Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
E Bromiley  
#1 Posted : 06 January 2025 13:13:43(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
E Bromiley

Hi all, this article suggests we should be telling homeworkers to smoke outside - any thoughts? https://iosh.com/news-an...AIL&actSource=506029
A Kurdziel  
#2 Posted : 06 January 2025 13:22:30(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

Yes, and you can ask that they maintain proper dress standards. They should also keep their work area clean and tidy etc. You will the of course have to arrange for regular unscheduled home visits to make sure all of these standards are being met. Perhaps the board could also set out appropriate standards of décor for home workers. You often see unsuitable wallpaper and furnishings in peoples houses. People forget that these are not their private homes but workplaces. After all, what is the point of being a manager if you can’t order people about!

thanks 5 users thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
PDarlow on 06/01/2025(UTC), peter gotch on 06/01/2025(UTC), Messey on 06/01/2025(UTC), webstar on 14/01/2025(UTC), toe on 18/01/2025(UTC)
Holliday42333  
#3 Posted : 06 January 2025 13:35:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Holliday42333

Who on earth has written that pile of garbage.  I cannot believe that has been published by IOSH.

Its a good job HSE have stopped doing mythbusters.

No one show this to Dom Cooper, he'll crash LinkedIn! ;)

thanks 5 users thanked Holliday42333 for this useful post.
PDarlow on 06/01/2025(UTC), A Kurdziel on 06/01/2025(UTC), Roundtuit on 06/01/2025(UTC), peter gotch on 06/01/2025(UTC), toe on 18/01/2025(UTC)
PDarlow  
#4 Posted : 06 January 2025 13:40:35(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
PDarlow

Agree that this article is garbage. However, I can certainly believe IOSH would come up with this sort of nonsesne, after all, it advocates UN sustainability goals and pushes climate lies as examples.

thanks 1 user thanked PDarlow for this useful post.
webstar on 14/01/2025(UTC)
FHS  
#5 Posted : 06 January 2025 13:53:29(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
FHS

I thought it was just me. I wonder if this an example of an AI generated article or am I being over generous?

thanks 2 users thanked FHS for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 06/01/2025(UTC), peter gotch on 06/01/2025(UTC)
HSSnail  
#6 Posted : 06 January 2025 14:56:20(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
HSSnail

 Take Smoke breaks outside, arrange for external companies to do PAT Testing - provide them with a fire extinguisher! Any suggestion that inelegance went into that article is over generous! The sooner i retire fully and can stop paying my fees t these idiots the better if thats what they are endorsing!

thanks 6 users thanked HSSnail for this useful post.
PDarlow on 06/01/2025(UTC), Roundtuit on 06/01/2025(UTC), peter gotch on 06/01/2025(UTC), Martin Fieldingt on 07/01/2025(UTC), Bass900063 on 07/01/2025(UTC), webstar on 14/01/2025(UTC)
Kate  
#7 Posted : 06 January 2025 16:01:31(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

I notice the article also says "annual fire drills" (meaning at actual business premises, not employees' own homes) are "a legal requirement". 

Which law is that, then ...?

This is immediately followed by the claim that the HSE recommends "at least two or three a year." Really?  Where does the HSE (which doesn't have responsibility for this level of fire safety enforcement) say this?

thanks 2 users thanked Kate for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 06/01/2025(UTC), Roundtuit on 06/01/2025(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#8 Posted : 06 January 2025 16:51:25(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Fire extinguisher for Lithium Battery at home? I note the absence of a contributor name.

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
Elfin_Safety on 07/01/2025(UTC), Elfin_Safety on 07/01/2025(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#9 Posted : 06 January 2025 16:51:25(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Fire extinguisher for Lithium Battery at home? I note the absence of a contributor name.

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
Elfin_Safety on 07/01/2025(UTC), Elfin_Safety on 07/01/2025(UTC)
Kate  
#10 Posted : 06 January 2025 17:23:34(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

Well apparently "This content has been sourced from IOSH Fire Risk Management Group publications"

That falls a bit short of saying that the group endorses it. 

thanks 1 user thanked Kate for this useful post.
peter gotch on 06/01/2025(UTC)
peter gotch  
#11 Posted : 06 January 2025 17:40:21(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

E.B. Happy New Year and thanks for raising this on the Forums.

Unfortunately, I am far from surprised that IOSH would publish this.

If it was dated 1 April one would understand.

I wonder whether any of those of the IOSH Fire Risk Management Group executive committee actually keep records of their weekly tests of the smoke detectors in their homes.

Also, I suspect that the proof reading wasn't up to scratch.

For example, many employers will provide equipment or financial support to create a home office environment for their workers. Other employees will pay to heat, light and power their homeworking stations, as well as provide various items of IT equipment and furniture.

Surely the second sentence should start "Other emploYERS will pay......." given that most home working emploYEES probably foot the bill for "heat, light and power" themselves.

Messey  
#12 Posted : 06 January 2025 21:34:47(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Messey

At my last job, there were around 7,000 staff - with perhaps 40% of them working from home in a hybrid manner.

We introduced working from home during Covid. As the firm’s Fire Safety Manager, I nervously added WFH fire safety guidance on the firm's intranet. 

I have always tried as hard as I can to avoid the being labelled pedantic and tried to steer clear of accusations of 'elf and safety gone mad'. So I  focussed on the few additional risks of fire that we the employer had bought into the family home via introducing WFH. 

OK I did go down the smoke detector route (advising staff to get at least one), but my main advice was centred around charging phone & laptop batteries during the day and using laptops on a desk or hard surface and not a duvet (which may restrict cooling air flow). But that was it!!

The idea of advising staff to smoke outside or expect a risk assessment visit from me never entered my mind. I am appalled at this IOSH publication and worry it tarnishes the reputation IOSH  currently enjoy.

I am pleased that after 50 years in the workplace - and 48 of them in the fire safety industry - I will be retiring in 2025 as standards are definitely slipping  

thanks 4 users thanked Messey for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 07/01/2025(UTC), Martin Fieldingt on 07/01/2025(UTC), Bass900063 on 07/01/2025(UTC), peter gotch on 07/01/2025(UTC)
stevedm  
#13 Posted : 07 January 2025 07:48:49(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stevedm

have you had a thought that the article is designed to support a retun to the office?  Certain companies could quote the article as a way of enforcing these terms to squeeze people back into the office...

thanks 1 user thanked stevedm for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 07/01/2025(UTC)
Kate  
#14 Posted : 07 January 2025 08:48:43(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

Interesting point, Steve.

I imagine some IOSH staff work from home?  Have IOSH implemented these measures for their own staff?

Also, I spot a contradiction in IOSH's stance on workers smoking in their own homes.  According to Blueprint, "An OSH professional is expected to deliver management systems that promotes and protects [sic] worker wellbeing.  This includes persuading them to make good lifestyle choices to keep themselves fit and healthy and systems for the effective management of mental health."

Encouraging home workers to have smoking breaks outdoors doesn't appear to fit with persuading them to make good lifestyle choices, which would instead involve persuading them not to smoke at all.

thanks 1 user thanked Kate for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 07/01/2025(UTC)
antbruce001  
#15 Posted : 07 January 2025 12:41:12(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
antbruce001

A key item missed in this article is the definition of a homeworker (in health and safety terms). A homeworker is not someone who works at home. It is someone contracted to work from home, not someone choosing to work from home. COVID upset the apple cart, as people were required to work from home (no choice) and therefore the goal posts changed. But as it now stands, most 'homeworkers' are choosing to work from home rather than attending an office, but this is a choice so the employers have absolutely no legal H&S duties relating to those people whilst working in their own homes. But saying that, even for true homeworkers this article goes way over the top!!

Kate  
#16 Posted : 07 January 2025 14:20:30(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

Having no responsibilities at all can't possibly be correct.  If an employee choosing to work from home is issued with faulty electrical equipment to work at home with, or is bullied or over-worked by their manager, that cannot but be the employer's responsibility, same as if they were working anywhere else.

There is nothing in the Health and Safety at Work Act that restricts its provisions to the employer's business premises.

thanks 1 user thanked Kate for this useful post.
peter gotch on 07/01/2025(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#17 Posted : 07 January 2025 15:24:57(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: peter gotch Go to Quoted Post
Surely the second sentence should start "Other emploYERS will pay......." given that most home working emploYEES probably foot the bill for "heat, light and power" themselves.

In my previous role I was contracted as "home based" which meant that utilities were subsidised through a flat weekly expenses payment rather than the rigmarole of proportioning actual invoices.

In my current role and becoming officially hybrid thanks to Covid I did take advantage of the two years of tax break HM Gov issued without question.

Now unfortunately should I seek any contribution the invitation will be to come back to the office.

Roundtuit  
#18 Posted : 07 January 2025 15:24:57(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: peter gotch Go to Quoted Post
Surely the second sentence should start "Other emploYERS will pay......." given that most home working emploYEES probably foot the bill for "heat, light and power" themselves.

In my previous role I was contracted as "home based" which meant that utilities were subsidised through a flat weekly expenses payment rather than the rigmarole of proportioning actual invoices.

In my current role and becoming officially hybrid thanks to Covid I did take advantage of the two years of tax break HM Gov issued without question.

Now unfortunately should I seek any contribution the invitation will be to come back to the office.

A Kurdziel  
#19 Posted : 07 January 2025 16:21:27(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

I think that Kate’s argument is correct. Nowhere in H&S safety law is there such a thing as a “home worker” as opposed to an office based employee. The duty of care expected is the same wherever the employee is working, whatever the contract says but the employer is only responsible for those things that they can actually control.  Employers can’t be responsible for  welfare provisions such as toilets or ventilation if the worker is in their own  home.  The electrics and gas fittings similarly belong to the employee but if the employer provides any sort of  work equipment it must be safe including a laptop that won’t catch fire if left on charge. I cannot imagine any employee reporting their employer for allowing them to smoke at work their own home! On the other hand  how often do you see employees smoking in company vehicles; that is clearly illegal but I have not heard of any prosecutions for many years. So,  you have to look at what is realistic rather assuming that people will follow the letter of the law. Somebody’s AI needs more training!  

Team.IOSH  
#20 Posted : 07 January 2025 17:33:15(UTC)
Rank: IOSH staff
Team.IOSH

Thank you for your feedback on this article. We are currently reviewing it and feel several points you make raise enough concerns for it to be taken it down from our website. We appreciate constructive responses that highlight where our content does not give the right information or advice, and we apologise for anything that falls below the high standards we set. Best regards, Jasmeen 

thanks 6 users thanked Team.IOSH for this useful post.
Kate on 07/01/2025(UTC), peter gotch on 07/01/2025(UTC), Holliday42333 on 08/01/2025(UTC), Evans38004 on 08/01/2025(UTC), Elfin_Safety on 08/01/2025(UTC), Roundtuit on 09/01/2025(UTC)
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
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.