Posted By Barry Cooper Dear colleague's a fairly long on I'm afraid, We have an employee who suffered a skin rash, he visited our occupational health nurse, who unbeknown to me recommended long sleeves and gloves to protect him. This advice was ignored for about 3-4 months, although we did send him to a dermatologist who's report stated that his work aggravated an existing condition (tests done with all products handled proved inconclusive). Eventually the employee was provided with the necessary PPE and instructed to wear it. The employee made a claim against the company for contacting dermatitis from his work activity. Our insurers decided to settle on best terms, on the basis that he had an existing condition. The claimant then decided to see another specialist who now claims the skin condition was caused by the employee's work. So the settlement figure has risen, and should be settled any time now (bartering is going on). The problem I have is that the employee, still does not wear long sleeve polo shirts or gloves. I have recommended that the wearing of PPE must be enforced. His manager is reluctant to enforce it. Although our insurers inform me the employee cannot claim again for the same injury, I believe we are being neglegent and must enforce it or take him off the job. The cause of the dermatitis has never been proven, except that when he is on holiday his skin clears up. None of his colleagues who do the same job, have any problems Advice please Barry

Posted By Adrian Watson Dear Barry, There are a number of issues here: 1. Different people have different exposures from similar or the same task; there are always individual, task and environmental factors that vary. 2. Different people react differently to the same exposure; most people in a workplace will not suffer and most of those who do suffer, suffer in silence. 3. COSHH imposes absolute liability! 4. By failing to ensure the person wears PPE you breach: (a). Regs 7(1) failure to prevent, or where this is not reasonably practical, control exposures; (b). Reg (8)(1) failure to ensure that controls are properly used or applied. (c). There are also other breaches. 5. If his disease becomes significantly worse, he has a new claim for the ongoing breaches! 6. You should be asking why cannot exposures be prevented or controlled other than by the provision and use wearing PPE. I suggest that you contact Chris Packham. Regards Adrian Watson

Posted By Chris Packham Barry Reading your posting again it seems to me that you have two situations to deal with. One is to ensure that the employee complies with the procedures that you have introduced to protect his health. The other is to determine whether what you are dealing with is really an occupational skin problem. The fact that two dermatologists have reached a diagnosis does not, in my experience, necessarily indicate an occupational skin problem. Dermatologists do not necessarily always understand the conditions in the workplace and may not have tested for the right substances. I have had several clients where a diagnosis of an occupational skin problem has been made but where my investigation has indicated a totally different cause. The diagnosis was medically accurate but operationally irrelevant. I have also seen several cases where compensation has been agreed and paid where there was, in effect, no occupational skin problem. Without knowing more about your specific situation I cannot comment further, but as aleady indicated, would be happy to discuss this on the phone with you. Chris

Posted By Barry Cooper Chris I will call you Monday Thanks for the input guys, will consider all your responses, and hopefully resolve the problem. Or we could just sack him. Joke! Barry