Posted By Decimomal We have a employee who has had serious back problems (he had an operation 18 months ago), and is requesting the company provide him with a new chair. He is at his workstation for approximately 70% of the day. We have a summary of the medical history from the NHS and we have agreed to buy a chair but don’t want to go ahead unless it is approved for his condition. We cannot take the chance that his choice of chair, ‘because it’s comfortable’, is any guarantee that it won’t cause him more problems in the future. We think the solution is to get occupational therapist or similar to carry out an assessment and provide us with a recommendation. What do you think, and how do we go about getting an OT or similar? Many thanks. Decimo.

Posted By Tabs It is likely that the person is still under the care of a physiotherapist, or was previously. I would try to get them to make the judgement as they will best understand the problems and how to cope with them. Ask your employee for their details.

Posted By Mike Miller having dealt with something similar in the past I can recomend the following link http://www.humanoffice.c...Cugr_tjJUCFQLBsgodoSytfw They deal with it all for you and are a great service. Good luck

Posted By A tech SP I agree with getting some expert advice but you must take on board what the individual says as they are going to be sat in it for more than a thousand hours a year. If they say its comfortable then you assume they are in a posistion to make that statement. I do not deal with any supplier who does not provide chairs on a sale or return basis. Dont forget to reiterate the other aspects of VDU good practice.

Posted By Kieran J Duignan Without disagreeing with anything above, there's another factor to take into account, which I've discovered serving as an expert witness (safety ergonomist) in cases of this kind. It's that medical specialists - rheumatologists and orthopaedic surgeons - can fundamentally disagree about their assessment of the facts arising as to causality of the condition of the injured/disabled person. So, you are well advised to consider two things: a. consult a professional with experience as an expert witness in claims of this kind b. in consultation with whoever has responsibility for employment law in your company, check carefully how your company is complying with discrimination law in this case because if his difficulties persist to the stage of litigation, a well-informed solicitor may find it easier to make a case for unfair discrimination.

Posted By Kieran J Duignan Hello Steve I believe I appreciate what you mean. The basic issue is that Access to Work programme (which is excellent in many ways) is not designed to safeguard an employer but to assist an employee. On that basis, assessors appointed by the managers in the scheme vary in the level of knowledge of ergonomics and law they bring to their assessments; so, to the extent that you have a deficient ergonomic assessment, you're not well covered legally. If you expect to be adequately covered, you may need to commission a safety ergonomist who is her/himself a full member of both the IOSH and the Ergonomics Society (or an Ergonomist registered by the Central Register European of Ergonomists), as they've been screened to establish they have a verifiable record of applying relevant science and comply with relevant codes of practice. To my knowledge, AtW don't apply this relatively high and expensive standard. The scope of my remarks extend more widely than safety as disability discrimination is much broader and has extensive HR implications which the AtW don't profess to assist an employer to comply with. Because HR and OSH professionals have quite different professional programmes of formation and of professional accountability, it's up to the individual professional in each domain to check that he/she is taking appropriate steps to address the issues in a rounded manner. The boundary between employment law, generally the responsibility of HR pros, where one is appointed, and safety law is quite a gray area. I recall a case in which I was cross-examined in court, in which the official court report recorded their agreement with my observation that the employer had totally and utterly failed to deal with the issue central to the claim, by simply failing to understand the difference between a risk assessment, subject to safety law, and a grievance procedure, subject to the Employment Rights Act. Had the HR (and tade union official) involved understood this distinction, they would have saved in the order of £200K (the approximate total costs, direct and indirect) for the hearing. I'm particularly careful because, despite taking care to manage the interface between HR and others in the same firm, I've been exposed to frustration once on the part of a well-intentioned guy who blamed me for difficulties arising in the case of an employee with a MSD problem that she had from birth and was compounded by sports and car accidents, when the failure lay on the part of HR who appointed her and declined to discuss with me the implications fo my ergonomic assessment.

Posted By Decimomal Kieron, You replied; "So, you are well advised to consider two things: a. consult a professional with experience as an expert witness in claims of this kind b. in consultation with whoever has responsibility for employment law in your company, check carefully how your company is complying with discrimination law in this case because if his difficulties persist to the stage of litigation, a well-informed solicitor may find it easier to make a case for unfair discrimination" Where did you get the idea that I was talking about a claim and/or discrimination as I did not mention either of these and it is not the case anyway? I believe my query was quite straightforawrd in wanting to assist an employee with a problem. I also found your second response a bit difficult to follow and am not really sure what it is that you are advising. That being said, I appreciate your input. Decimo.