I have been in and around safety for about 20 years and are surmising this has changed over the years but wondered what people did these days and their opinions.

First of all I was always led to believe that as for instance someone that is going to be employed to work at height would be asked certain questions via the questionnaire and that there was nothing wrong with this but is this still the case ?

I also surmised this was a human resources task as it needs to be done before someone is actually employed obviously in conjunction with competent advice on the replies. Is this still the case ?

Another thing i wanted opinion on is that in this world of political correctness and privacy laws etc i was always told that Safety Law outguns all other laws in other words if there was sound safety rationale behind a decision then it would stand.

Thanks in advance for the feedback

Alan

There's a fair amount of misinformation out there! Employers are permitted to make sufficient enquiry to ensure candidates can carry out intrinsic requirements of the job. See (e.g.)

http://www.equalityhuman..._for_employers_final.pdf

"Section 60 of the Act provides that, **other than in certain circumstances**, employers **must** not ask about the health of job applicants before making a job offer.

This means that employers should not ask applicants to complete medical questionnaires at an early stage of the recruitment process – and should certainly not be asking OH professionals to get involved in assessing an employee’s health or fitness until a job offer has been made, other than where a specific exception applies"

http://www.personneltoda...oyment-health-questions/

https://www.gov.uk/gover...ent-health-questions.pdf

"Once the employer has decided that a job applicant
meets the requirements for work, the employer
might make the applicant a job offer, or place the
applicant in a pool of successful applicants to be
offered jobs as vacancies arise.
At this point, the employer is allowed to make
the offer conditional upon the successful
applicant meeting the employer’s health or other
requirements. The Act does not then prevent the
employer asking questions relating to health or
disability.The employer may, for example, need to
ask questions to determine whether a successful
applicant would be eligible for job-related benefits,
or would need reasonable adjustments to enable
them to do the job.
However, an employer must avoid making final job
award decisions that discriminate against disabled
people – see “Avoiding direct discrimination” section
below"

Of course, many applicants do not know about the law. So discrimination is rife. Asking them if they're in a union first before discriminating may alleviate any possible irksome court cases (except it is doubtful if even that question is legal)

Still, with more employee-discriminating anti-union legislation coming soon, and with the unions being able to [legally] only put milk out for the cat.........

HR should have all aspects of a job role & its needs known to them pre recruitment and in many cases the comment **other than in certain circumstances** applies so help them all U can to have all the info they need before the recruitment stage is activated. Alas many HR staff do not appear to like that area so look after themselves and even recruit where its obvious that the person is wrong for the job

Best of luck noting that U may have to support managers after HR have recruited the wrong people

One of the Q&A in Ron's link (Equality and Human Rights Commission) is:



Similar subject, I sometimes do ladder training for managers who want to get up close to some of their roofing projects. I need to know if they are scared of heights! I make them climb up a 4.5m ladder (that has already been secured at the top).

So spud, if you are reluctant to ask questions, include a practical ladder climbing in the interview?

John

So are we saying its better to employ someone with a disability to do a job that they may not be able to physically do? Therefore potentially putting them at increased risk of injury.

If you take the recent bin lorry crash into question, he had not admitted to an employer that he had experienced black outs before. This should have been declared but he was worried he would lose his job over it.

From our procedures, unless there is a specific requirement for a certain level of fitness, the health check is always done after the offer of a job. In the case of our off shore service engineers it is a condition of the offer of work that they attend a medical anyway, but if it's for an office worker, no quesitons are asked until post offer. They may attend a medical, and alot of people with specific issues may well make people (first aiders usually and HR) that they have a condition (e.g. diabetics, epilespy).

If an employee then declared a condition that could affect their work, you would have to assess from a health & safety point of view if reasonalbe adjustments could be made to ensure their safety and ability to work. For example, if someone has epilepsy but works on a computer all day, you may assess what triggers might cause a seizure and put adjustments in place (lighting, quality of screens).

In a lot of cases people don't always declare a condition or illness and it can put them in a dangerous situation, so the potential employee also needs to be honest. Not always the case.

But as has been said, H&S overrides any potential discrimination. You would not locate a wheelchair user on a floor above ground level if there was no practical way to get them up or down stairs safely (assuming even if you had a lift it could not be used during an evacuation unless it was designed for purpose). So you would assess the risks and decide on the best course of action (e.g. locate them at ground level, put in ramps and have suitable wash facilities to accommodate their wheelchair).

Nor in every case (and probably not in the majority of cases). Reasonable adjustments come in many forms and I suggest this shouldn't be a default "health and safety" task.