Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi
I need your view on the following;
We employ new staff with an average age of over 50yrs old. The work requires routine handling of heavy loads without the choice of handling equipment (becuase there is not any suitable for the task)
My concern is that I am told that it is illegal for us to pre-screen for back complaints of new recruits becuase it is not allowed under DDA........is this right????
I just cannot beleive that this can be possible; we are exposing the individual and business risk by employing people with pre-disposed complaints.
If I am wrong, please can you be exact on any legalities which overcome this obstacle so that I can take it back to the business with a convincing arguement ......thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
It is covered under the Equality Act 2010.
Your recruitment policy needs to be blind to the issue of disability. So you will select your candidate on the basis of experience, qualifications, CV and interview performance.
Once you have identified who you wish to recruit, you can then make the job offer subject to health screening / questions that are relevant to the work to be undertaken.
It is all explained in the Equalities Office document - What do I need to know, a quick start guide to the ban on questions about health and disability during recruitment. Snappy title eh.
www.equalitiesoffice.gov.uk
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Presumably we're still allowed to state up front that the job requires some degree of physical fitness, dexterity, colour discrimination etc.
Otherwise we tend to waste everybody's time?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The Equality Act and associated areas etc. + case law allows for the adequate and proper management of H&S irrespective of what many may say and think and its not very sensible and its illegal to put somebody at unnecessary risk so these areas can be covered at the point of recruitment - there are many industries that example my comments -
You need to be absolutely sure of the work activity needing certain parameters otherwise you are very exposed so I advise that you gain expert [ I repeat; expert] assistance as the recruitment exercise will be a waste and it could be costly down the line where you recruit the wrong people
NB: Ageism; do not make the mistake that older are less fit etc than the younger as this is the first generation in history that overall is less strong, fit etc. than its parents! We undertook an exercise some years ago and found that almost all those above 50 were OK and most of those below 40 were not OK
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
On the back of Ron's contribution, I remember many years back whilst working on a production line, the company was trying to recruit a machine operator. The job required dexterity, efficiency and two hand operation. Unfortunately, the gentleman being 'trialled' had had a stroke at some time and consequently could only use one arm effectively (to meet the requirement of the role).
He was assessed for about 20 minutes and after a lot of squirming, our employer told the gentleman it wasn't going to work.
This situation was both difficult and in my mind unnecessary.
My final thought relates to:
'The work requires routine handling of heavy loads without the choice of handling equipment (because there is not any suitable for the task)'
I'd be interested to know what is being handled and if anything could be designed (bespoke) to reduce manual handing 'SFAIRP?' Stating 'there is not any suitable for the task' may not stand up in court if the smelly stuff hits the fan!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Strongly recommend that you do not employ anyone until he or she has completed a Pre-Employment Medical Questionnaire or attended screening.
The more information you have relating to a candidate, the more likely you are to make a good decision. The completion of these forms / processess is the best way of obtaining information about a candidate.
Each candidate should complete an Application Form relating to Health even where he or she has submitted a C.V at the time of application - i.e. send one out with the application pack. This is because a candidate generally includes in a C.V. the information which he or she wants you to have, which will not necessarily be the information that you require to make an informed and legal decision.
You should first consider the completed Application Forms and then decide whom to interview.
All legal and within the boundaries of TEA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Garfield, sorry I think your advice is wrong.
If you are using the PEMQ on the application form to select who to interview then you are in breach of the Equality Act. As I said before, the selection process needs to be more or less blind to disability.
You are however entitled to ask the questions once you are in a position to offer the applicant a job. As an insurer, we encourage firms to do this because health surveillance starts with knowing the baseline position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Whilst every answer here has been a good one and we are all well meaning;- it does nobody any good if we let people think that they will/may get a post as they have come so far in the recruitment process and then at the 'point of offer' we drop some bomb shells - its not right, its immoral etc in my view where we can legally sort such things at a much earlier stage we should
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
stevie40 wrote:Garfield, sorry I think your advice is wrong.
If you are using the PEMQ on the application form to select who to interview then you are in breach of the Equality Act. As I said before, the selection process needs to be more or less blind to disability.
You are however entitled to ask the questions once you are in a position to offer the applicant a job. As an insurer, we encourage firms to do this because health surveillance starts with knowing the baseline position.
mmmm need to investigate. My 'advice' was lifted directly from our insurers employment law manual - dated November 2011!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
It is a shame that nobody has yet even mentioned the use of well-validated tools of psychometric assessment, especially as British test designers are world leaders in this field and the BPS Psychometric Testing Centre services are being uses as a model for European Standards.
In response to the specific question asked, specialists in relevant medical disciplines, psychotherapy and ergonomics have in fact tested a well-validated psychometric instrument that provides reliable valid data specifically relevant to the screening of persons with musculoskeletal injuries.
There is also very substantial research by Hogan Assessments Inc. on the valid legally compliant use of psychometric instruments to select people with and without injuries.
Is it not in the best interests of employers, employees and candidates to regard compliance with the Equality Act 2010 should be a stimulus to quality assessment rather than a source of confusion, misunderstanding, misleading or inaccurate statements?
Chartered psychologists on the BPS Psychological Testing Centre's register to the European Test User Certificate (Level 2) specialising in Work and Organisational Assessment should be able to provide relevant details; I should be pleased to provide essential relevant factual information, to those interested who p.m. me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
thank you all for the time and effort to reply to my query. It is valuable information I have gained and will take forward into the business
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
KieranD wrote:It is a shame that nobody has yet even mentioned the use of well-validated tools of psychometric assessment, especially as British test designers are world leaders in this field and the BPS Psychometric Testing Centre services are being uses as a model for European Standards.
In response to the specific question asked, specialists in relevant medical disciplines, psychotherapy and ergonomics have in fact tested a well-validated psychometric instrument that provides reliable valid data specifically relevant to the screening of persons with musculoskeletal injuries.
There is also very substantial research by Hogan Assessments Inc. on the valid legally compliant use of psychometric instruments to select people with and without injuries.
Is it not in the best interests of employers, employees and candidates to regard compliance with the Equality Act 2010 should be a stimulus to quality assessment rather than a source of confusion, misunderstanding, misleading or inaccurate statements?
Chartered psychologists on the BPS Psychological Testing Centre's register to the European Test User Certificate (Level 2) specialising in Work and Organisational Assessment should be able to provide relevant details; I should be pleased to provide essential relevant factual information, to those interested who p.m. me.
Snake oil & snake oil salesmen, IMHO
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.