Company -- the Company may or may not have been at fault. If the company had proper procedures in its manual, if the company had an adequate training program, and if all training was given at appropriate times, and if both employees attended the training session, then the Company had reasonably followed all precautions. We might also ask if there were clear signs posted on the vehicles about drivers/passenger. We might delve into finding out how diligent the Company was on supervisor's adhering to rules, whether there was a safety committee, or procedures designed to ensure that there were appropriate safety regulations
Company Supervisors for Driver and Passenger -- to assign blame, we would first need to find out all the above (Company). Then we would need examine the records of the supervisors of both employees; had there been previous violations of rules; had the employees been adequately trained and counseled; if there had been previous warnings, what was the action plan. No supervisor can control an employee, but only train, counsel, and model behaviors.
City Traffic -- Much of blame toward the traffic or police departments would depend upon City, County, or State regulations. It would also depend on whether the various local entities followed the appropriate regulations.
City Police (see above)-
City Utilities -- the biggest question regarding blame would be whether there were regulations that required better lighting or better markings on certain construction sites. Did someone fail to inspect, or if they inspected, was the...
If statutes were in place, how are they regulated? What procedures ensure the public safety? Were these procedures violated during the time period of this accident? Which functional group, if any, would be responsible for ensuring public safety to prevent additional safety issues?
Reflection -- Could This Have Been Averted? The fatal incident could, in fact, have been avoided had a complex set of issues not happened in a certain way. However, no one can say whether or not other events, etc. might have caused the driver to swerve; or have the accident in the first place. Some possible scenarios that would have mitigate probability of accident:
Driver stays on route and is extra careful with passenger.
Driver stays on route and there is no passenger.
City has provided additional lighting and additional warning for dangerous areas
Driver slows down to go through dangerous areas, avoids accident.
Driver avoids dangerous area completely
From the initial paradigm of causality, though, one decision would have placed the driver and the truck in an alternate location, potentially out of danger -- the driver should not have veered from his route, nor taken on a passenger.
REFERENCE
Roughton, J. (2002). Developing an Effective Safety Culture: A Leadership Approach. London:
Butterworh-Heineman.
