Rank: Forum user 
|
We have a chap who has been avoiding occ health appointments and when we finally got him to attend it turns out he has a needle phobia and is now refusing to submit to a blood test for lead surveillance.
My provider tells me the only way to measure this is via the blood, so a urine test etc. is out.
We have looked at moving him to an area where the surveillance is not needed, but there are no options for this at the present time and he has stated that even if there was he doesn't want to be moved anyway.
It seems a bit heavy handed to give him the ultimatum of 'get tested or we will have to sack you', but that has been suggested by some of the management on the basis of employee compiance with HASAWA Sec 7.
The occ health provider has suggested we could 'assume' he is fine without testing him, on the basis that all his colleagues have tested fine already. I am not happy with that approach for obvious reasons and I doubt it would stand up in a civil claim or HSE investigation.
Are there any avenues I haven't thought of yet?
Many thanks
Stu
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I would look hard at risk assessment and likelihood of exposure - it might be possible to argue there is no risk of significant exposure? (but this seams unlikely)
You've already looked at moving him..
So I would ask the doctor for advice, as it's ultimately their call if an individual can work with lead, I am sure they won't authorise as OK for work with no testing. (It might also be worth asking HSL if their are any new approved modern, non invasive testing methods... but i really doubt there are.
I have a phobia of needles - but I still manage to 'man up' whilst I get stabbed... I am not sure how you can avoid it life?
To help your case with employee see the CLAW ACoP - Page 65
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l132.pdf
"(12) An employee to whom this regulation applies shall, when required by his
employer and at the cost of the employer, present himself during his working hours
for such medical surveillance procedures as may be required for the purposes of
paragraph (1) and shall furnish the relevant doctor with such information concerning
his health as the relevant doctor may reasonably require."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Many thanks - I looked at that and strangely it does mention urine lead concentrations in the acop, so I'll go back to the provider and ask why they say they can't measure lead that way any more.
But if not, it's up to the physician then.....
Many thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I think it's because only lead alkyls can be detected in urine,
Again - this is why you need a specialist Doctor to advise, it all depends on type of exposure, time periods etc.
I'm sure one of the schedules to the regs talks about this in a lot more detail...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Obvioulsy not knowing the details & to echoing #2 - I take it an occupational hygienist has tested for lead & found it to be above the 'significant' level. If not it would be worth testing, as if below this level blood testing isn't necessary, which is a win, win all round!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.