Hamm Obviously, there's a complex balance involved here, especially if barring the teacher from site affects her earnings. Until there's a well-documented medical assessment, any risk management measures you might negotiate can only be provisional. However, based on the (extremely limited) information available, I might consider these hypothese as a basis for managing risks in the interim 1. She may notice physical sensations during the day or half-day prior to 'passing out'; so, discuss with her the possibility of recording brief entries of unusual physical symptoms (e.g. palpittations, irregular breathing, muscular pains) in a diary, every half day, that can be reviewed after a fainting episode; 2. She may be prevented from falling out of a chair by providing a chair with appropriate arms; so, rent a suitable chair from a specialist dealer; 3. An sound alarm can draw the attention of another responsibile adult to her condition in the event that she feels faint or actually faints; so, provide her with a portable sound alarm which can be triggered by hand as well as by a suitable part of her body in the event of a fall.

you also have to consider the effect this has on children as a toddler etc watching a teacher collapse can be a dramatic event so my advise is that a professional opinion is sort before the return The problem many Occ Health providers have is that they have little experience in schools so provide the standard 'industrial' answer; and as as for falling out of a chair - most teachers stand all day and as already stated we need more information

The observation: 'Otherwise they want sacking, as they are not providing any worthwhile service' is a simple, simplistic recipe for a valid claim for unfair dismissal, as the fact is there's no evidence that the teacher is 'not providing any service'.

Hamm Are you doing the risk assessment of your own volition as a OS&H professional or has someone else, e.g. a headteacher or human resources (HR) manager, asked you to do it? Also, though you wrote that the teacher passes out (faints) "with very little warning and for no apparent reason", how do you know this information? Is it based on what others, perhaps in HR or Occupational Health (OH) have said or written, or what the teacher herself has told you? Another important aspect to consider is the frequency with which the faints tend to occur: If the teacher faints several times a day, perhaps she should be signed off work until, hopefully, the cause can be established and tackled. During my former employment involving schools, I sometimes found that OH physicians writing reports about teachers or other employees with medical conditions tended to abdicate from their responsibility by concluding their reports with vague advice that 'a risk assessment should be carried out'. Therefore, if this is what has happened in your case, surely the headteacher and/or HR people ought to ask the OH physician for more guidance about what the teacher should or shouldn't do. Also, as mentioned in previous threads on this forum about employees with medical conditions, it's very important that the teacher herself is involved in discussions, especially with her line manager, about what she thinks/knows she can and can't do, and what warning signs, if any, she experiences prior to a faint. Also, assuming that her GP is also involved, she should be able to add whatever advice she has received from her GP.

Unlike Walker I believe the Occ. Health should be sacked NOW for putting this person back to work without further ado. I think the employer ought to be giving full pay medical leave until there is proper diagnosis and assessment. Even part time this person has to travel to and from work as well as being expected to manage the symptoms. Has anyone considered that this could be a pre-cursor to something more serious and that there could be a major life threatening event for the person. Take away the pressure of having to work for the sake of the teacher's health. Bob

Walker I regret the misunderstanding... even if your expression 'want sacking' replies to what is normally not a desired or 'wanted' experience. Actually, there's so much information missing from the presentation of the question that confusion is inevitable. For example, if it's not a maintained school, ultimately funded by the taxpayer, the school may have none of the roles referred to throughout the replies, as the 'competent' person to advise on safety may well be the only role based in statutory obligations. While HR and OH specialists are advisable in a school, they're not mandatory.

"team-making" should be tea-making - and I mean that handling a boiling kettle could lead to a serious accident if she were to faint.

I agree with Clairel. I am surprised OH let her back without a buddy system in place at the very least. Can you imagine if a teacher of young primary class fainted and fell injuring a child- It doesnt bear thinking about the repercussions given that OH know the circumstances.

Every school is acting in loco parentis and ANY sudden loss of teacher control of a class could well constitute a breach of that duty. If a child is injured during such a loss of control just try explaining to the courts that your employer felt it was OK. Accepting bad advice does not reduce liability in my view especially when the risks are clear. Bob

That person should not be in work at all alone with children. The world has gone mad again.

In my opinion canopener at #17 makes some very good points about working with OH doctors. As an additional point I've found from experience over 35 years that good liaison and regular face-to-face contact between OS&H and OH professionals enables them to have a reasonable grasp of their respective remits. Also, for some situations joint visits and investigations can be very effective - something I experienced during my time with HSE, helped considerably by the fact that inspectors and EMAS doctors had their offices in the same buildings. A similar situation existed with my subsequent employer, a local authority, when it used the services of the OH department of the local health authority. Alas, however, the reasonably close working ended when compulsory competitive tendering (CCT) arrived and the OH contract was awarded to a private company. Unlike its predecessor, the company seemed to have a turnover of OH doctors which didn't help with aspects like continuity and good liaison. To avoid any misunderstanding here I should state that no criticism of the OH doctors is intended because I knew little about their workloads and other contractual obligations.