We currently allow employees to purchase safety shoes to the value of £40 and there still appears to be a good selection with the required safety rating at this price. If employees choose a higher value then this is deducted over a number of months from their pay. Some employees are asking for this to be increased (£60 mentioned) but my feeling is this is only to allow branded footwear to be purchased. Also, if an employee has a verified medical condition the company will pay whatever is required to ensure they have appropriate safety footwear. Does anyone else think £40 is too little?

I agree £40 is a good allowance for safety shoes there are some very good quality ones around for 30-40 pounds. I suspect like you they are after branded items.

Thomas, Phil is spot on with what he said , we have a sliding scale on price for PPE at my place as house keeping do not need the different foot wear that the maintenance team need so price per pair is different as the amount of protection needed is different.

i bought a very comfortable pair for £19 from screwfix and toolstation do a similar price range. i certainly saw a lot for £100+ but I'm to tight to pay anywhere near that. maybe track down some stores that do safety shoes for £40 so to offer as bigger range as possible to the staff. Phil

How does this stack up vs the regulations? Under Section 9 of HSW Act no charge can be made to the worker for the provision of PPE which is used only at work. How does the situation in question here fit with that?

Farrell - thanks. Whilst I can see why this might be practical and both parties are 'happy' it still leaves me with the question ' Is it legal?' From a practicality standpoint I can see that it probably doesn't matter too much and I doubt the HSE would be too interested, I'm just curious as to what people think. I would argue based on what the regs say (and the Guidance to the PPE regs Reg 4), that 'no charge can be made' - therefore it's illegal is it not?

Sorry a better answer :) S9 = "No employer shall levy or permit to be levied on any employee of his any charge in respect of anything done or provided in pursuance of any specific requirement of the relevant statutory provisions". however I comply by giving footwear to a recognised standard. I offer 3 choices = Fully compliant! To charge for basic PPE, or expect employees to provide = illegal

teh_boy said IMHO my £25 uvex boots are signifcantly better than my £90 Cat boots. Also the £25 meet all legal requirments. I met a guy on a construction site 3 years ago who had stood on a large drawing pin which penetrated his foot causing discomfort. He had paid £85 to get a brand name which did not fit all of the criteria, ie no steel mid-sole. He assumed that the more you pay the more you get. But I knew of footwear costing £30 and less which amply offered protection and comfort. £40 IMO is extremely generous.

I think it depends upon what the required standard is - if you just need 345 SB you'll get that easily with £40, and I think it a reasonably generous allowance. If you need S3 (ie normally specified to get penetration resistant insole) boots there's some choice at £40, but if you need something more esoteric it's not enough. Last year I needed some S3 CI (ie cold-store boots - I needed rated at -25C) but not rigger-boot style, and the absolute cheapest I could find was about £60. I'm sure there are other options that would push it up further. I will offer a voice of dissent though - the medium price (around the £60 mark) boots are generally more comfortable than the ones bought on the basis of whatever's cheapest while hitting the standard. Maybe those who find the cheapest ones super comfy should be thanking some deity you have the same shape feet as the manufacturer, or something. Notwithstanding which, my understanding is that you can't let employees 'top up' to buy better boots for themselves - PPE needs to be provided and needs to be free to the user.