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
Robert Gibson  
#1 Posted : 27 August 2010 11:08:45(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Robert Gibson

I am aware that there is a separate question being discussed on the forum as I type this but I would like the answers to two questions specifically please: 1) What is the definition of a home worker in terms of time spent working from home i.e. is someone who works from home once a week classified as a home worker (their own request and agreed by management)? 2) For home workers does an employer have to provide an adjustable chair or would it be sufficient if the employee who was requesting that they work from home that the employer ensures they already have their own adjustable chair at home before permitting them to work? Many thanks
sean  
#2 Posted : 27 August 2010 11:28:38(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Robert, Even if an employee works from home one day a week with agreement from the employer they are classed as a home worker. The employer has to supply all equipment needed for the employee to carry out their duties, exactly the same as if they were in the office. The employer has rights to enter the house and ensure that the work station is adequate, it must also be risk assessed. Working from home sounds great but the employer still has a duty of care towards the employee. There may be many complications for the employer, as they have to still ensure the Health & Safety of the employee, for example if the employee is suffering with work related stress, it can make it awkward for the employer to manage the situation correctly. In my organisation a home worker is normally asked to attend an office at least once a week, and the employer has the right to cancel the agreement at any time, and insist the employee attend the work place every day. As stated earlier there are many complications to working from home for both the employee and employer.
Robert Gibson  
#3 Posted : 27 August 2010 11:41:25(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Robert Gibson

Thanks for your reply Sean I understand what you are saying but the reason for my specific question as that in a previous job working for a local government organisation, employees could work from home if they so wished (however office bases were still provided and available) and a risk assessment was undertaken. However it was classified as 'agile working' as they had a choice and therefore the employer did not provide a desk or an operator's chair. In my current job I just want to make sure we are complying with the law but not going to unnecessary additional expense.
sean  
#4 Posted : 27 August 2010 11:47:32(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

I too work in the public sector, but also know from a presentation i gave when training that the employer still has to treat the employee exactly the same if they are working from home. Maybe it was a local agreement in your previous job, but feel that if a problem had arisen the employer would have been liable. I am sure that you will get a full and proper answer to your thread from the Professional H&S bods out there, but that is my understanding of the situation.
Ron Hunter  
#5 Posted : 27 August 2010 12:33:59(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

Sean; What "right" has my employer to enter my home?
A Kurdziel  
#6 Posted : 27 August 2010 12:52:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

Yes what right has the employer to enter an employee’s premises? No if an employee is working from home then the employer is responsible. This does not mean that they have to kit out a complete home office. Most of our home workers can use their own furniture and they do not have any problems, after all what wrong with using the kitchen table for a bit of writing up. The problems occur if the homeworker needs a bit more, then you have to look at supplying specialist chairs etc. Look at the DSE regs Schedule at the back which describes the requirements of a DSE workstation. If you read part one of the schedule it makes it clear that the requirements are only needed if “they have an effect with a view to securing the health, safety and welfare of person at work” which means that there is not a requirement for all workstations to fulfil these requirements but only if there is need ie a problem. And how do you know there is a problem? Because you have done a risk assessment. Simples.
sean  
#7 Posted : 27 August 2010 12:53:41(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Ron I fully understand why you have asked that question, but basically it is their workstation in your house, they have the right to ensure it is compliant, and that you are working satisfactory to their requirements. Plus the workstation and place of work has to be risk assessed. My employer would not just turn up, however if they give you notice that they are going to visit to ensure everything is ok, then as part of the agreement you have to give them access. Obviously if you refuse then the agreement is broken and they can ask you to attend work as normal.
safetyamateur  
#8 Posted : 27 August 2010 12:58:34(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
safetyamateur

That's a shame. I had visions of SAS-style forced entries by middle managers in sensible shoes. Yes, my understanding is that homeworking should be subject to a number of terms and conditions. One of those would enable the employer to gain reasonable access.
grim72  
#9 Posted : 27 August 2010 13:02:00(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
grim72

Would the employer be responsible for carrying out pat testing of computers etc? Presumably this would only be done on items being used 'for work' or would they need to do a premises check to ensure it is safe?
Ron Hunter  
#10 Posted : 27 August 2010 13:04:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

"Agreement" is not the same as "right".
sean  
#11 Posted : 27 August 2010 13:09:28(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

I can only go on the circumstances my employer lays down before any agreement is made with the employee. I do fully understand all your concerns, but as stated earlier the employer still has a duty of care for the employee at work or working from home. My employer even insists that the work area used is sufficient so you cannot be disturbed whilst working, I children interrupting etc... As I say these are my employers requirements.
sean  
#12 Posted : 27 August 2010 13:15:26(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Ron The employee has to agree to the conditions set down by the employer before they can work from home, that's why it is an "agreement" and signed up to by the employee
David Bannister  
#13 Posted : 27 August 2010 13:19:35(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
David Bannister

I fear that homeworking is one of those areas where we can very easily stray in to over-zealousness and disproportionate attention to trivial risks that then become highlighted by our detractors. Do computers need to be PATed? What additional risks are created by occasional working at home over and above those created by living at home? The greatest risk in my home office is tripping over the cat, followed closely by walking in to the edge of the door and high blood pressure caused by cold-callers both at the door and phone. For any employee who is required to permanently and full time work from home then a work environment check is appropriate with provision of adequate equipment and maintenance as necessary. However, the one day a week homeworker should need little employer intervention in my opinion, provided the work is office type. Of course, outworkers are a whole different subject but I suspect this aspect was outside the scope and intention of the original post.
grim72  
#14 Posted : 27 August 2010 13:36:27(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
grim72

I agree stuff which is why I asked the question about PAT testing. How many people carry out checks of their electrical equipment at home? However, PCs at work will need to be PAT tested and I assume if an employee is working for home then this would 'need' to go through the same tests? Personally, I think it is overkill but from a company perspective I imagine they would?
jay  
#15 Posted : 27 August 2010 13:39:33(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jay

We take a "sensible" approach. We have two categories of home workers. It is office type activity, using a computer. The first category is that when home working forms a part of the employment contract. We carry out a thorough home working risk assessment (adapted from the excellent IOSH guidance on teleworking). We also provide a workstation. We reserve the right to undertake an check of the premises, although in most cases, photographic/video proof from the homeworker suffices. We train them to do a self-assessment for the DSE work-station. They typically work more than 90% of the time from home except when attending team meetings etc on the site. The second category are those who have permission to work from home from their line managers primarily for the benefit of the employee. For this category, we do not undertake the same level of risk assessment as the previous category. They typically work from home once day a week on an average. We provide them with guidance on setting up their workstations and other matters. Most will have he company laptops, a few could be using their own PC's, but working via a secure network using their Internet broadband connection. My view is that there is no need for OTT checks and controls in this category As a background, we have an effective employee and health and safety consultative bodies (not unionised). We have an excellent organisational and safety culture.
sean  
#16 Posted : 27 August 2010 13:46:14(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Well put Jay, and extra information from the HSE http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg226.pdf
Canopener  
#17 Posted : 27 August 2010 14:21:11(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

Jay I think that you have adopted a sensible and proportionate approach much along the lines of what we have. In answer to the 2 questions: 1. I couldn't find a definition, but again you need to adopt a sensible and proportionate approach - otherwise you could disappear up your own .............. 2. If there is already a suitable chair and other equipment that is fine. It does NOT have to be provided by the employer, in practical terms that would in many cases be an absolute nonsense. There is http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg226.pdf although not IMO particularly helpful and other resources on the HSE website There is no legal RIGHT of entry
bob youel  
#18 Posted : 27 August 2010 15:03:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
bob youel

wherever an employer makes a gain from a person in the course of their business they can technicially be seen as being responsible for the person at the point in time of making that gain The most common situation being poping a letter into a post box on the way home -The employee is the employee until such time as the letter is actually posted. Thereafter they are walkingg home and not making a gain for their employer so irrespective of where a person works at home or otherwise an employer has duties where somebody is doing something for then that is part of a businees situation - posting letters is a work activity
sean  
#19 Posted : 27 August 2010 15:21:38(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Phil, for the record i never said the employer had a LEGAL right to enter the employee's house, i actually said that it was part of the agreement that the employer could visit the house. once the employee agreed to the arrangement then the employer had the right (not legal) to visit the premises. And why do you not think that advice from the HSE isnt much good? because you dont agree with it??
Canopener  
#20 Posted : 27 August 2010 16:55:55(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

Sean!!!! A right has the connotation of being something legal, but I apologise (if I need to) for the use of the word. I aren't going to fall out with it. Ok - there is no right of entry. For the sake of clarity, 1. I expressed an OPINION as per "IMO", as I and others here are 'entitled' to, and do so with regularity. That is the very nature of conversation, discourse, debate etc. 2. I did NOT say that it wasn't "..much good.." I expressed an opinion that it wasn't "..particularly helpful.." NOR do I disagree with, or say that I disagreed with the information within 226. The reason I said what I said (again, if I have to give a reason to back up my opinion) is that I feel that it is aimed at those without a reasonable working knowledge of H&S, which in the main I suggest that many on here do. The information contained within 226 is hardly rocket science; is it?
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.