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 : 06 July 2006 11:36:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Alan Hewett Hello, I am seeking some opinions on the following. A person, classified as a 'user' under the DSE Regulations, has an eyetest (as per DSE Policy) at an opticians. Information for the optician includes visual work distances and photographs of the working environment. The optician prescribes varifocal lenses, as an exception, due to the nature of the work. The cost of the glasses exceeds our allowances for basic appliances. As an exception in the circumstances mentioned the cost will be covered by employer in full as they are the basic appliances required due to the nature of the task. The opticians have a 'buy one, get one free' policy. Your opinons are sought as to; Who 'owns' the second pair? (would the employer keep them as a replacement if the 1st pair get damaged, what if the user had contributed to the cost for a more fashionable appliance, would the same opinion apply?) If the user had a medical condition that came under the remit of the DDA and the special corrective appliances where supplied as a reasonable adjustment would the employer be able to ask that emplpoyee to contribute towards the costs of the frames and lenses if they chose more fashionable ones above the costs of standard ones? (ie lighwieght or rimless frames, ice style or extra thin lense styles etc) Your comments would be appreciated, Regards Alan
Admin  
#2 Posted : 06 July 2006 12:16:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Glyn Atkinson You look as if you need an agreed price corporate eyecare package through one of the major optical services where you can negotiate the requirement for glasses at a fixed price in whichever optical circumstances the user requires for their work. If you have access to The SHP - back page , you will know who we use, excellent service costed out in total detail in advance. Scheme is now in its' second two year cycle with no problems at all.
Admin  
#3 Posted : 06 July 2006 12:23:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Alan Hewett Thanks Glyn, Its godd to hear that those type of arrangements workl and it is an area that we are looking at but this can take time as per best value and tendering processes for Local Authorities. In the meantime what would your opinion be on the scenario? Alan
Admin  
#4 Posted : 06 July 2006 12:26:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John Webster On the basis that there's no such thing as a free lunch, there's no such thing as buy one get one free. The deal is that 2 pairs are provided for the price stated. The word "Free" is marketing hype. So if the company has paid because they are needed for work purposes, they both belong to the company. Gets a bit more complicated if the employee pays extra for their own fashion choice, because you both own part of them. In practice, does it matter? Both pairs would still have to be available for work. The company is hardly going to retain ex-employees specs to re-issue to someone else, are they?
Admin  
#5 Posted : 06 July 2006 12:37:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ian Mitchell As a related issue, I used to work in a pharmaceutical production environment where side protection was required on eyewear in case of splashes etc. In this instance, if you needed corrective eyewear for work you were sent to the site approved optician and tested for free company issue glasses with side pieces built in. Fashionable didn't enter into it- you got the basic frame (male or female) which meant that there was no desire to take them when you left (I didn't!!).
Admin  
#6 Posted : 06 July 2006 12:45:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Alan Hewett Thanks for the comments so far, What do you think about the DDA aspect? Alan
Admin  
#7 Posted : 06 July 2006 12:49:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By garyh What message does this send to the employee? The message it sends me is that the employer is being a bit narrow minded. Just let this person have both pairs of specs. For goodness sake!
Admin  
#8 Posted : 06 July 2006 13:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Peter Taylor14 Is this really a safety question or a jobsworth trying to save tuppence????
Admin  
#9 Posted : 06 July 2006 13:47:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By LTN I agree with the GaryH. A second pair of glasses is very important when you consider how often people break or damage them, lose them, forget them etc so let the employee decide where they and how they should keep their spare one. There may be no such thing as a free lunch but BOGOF can be more cost effective than getting another replacement pair later. If the employee wants to pay extra to upgrade their glasses to thinner lens etc. then those costs are usually added separately so the employee could pay towards those extras I would have thought.
Admin  
#10 Posted : 06 July 2006 13:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Alan Hewett Peter, The Buy one get one free area is something that was mentioned as a discussion point based on a real scenario and you could possibly apply it to others areas of safety such as PPE provision which is something I had not previously considerd but found a concept which I would value others opinions on. The other opinion sought (definatley safety), any potential cross over between the DSE Regs and the DDA with the provision of special corrective appliances and reasonable adjustments. If so which would take precedent or are the requirements effectively the same? Alan
Admin  
#11 Posted : 06 July 2006 15:39:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Glyn Atkinson In my experience, the buy one free does not apply to a commercially thought through scheme for safety glasses - you can buy other glasses through a family plan, but the safety specs are bought through signed for vouchers issued by safety department or occ health - price per pair - no other offers apply. Extra voucher required for bi focal adjustment lenses or lens option for tinting in certain working and lighting conditons - it's not a fashion show handout, it's for work purposes. Alan, please pm me if you require exact details of how I run / control this scheme at work for employees with work related assessment needs, both on production lines and vdu type protection. A pleasure to help in any way !
Admin  
#12 Posted : 07 July 2006 10:59:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Martin Gray Alan I don't think it is a case of who owns the second pair. If you are a company who employs staff to drive as well as operate DSE, do you automatically supply those staff with a second pair of glasses for driving as advised in the Highway Code? Martin
Admin  
#13 Posted : 07 July 2006 13:39:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ron Hunter The specs legally belong to the employer.HSE/HELA guidance is clear on this. Exceptional or not, the employer must bear the cost of 'corrective appliance', i.e. basic frame and prescribed lenses (without ant special tints or coatings). It is fundamnetally incorrect, I believe, to refer to this as "an allowance" You could consider entering into a fixed price contract with an optician for baic frame single vision & vari-focal specs.
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
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.