Updated: 11/14/19 Nothing in this policy obligates the District to undertake a defense, pay any judgment or otherwise assume liability for actions of an employee acting outside the scope of employment with the District. In addition, the school District shall not be obligated to pay any judgments for any reckless or intentional acts of the employee. In the event that it is determined that the employee was not acting within the scope of employment at the time of the acts undertaken, and the District has provided a defense to the action, the School District employee shall reimburse the District for the expenses which it has incurred in defending the lawsuit. Nothing in this policy shall be construed to require the District to undertake a defense, against an employee or to assume responsibility for any acts which the District would not be legally required to provide because the District employee was not acting within the scope of employment. The School District may decline to defend any action against an employee if it determines: 1. That the act or omission in question did not occur: a. During the performance of the employee’s duties; b. Within the scope of employment; or c. Under color of authority. 2. That the injury resulted from fraud or malice of the employee; or 3. That the injury or damage on which the claim is based resulted from the influence of drugs and or alcohol. Utah Code § 63-30-37 (3) Within ten (10) days after receiving the request to defend the employee, the District shall inform the employee whether it will provide the defense and if it refuses to provide the defense, the basis for the refusal. Utah Code § 63-30-37 (4)(a)
3.1000 HEALTH REQUIREMENTS AND SERVICES
3.1010 HEALTH REQUIREMENTS AND SERVICES: COMMUNICABLE DISEASES
3.1010.01 BLOOD BORNE PATHOGENS EXPOSURE CONTROL Issue Date: 4/10/97 Purpose and Introduction The purpose of this exposure control is to:
1. Eliminate or minimize employee occupational exposure to blood or certain other body fluids;
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker