Rank: New forum user 
|
I have a situation whereby an employee who has a current personal injury claim against one of our trading business who is refusing to sign training documents. The training has been re-given post claim due to the business losing the previous records. I guess the employee is worried that this could effect their current claim. Part of the businesses policy is for the records to the signed to demonstrate that the training has been given or that they acknowledge attendance.
Is the employee in contravention of section 7 (b) of the Health and Safety at Work? Any suggestions on how to manage this situation?
I may also look at getting them to sign a statement indicating their objections. Failing that, if they are a union member, a statement from their representative perhaps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I don’t think refusing to sign is a breach of section 7. If the
employee refused to follow the training, or misuse a piece of equipment
provided as part of that training then it would be a different matter. While it’s
nice to get a signature all it ultimately proves is that they have signed a bit
of paper. It in no way demonstrates that they actually understood the training,
or that the training was adequate. If they refuse to sign I would get the trainer
to make a note on the records that this was the case.
|
 3 users thanked HSSnail for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
What is the wording at the signature line? Have to agree if it merely states "was present" or "attended" there is no good reason not to sign. On the other hand when presented with documents that gave war and peace legalese just wrote the word attended and then signed across to prevent it being removed or covered up..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
What is the wording at the signature line? Have to agree if it merely states "was present" or "attended" there is no good reason not to sign. On the other hand when presented with documents that gave war and peace legalese just wrote the word attended and then signed across to prevent it being removed or covered up..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Sorry to bore people (similar response twice in one day!) but the issue is one of competence not training. The employer must believe that the employee is competent to do a job safely not just having signed piece of paper saying they have attended training. If an employee was to refuse to take part in training then the employer would be perfectly in their rights to sack them; if they simply refuse to sign a piece of paper, that is just them being a pain and I suppose they could be disciplined under company policy but it does not look like a breach of section 7 (which of course can only be prosecuted by the HSE)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Originally Posted by: Roundtuit  What is the wording at the signature line? Have to agree if it merely states "was present" or "attended" there is no good reason not to sign. On the other hand when presented with documents that gave war and peace legalese just wrote the word attended and then signed across to prevent it being removed or covered up.. [There is just a signature line saying that they were present or attended. I agree with other quotes that its more a breach of policy then Section 7 Thanks for your quote.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I wouldn't get too hung up about signatures on training records.
I was involved in one claim where the employee was shown a signed training record in Court & promptly declared that it wasn't his signature!!
|
1 user thanked Zyggy for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
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.