Rank: Forum user
|
Hi guys pretty new to the forum, but I know somebody will have the answer. We recently sent our fabbies/welders for annual Health Surveillance. They were asked to complete a HAVS questionnaire. The Company that undertook the Health Surveillance have written to me recommending that two of our guys are referred back for a level 3 assessment.
To my mind this purely a commercial decision taken by them based on the answers given.
Another point to bear in mind is that both guys are in there 50's and have only been with us for three years.
While I do not wish to undermine the practitioners involved I dont particularly want to be sending these guys back at our expense when the results of a level 3 assessment may mean that they have to consider other career options.
My question is, as long as I keep these guys informed(they can pay for their own level 3 assessment) do I need to take the recommendation ubnder any current legislation.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I would suggest that you clarify the outcome of the recent examination with your health surveillance providers as it sounds as though you may have a couple of cases of industrial disease that require to be reported under RIDDOR.
You will need to check the legislation on vibration to make sure you are controlling their exposure to vibration adequately. If they are indeed at Stage 3 they should not be using vibrating tools, as continued uncontrolled use may lead to a permanent disability.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Your recruitment processes need to be water tight and yes you can legally refuse to recruit if a person has HAVS and /or another such condition but your systems need to be water tight [repeat water tight]otherwise you are open to all sorts of claims, backlashes and problems
And take note of Bob Howden's comments as they are sound
Additionally obtaining information about a persons individual health status especially about HAVS at the recruitment stage and ongoing is a very frustrating exercise as in my experience the medical people are very very very defensive of their position as are the individuals themselves
Best of luck as this can be a long drawn out and costly exercise and please do not blame H&S as if you recruit properly U have few H&S problems, if any, of this sort
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Tier 3 would be a reasonable due diligence next step where derived by competent assessment.
The Occ Health provider is attempting to protect both the employer and the employees here - seems harsh on the face of it to suggest this is only on the basis of a 'commercial' decision.
This is what you signed-up for, is it not?
|
|
|
|
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.