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

PPE
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
LATCHY  
#1 Posted : 24 October 2014 13:49:07(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
LATCHY

Do I has an employer need to provide PPE to the self employed or is it there duty to provide there own If a person as access to all PPE and knows this, does it still need to be issued and written down? Advice please
Lawlee45239  
#2 Posted : 24 October 2014 14:27:27(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Lawlee45239

LATCHY wrote:
Do I has an employer need to provide PPE to the self employed or is it there duty to provide there own If a person as access to all PPE and knows this, does it still need to be issued and written down? Advice please
We have guys who are self- employed but we class as employed, we supply PPE free of charge and record on a PPE register
LATCHY  
#3 Posted : 24 October 2014 16:41:02(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
LATCHY

What I am asking is if an employee as access to PPE but does not use it and then an accident happens, is there a legal challenge that the PPE should have been issued and signed for ?
Canopener  
#4 Posted : 24 October 2014 16:50:16(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

There seems to be 2 issues. Compliance with policies/procedures/rules (call them what you like) Documentry evidence of compliance Employers must not only have the procedures but should also take reasonable steps to ensure that the procedure is something more than what is written on paper and that it actually represents the reality As always, documentry evidence of people having had training, been issues with PPE etc etc etcd isn't half handy when it comes to defending yourself in any 'proceedings'. In essence how would you otherwise prove that PPE had been issued? So yes, there is potential for 'challenge'.
paulw71  
#5 Posted : 24 October 2014 16:54:02(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
paulw71

Depends as to whether you have trained them in its use and inducted them into site and site procedures, rules etc. There may even be a supervision issue to ensure its worn/used correctly. The term PPE can cover a pretty broad spectrum. I personally dont think its enough just to issue the ppe and leave it at that.
johnmurray  
#6 Posted : 25 October 2014 08:08:01(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

You know those large boards outside construction sites? The ones that read things like: NO HARD HAT NO JOB If your ¨self employed¨ workers do not have the correct PPE, or have but do not use it, then off them from the site. Similarly; if your other contractors have a lax attitude to your way of ensuring safe working, explain to them the realities of employment (and unemployment). It works wonders. At the end of the day (or someones life) YOU (the contractor) is the one who has the problems. If there is a doubt as to the status of your non-employed subbies, check the problems the contractor will face if an HMRC flying squad arrives on site. http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg174.pdf
RayRapp  
#7 Posted : 25 October 2014 09:34:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

The duty to provide PPE lies with the employer. If you are sub-contracting workers then the duty falls either with an agency if they provide the contingent labour or the self-employed person. Where sub-contractors have insufficient PPE the main contractor could supply it, charge for it, or tell the worker to come back when they have the proper PPE. No need to get someone to sign for anything other an acknowledgement that they have been given a site induction which should also clarify what PPE is required to be used on site. If a sub-contractor fails to wear the appropriate PPE and is subsequently injured, I believe the liability rests with them on the proviso they were advised what PPE to use (i.e site rules). That said, there could be a scenario where the main contractor ignored workers who did not use the appropriate PPE and could be found liable or part liable if there was an accident. All these types of situations are judged on their own individual circumstances and no rule can cover every eventuality.
Steve e ashton  
#8 Posted : 26 October 2014 12:03:42(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Steve e ashton

There is no legal obligation to gets signature, so its not the absence of that that will give rise to a 'legal challenge'... There IS an obligation to ensure PPE is worn when necessary... 'Provide' means more than just'making available'-it must be issued personally, and the recipient 'trained' if necessary to wear it,clean it and maintain it. There have been cases that revolved around the meaning of 'provide' in this context but I can't recall the details at the moment. A signature is probably a god thing but doesn't in itself satisfy the legal obligation.
ashley.willson  
#9 Posted : 27 October 2014 08:53:53(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

What I do is to have a PPE register for when it is issued and for sub contracted staff or those that can or want to supply their own, they sign a different form as evidence that they have supplied it themselves but will still report damage etc etc
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.