Rank: Forum user 
|
I have two questions here;
I have a client who after much debate has now agreed to supply steel toe capped boots to all his staff. The boots they are looking to supply are very basic but meet the requirements of the workplace. Some staff have indicated they would rather spend their own money on a better quality boot, now the question I have is can the employer get the employees to sign that they had been issued with free ‘basic’ boots but turned these down and bought their own boots?
The client has also asked when supplying boots and hi-vis vests do these need to be brand new? I have told him as long as they are in a good condition and fit the employee there isn't a problem with them having been used previously.
Any advice would be very much appreciated
Martin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Duty remains for the employer to ensure employee purchased footwear is suitable to mitigate the identified risks.
The employer cannot levy a charge on the employee and is therefore obliged to contribute the equivalent of the footwear he would have supplied.
The "waiver" approach is a non-starter!
Things don't have to be new - but they do have to be fit for purpose. Some "low end" footwear just doesn't provide the comfort for all-day everyday use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
To answer question 2, would you wear someone else's boots?
Agree that PPE does not necessarily have to be new, but in some instances there is an additional risk of transferring disease if it is not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
If possible, I'd give them a choice of better boots, but still purchased by us - makes certain they're of sufficient spec, and is easier to police than "bring your own in".
Been bitten by this a while ago by a guy who picked the wrong pair of boots of the store shelf, ended up with a puncture injury.......................
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
We have 3 different boots, all are fit for purpose in that they protect the staff members feet from the identified hazards. All three styles were tested by volunteers for comfort and it took several attempts to get the right footwear. The staff have the option of one of the supplied boots for free or the value against a pair of their own choice THAT MEET OR EXCEED the specification of the supplied boots. I was amazed at how many of the big named boots fail to meet the standard required
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
nickh wrote:To answer question 2, would you wear someone else's boots?
. On a chemical plant i worked on we had a spare stash of PPE - including boots worn for a few days by those couldn't hack life in a proper job :) If you needed an emergency pair of (disinfected boots) and stores were out of your size - this was the place you went. They were aptly named - dead man's boots :) No one liked wearing them - not for hygiene issues, but for the rumours that they were haunted!!!! I kid you not!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Thanks for all the advice, I think this one is going to get very interesting with the client!
Martin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
#6 we have similar in operation due to the same reasons, we have them polished disinfected and new inner soles and laces put in.
These are also used when the person forgets to bring his in for work, instead of them losing pay and us losing a man.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Could you not trial a few pairs for similar prices, not make anyone aware of the price and then carry out a questionnaire type survey for feedback.
Ultimately, your site rules will dictate what people have to wear. However, using other peoples boots is not acceptable from a hygiene pint of view and will ultimately lower moral if you issue either used of, what is viewed as, cheap boots.
The inclusion of the employees when carrying a trial will make them feel included and boost moral and therefore production inadvertently. You will obviously have to set a budget before proceeding but I think you would be very surprised as to what you can get for your money these days.
I have just addressed the very same problem in this way and have found we was paying £23.00p beforehand and now we are paying £17.00p. so this has worked out lovely.
Good luck!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi All
I have had someone come to my office with the following question concerning safety boots. We issue safety boots to members of our warehouse staff they are compulsory to wear. He feels that the safety boots we supply are not comfortable enough for his use, he has asked can he get a pair himself, I stated that he could as long as they had the specifications that match the ones we supply.
I also told him that if the price of them exceeded the price of the safety boots the Company supplied he would have to pay the difference. He was not at all happy with this.
The question is:- is it unreasonable to put a limited on the price of safety boots. And is there any legalities regarding this.
Need to get my facts straight before I see him about this issue.
Any thoughts??
Steve w
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
steve w wrote:
The question is:- is it unreasonable to put a limited on the price of safety boots. And is there any legalities regarding this.
No it's not unreasonable to put a limit, as long as it's a reasonable limit. The limit needs to take account of the standards the boots need to meet. We say 60 quid but we require S3 - if you only want SB then you can get boots quite a lot cheaper. Personally, I would expect to spend more than £60 on boots I'm going to wear all day every day for days on end. The last pair of boots I bought myself (not safety boots) I spent about £120. However, £60 is what we have decided. The legality is a grey area, but rumour is HSE don't mind you taking this approach. You'd be on sticky ground, I think, if your allowed budget was not enough to obtain boots that meet your performance requirement. If you don't want to risk basing policy on rumour, simply decide staff can't buy their own boots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Your risk assessment will give you the standard of boot required full stop.
You will then obviously supply a boot/shoe or even a selection of boots/shoes that adhere to this standard as your 'core list' PPE.
The cost is not important in the sense that if you or your procurement team have managed to get an earth shattering deal where you pay £1 or a bad one where you pay £250 for your standard of boots then that is the price of the protection that you specify.
If, after that, an individual wants to get his own boots (that comply with your standard of course) every single penny above what you pay for the boots/shoes should be paid by the individual.
Its as simple as that IMO.
(worked for me for 20+ years...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Thanks for the last post
Completely agree with everything you said.
The footwear we provide completely is up to the spec that our risk assessment stipulates.
The employee in question says that he agrees with this but he finds the safety shoes very uncomfortable, he wishes to purchase his own which cost more than the footwear we provide. We have stated that he can get his own (must be up to our stated spec)and he must pay the difference if the footwear costs more than the ones we provided.
He’s argued that the regulations state the an employee cannot be charged anything for P.P.E. that is require by the job or Company. So he has refused the pay the difference.
Where do we stand on this one
Steve w
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
And you are not asking him to pay for the PPE that is required to do the job, he wants over and above the PPE (if I'm reading correctly) that you are providing FOC as per your R/A to do the job.
'Uncomfortable' and 'Occupational Health referred' are two distinct different things.
If he is 'special' and has 'special' feet then get OH or his Doctor to confirm this, YOU can then provide him (and yes they will cost a fair whack) some 'special' shoes for him.
Point being they will still be FOC to him, managed as a special case but defo will not be the brand he is after!
Minus the cynicism in my tone above, it is very important that the shoes are fit for purpose though as they need to be half decent if your in them for x hours a day. I assume you supply not the best but not the worse and so you do what 90% of the rest of us do.
Just be open with the guy and say how it is - print off this thread if it helps! He's lucky in one sense you are willing to allow him to buy his own WITHOUT him proving he has 6 toes on each foot and will ALLOW the cost of yours to be factored in.
He can't have his cake and eat it.
Somewhere in all the above I hope you get the picture
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
steve w wrote:He’s argued that the regulations state the an employee cannot be charged anything for P.P.E. that is require by the job or Company. So he has refused the pay the difference.
Where do we stand on this one The employee is misinterpreting s.9 of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
steve w wrote:
He’s argued that the regulations state the an employee cannot be charged anything for P.P.E. that is require by the job or Company. So he has refused the pay the difference.
He's correct that the employee cannot be charged for PPE that is REQUIRED to do the job, but you're not proposing that he does so - you've supplied the PPE required to do the job for free. The regulations do not require that the employer pays for whatever PPE the employee fancies. They don't require that the company pays for PPE required by the employee but not by the job or company. If you've assessed the requirement and supplied PPE that meets the requirement, you have satisfied the regulations. The offer to part-subsidise personal preference for something different is an extra over the legal requirement. If he doesn't like that offer, issue the standard boots and leave it at that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.