Rank: Forum user 
|
Little doubt that others have experienced this situation but its a new one for me - an office worker is years using a four legged meeting room chair at his DSE workstation. An assessment indicates new adjustable chair required as per Regs, user says no, the chair he has had all along is far more comfortable!! Does one force the chair on the user, quoting the Regs or accept his decision with written confirmation that the right chair was offered??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Does he have a medical problem i.e. back, neck, headaches etc.?
If not why make him use a different chair.
This game of ours is not a one size fits all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
What would we do if a person on a construction site refused to wear his hard hat because the hat he had on was, in his opinion, suitable
I think that this is the same situation as the above; as all U need is one negative situation and U would be getting a claim
Just tell his manager [letting him know that U need to tell his manager] and let the manager manage -Thereafter if the manager does nothing its their problem and not yours as U cannot do everything
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
DSE isn't quite as black and white as hard hats & construction sites.
The requirements for seating described in Schedule 2 of the Regs are quite limited and the guidance in L26 para 57(b) provides further qualification:
"Some individuals who suffer from certain back complaints may benefit
from a chair with a fixed back rest or a special chair without a back rest"
If the workstation is used only by that individual then there is potential justification in maintaining that status quo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
In this case you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink. If the person is happy with their chair even it does not tick all the DSE boxes they can keep it. It’s like PPE when they can be forced to use the kit provided. Just make it clear and record the fact they were offered better workstation equipment and turned it down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Does paragraph 1 of the schedule to the Regs; viz:
1 An employer shall ensure that a workstation meets the requirements laid down in this Schedule to the extent that –
(a) those requirements relate to a component which is present in the workstation concerned;
(b) those requirements have effect with a view to securing the health, safety and welfare of persons at work; and
(c) the inherent characteristics of a given task make compliance with those requirements appropriate as respects the workstation concerned.
have any bearing on this discussion?
LB
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Has bearing if the "health, safety & welfare" of the person at work needs secured. Have risk factors been identified? Fixed height and backrest may be suitable for the individual at this workstation.
If there is tissue adaptation because of habitual poor posture & movements it needs changed i.e. it feels comfier because he's so used to having his shoulders up at his ears that it feels uncomfortable to move them.
However- isn't this the nature of adjustable chairs, the user can change them to suit themselves? I'm no help!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Murty18829 wrote:Has bearing if the "health, safety & welfare" of the person at work needs secured. Have risk factors been identified? Fixed height and backrest may be suitable for the individual at this workstation.
If there is tissue adaptation because of habitual poor posture & movements it needs changed i.e. it feels comfier because he's so used to having his shoulders up at his ears that it feels uncomfortable to move them.
However- isn't this the nature of adjustable chairs, the user can change them to suit themselves? I'm no help! Yes I agree about the tissue adaptation. I think as long as some Assessment has been done - the person offered alternatives to what they have based on the assesmsnet of risk and they refuse to allow it, the person is monitored by the employer /supervisor then you have done as much as you can and in this case the person took the risk upon themselves which is often quoted in latin but I cant remember it. Remember that under the act the employee has to comply with the employers reasonable requests re H&S!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Beware. "volenti non fit injuria" is an entirely different situation from the employee's duty to comply with Section 7(b) of HASAWA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.