Posted By Seamus O Sullivan
Hi Guys,

I have across a situation,

employee was shown a dvd on manual handling in english two years ago.

Employee is polish, poor English now, may have been worse 2 years ago, employee did not do any practical lifts,

Employee has a serious back injury as a result of work.

My feeling on the situation is the employer did not provide sufficient training. Employer thinks he is OK, I suggest he has a problem.

What do you think?

Regards
Seamus

Posted By MartB
Hi Seamus,
Was there any additional information provided either before or after the dvd presentation? (SSOW-Risk assessment etc)

Was the training documented? (Was there a questionnaire in relation to the content of the dvd to obtain understanding of what was shown?)

Purely showing a dvd alone, would not be deemed to be adequate and sufficient training?

With a PI claim with no documented evidence a company would be fully exposed.

Regards,
Martb

Posted By James K
Hi Seamus,
As a manual handling instructor I have given training to both inhouse employees and on external training courses.
The training must be given in a language that the trainee understands completely.
The training must be followed by a practical assessment completed by the trainee and overseen by the instructor. This practical assessment must be documented. There are a lot of other requirements but the above covers your queries only.
Like you, I would also suggest that the employer has a potential problem.

See my disclaimer on other threads

Posted By Dave Merchant
It's not as clear-cut as it sounds. There is no legal requirement for formal training under the MHR, indeed the word 'training' doesn't appear in the Regs at all - instead the employer has to manage and assess the risks and provide information on weights. The Post Office case ruled that the employee also has a duty to act "sensibly" when lifting, and we don't know in this case if they did or not.

INDG143 *suggests* training but it's only a suggestion. Many companies do, but every person on the planet does 'manual handling' on a daily basis and the vast majority have never been awarded a certificate for it.

The employer could therefore argue that they did what was mandated by law (i.e. not much), and it'd be a battle of opinion over whether that was adequate or not - but I wouldn't bet anything on the outcome of a civil case.