be punished for this.

Example:

In April 2013, the Moscow City Court ruled in case No. 10-1475, according to which CEO The cinema was prosecuted with a one-year suspended sentence for an employee who fell from a ceiling and sustained injuries resulting in his death. During the proceedings, it turned out that the deceased engineer did not undergo mandatory training in safe work practices.

Sanctions

If violations in the field of labor protection are detected, sanctions can be imposed both on the employee and on legal entities and individual entrepreneurs.

If the fact of an intentional or unintentional, committed through negligence, misconduct is revealed, the employee may incur the following punishment options:

warning of incomplete service compliance;
transfer to a position with a lower pay for up to three months, subject to the consent of the employee;
dismissal from a position associated with hazardous conditions labor, with transfer to another, in accordance with the specialty of the employee, with his consent.

With material sanctions, the employee will be obliged to compensate not only the direct damage caused by the misconduct itself, but also compensate for his costs for payments to third parties.

Legal entities, as well as individual entrepreneurs, can be held administratively liable if they fail to comply with the requirements of the labor protection system. In this case, the violation should be expressed in illegal actions or omissions that are intentional.

The legislation provides for the following scope of sanctions:

For individual entrepreneurs– penalty in the range from 5 to 50 minimum dimensions wages or a temporary ban on doing business for up to 90 days.
For legal entities the amount of penalties will be from 300 to 500 minimum wages (minimum wages), or a ban on conducting activities for up to 90 days will be imposed.

In case of concealment of the fact of an accident or the presence of occupational disease when insuring, in accordance with Article 228 Labor Code, the administrative penalty will be:

for individual - from 3 to 5 minimum wages;
for legal entity - from 50 to 100 minimum wages.

Criminal liability becomes a consequence gross violations in terms of compliance with labor protection standards, detailed in article 143 of the Criminal Code.

In addition, the following categories of offenses are criminally punishable:

safety at nuclear power facilities;
safety during construction and other works;
safety at explosive facilities;
Fire safety.

If a violation of the provisions of labor protection is admitted, which resulted in the infliction of grievous harm, penalties in the amount of wages in the amount of up to one and a half years, or imprisonment for a period of up to one year, or corrective labor for a duration of up to two years, may be imposed. If the result of the violation was death, the perpetrator will be sentenced to up to three years.

The fact of violation must be documented.

For these purposes, a special commission is created, consisting of at least three people, which investigates the circumstances of the violation and, based on the results, draws up an appropriate act.

The document is drawn up in free form, but must contain required details and information:

place of drawing up the act, its date and time;
information about the members of the commission, including their positions;
information about the offender, also indicating the position;
the circumstances of the violation committed by the perpetrator;
what are the consequences of the violation;
sanctions proposed by the commission.

Below is attached a sample act drawn up based on the results of an inspection of a violation committed in terms of labor protection requirements by an employee of Art-ex LLC:

On the basis of the sanctions measures proposed in the act, the corresponding order is signed. uniform form this document no, so you can use the following example: