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 : 14 August 2009 18:35:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By hilarycrocker Like many places we are very short staffed and over the school holidays running the Occupational Health department on most days as sole practitioners without any admin, which has made it very difficult to run clinics and deal with enquiries. The HR department decided they would provide a HR admin assistant to do our admin role rather that get someone from the hospital admin temporary staffing. My question is does this constitute a conflict of interest and if so where can I find this information/which guidelines can I use to advise HR. I feel this could cause big problems with staff perception. The hospital staff could lose confidence in Occupational Health and feel that confidentiality is breached even if the HR staff member does everything to the book.
Admin  
#2 Posted : 15 August 2009 09:43:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Raymond Rapp Hilary Not sure where you are coming from because confidentiality applies to both HR and OH. It will depend on circumstances and the persona of the individual. For example, in a previous role we had in our team a admin lady who worked for both the HSQE team and HR. She was very efficient and discreet, hence no problems that I was aware of. Ray
Admin  
#3 Posted : 15 August 2009 10:06:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Phil Rose Hilary - same here, I am not quite sure where the conflict arises from the scenario that you have described. Could you be more specific?
Admin  
#4 Posted : 15 August 2009 12:21:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Kieran J Duignan Hilary From the limited information you state publicly, it appears that the root issues have to do with different sets of needs rather than legal rights. Needs of protection of private data about medical aspects of an individual's makeup rightly concern medically qualified people, which an HR professional (like myself as a Fellow of the CIPD) could easily misinterpret. The 'cover' for staff absence reflect valid needs of economy and perhaps also of fairness in delivery. As an occupational psychologist, it appears to me that addressing the balance of needs is very unlikely to succeed through any procedural process. By contrast, skilful cultural tools - such as newsletters, notices and even VERY VERY skilfully drawn cartoons - can communicate the necessary assurance and respect, with decorum on a timely basis. In my experience, the quality of written and picturial communication is the sungle process most neglected by health/safety professionals including some who misguidedly belief they are excellent communciators on the bssis of little or no reliable valid evidence to support their self-concepts. The consequences of this failure result in systematic failure to use and to create good opportunities to influence with integrity and to raise the status of their profession.
Admin  
#5 Posted : 15 August 2009 21:57:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By hilarycrocker Thank you for responces. I know HR are bound to keep confidences too but some staff see HR as management and may feel that the HR assistant has access to their notes and that confidentiality could be breached. However I agree that to allay staff concerns communication and reassurance is needed as soon as possible. Thank you
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.