Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 21 November 2001 15:25:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John James Can anyone help? I have been asked to provide a format for a risk assessment for employees over the age of 65. We currently employ a number of people over 65 in our catering outlets doing a variety of catering / food service tasks. Our insurers have asked use to ensure that specific risk assessments are carried out for each such employee on the basis of their age. I'd be grateful for any suggestions etc. Many thanks John James
Admin  
#2 Posted : 21 November 2001 16:59:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert Woods If these people are in good health then a review of the risk assessments should be all that is needed as you would for any employee. Would the insurance firm require seperate assessments for people who are 64 years and 360 days old. They certainly won't lack experiance and maturity. Robert Woods
Admin  
#3 Posted : 21 November 2001 22:34:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ashley Williams It is possible that this proccess may end up with you in hot water. What if one of these staff object to the risk assessment becasuse of their age? There is a requirement to assess the risks to young workers and pregnant women, but no mention of people over 65. There is little case law covering Ageism, but there is some. Just an observation on this topic! Ashley
Admin  
#4 Posted : 22 November 2001 08:31:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Laurie If you can wait for thirteen months I will be doing one on my own behalf! Seriously though, there is no more reason to do a risk assessment on a fit 65 year old than there is on a 45 year old slob with a massive beer gut smoking twenty a day. Most risk assessments should take account of the individual's physical capabilities anyway. Laurie
Admin  
#5 Posted : 22 November 2001 11:59:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ken Taylor I see that they even want a risk assessment for each employee over 65 years and not just a generic one for an age category! The nearest I have come across to this is that residents in nursing care are individually assessed in order to establish their care needs. Hopefully you are not entering that scenario. To be serious, they are presumably looking at fitness for particular work. This is a consideration for Management with employees of any age - particularly when reporting or displaying disability or illness. This is a matter for careful consideration and consultation with Personnel/HR/Welfare Officers, etc taking into account job descriptions, person specifications, etc and also considering any associated risks to the individual or others. I would not like to see an approach based upon risk assessment alone and am aware of no precedent or legal requirement (as confirmed by the other replies). Whilst faculty deterioration and loss can be age-proportional, there is no one point at which the process can be said to generally commence and if a job needs someone with good corrected eyesight, it applies equally at 16 and 66 years. I think it would be better to make sure that the requirements for the work are clearly defined and then consider the individual staff in the light of these - always seeking to fit the job to the person when possible.
Admin  
#6 Posted : 22 November 2001 13:17:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Steve Mercer Agreeing with everyone's responses and based on my experience, I would like to add that your organisation should make best use of the information gained from a pre-employment health screening/test whilst paying particular attention to 'Lone Working' when reviewing your Risk Assessments. I have however, conducted 'Reasonable Adjustments' (Disability Discrimination Act 1995) with Personnel/Welfare Advisers. Is there any likelihood that this could be what your Insurers are referring to?
Admin  
#7 Posted : 22 November 2001 16:10:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Diane Warne Just a thought - can the insurers actually insist that this is done, i.e. say that cover is void if it is not done? If you told them that in your opinion a specific RA for each over-65 worker is not needed, and gave your reasons as discussed in this thread, would they be able to disagree with you and say that cover is void? I'm only asking out of curiosity, as I am interested to know how far insurers can go in insisting that you do what they say, especially if what they are asking goes beyond H&S legal requirements and normal safety management measures. Diane Warne
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.