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
Mr.Flibble  
#1 Posted : 29 December 2014 15:40:11(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Mr.Flibble

Ok now it is getting a tad chilly of a night time and when working in a Warehouse near bay doors which are open when loading it can get cold even with the Warehouse heating working. Now when I was a lad working in a warehouse I knew it got cold in the winter (and hot in the summer something to do with common sense) so I invested in some thermals which kept me toasty. I would never have demanded that my employer supplied me with these. However I am being asked should we supply these as part of our duty or care. The Warehouse is not a cold store and I have pointed out that drivers work outside making deliveries and have not asked for these but that point seems to get missed. They get breaks in a nice warm canteen where hot drinks are available. Just wondering what other people thoughts were. Where does duty of care end and common sense (and manning up) i.e. duty of care to ones self, kick in!?
toe  
#2 Posted : 29 December 2014 17:28:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
toe

Common sense would tell you to wrap up well on a cold night, this would include being appropriately dressed going too and from your work until you clock in/out. However, I think that this query is about Statutory Law (PPE regs, Mgnt Regs) as it applies during working hours and within a workplace, and has nothing to do with 'duty of care' as this sits in common law. Take a look at case law and the recent case linked below, for some more information about the risks. http://www.harpermacleod...rvices-llp-2013-csoh-130 http://www.scotcourts.go...pinions/2013CSOH130.html
westonphil  
#3 Posted : 29 December 2014 18:39:10(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
westonphil

Interesting case Toe. Mr Flibble I can only advise that I have worked for quite a number of companies and they have all provided suitable jackets and gloves etc., where required. They also supplied them to the lorry drivers. Regards
hilary  
#4 Posted : 29 December 2014 21:27:41(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
hilary

We provide high vis heavy coats, woolly hats and gloves for our warehouse/loading guys as well.
potts2030  
#5 Posted : 30 December 2014 09:01:16(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
potts2030

Most of the places i have worked they have provided jackets gloves hats and sometimes thermals. Some of the places in the past have provided hot soup to the staff
ajb  
#6 Posted : 30 December 2014 11:47:53(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
ajb

I think the case referred to by Toe has been overturned http://www.bbc.co.uk/new...nd-glasgow-west-29279622 I don't have the legal reference but I'm sure a search will bring it up.
westonphil  
#7 Posted : 30 December 2014 12:16:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
westonphil

That makes it even more interesting AJB! Thanks. Commenting further on Mr Flibble's points/questions the employers I have worked for considered it 'reasonable' to provide *WARM* clothing but that warm clothing was not issued as PPE except for where there were of course significant risks. Hi Viz was of course issued as PPE and the wearing of it was enforced. In a -25C warehouse warm clothing would be issued as PPE, of course. As we all know we cannot always just look to the law and expect it to make every decision, this is why we employ managers, directors, safety advisors etc., to make reasonable judgments. It is beneficial to try and develop and maintain a good culture at work because that helps to support safety, environmental, production, management, finance, HR etc., i.e., because everyone works together for a common aim rather than some people being 'less helpful', but in a reasonably practicable way. Sometimes a business has to invest in something because it helps the business processes and for reasons other than because a law says it must be done......I see that as good management. But also the employees should appreciate they have a part to play as well, and respect that they will not always get everything they ask for......generally within a good culture they do. Regards
DaveDowan  
#8 Posted : 30 December 2014 13:48:09(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
DaveDowan

chris.packham  
#9 Posted : 30 December 2014 13:52:09(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris.packham

have you checked out the PPE Regulations? Regulation 2 includes: "(including clothing affording protection against the weather)". Of course, it then depends whether you consider cold working conditions as 'weather'. Chris
toe  
#10 Posted : 30 December 2014 19:25:35(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
toe

Just goggled the appeal of the case from post number 6. This does make interesting reading and I think that the judges in the appeal have use some common sense in their judgement. Thanks to the up-date AJB. In light of this I stand corrected in my previous post at 2. I guess the OP does make an interesting point thought if you consider the statements made by the appellant judges (albeit it's about footwear) see link below. http://www.brodies.com/b...-v-cordia-ice-slip-case/
RayRapp  
#11 Posted : 30 December 2014 21:19:38(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Common sense does still have a place in this world but it is diminishing. Providing coats, gloves, boots to keep out the cold is good sense. Providing thermal underwear is a step too far IMO. But what do I know?! I was overruled when I said that sun cream is not PPE and would not be provided...meanwhile, it's mandatory to wear long sleeves even in the summer - crackers!
johnmurray  
#12 Posted : 31 December 2014 20:02:12(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

What we need is no regulations!
RayRapp  
#13 Posted : 01 January 2015 11:24:55(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

JohnMurray wrote:
What we need is no regulations!
Interesting thought, but I don't know what that will achieve except non-compliance. The notion that organisations will do the right thing without legislation can be discounted. It's not the regulations which are at fault - it's the idiots who are interpreting them!
westonphil  
#14 Posted : 01 January 2015 13:39:05(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
westonphil

RayRapp wrote:
JohnMurray wrote:
What we need is no regulations!
Interesting thought, but I don't know what that will achieve except non-compliance. The notion that organisations will do the right thing without legislation can be discounted.
Good point, we would likely be back to the 1800's when there were no regulations. I always point out that most of todays regulations came about because of accidents/injuries and not by accident and thus they are there to help prevent them. Sometimes when things appear to be safe it can be easy to lose sight of those laws etc., which brought that about. HNY Ray, regards
ashleywillson  
#15 Posted : 02 January 2015 09:22:52(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
ashleywillson

Mr Flibble. In my opinion I would be looking at the level of risk involved. Is the temperature a hazard that needs to be managed (and I am not asking for an answer from anyone, that is a rhetorical question!), if so how are you going to effectively manage / control / eliminate / reduce it? I suspect heaters won't cut the mustard from your OP so if you are going to write in as a control "Employees must wear coats / hats / gloves / long johns / tie hot water bottles around their bodies (or whatever....)" then I would say that you do need to provide it. I work in construction so our guys are outside all year round. We have a risk assessment which looks at extreme weather (i.e. extreme hots and colds and the effect on the human body and also the environment). A control for extreme cold is to wrap up warm (not the exact words of the risk assessment I hasten to add). As such we provide woolly hats, gloves and high vis heavy duty long coats which can be worn while the blokes work (plus it is great advertising!). As I say, that is my opinion and I personally believe it falls under a common law duty of care as much as PPE. Look to your risk assessments, put your common sense hat on and think about what you are asking of your guys!
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.