I have asked over and over that our employees wear safety eye protection when working in areas signed. Would i be correct in thinking that employees who do not use the PPE provided in a clearly stated area would be breaking the law? Where would i stand if there was an accident and the correct PPE had not be used, even though the training had been giving, items signed for and areas clearly marked and defind Thank you

Safety Glasses:::: Firstly They would NOT be breaking the Law, as this law would have been 'installed' by your company site specific rules. The Risk Assessment, would (In this case) have highlighted the need to protect the employees eyes as a control measure because it was found that there may be a hazard that could damage them. As the previous reply suggests; everyone, including employees have a duty to protect themselves and anyone who may be affected by their actions or omitions. Have you any disiplinary systems in place? if not why? this employee is clearly flouting your rules and should be repremanded. You are, or should be, carrying out your 'Duty of Care in protecting your employees.

I'm with achrn on this. Site specific rules are (as far as I can recall) made after a suitable and sufficient risk assessment? p

Failure of supervision and management? If the need for PPE as a risk control is as a result of an adequate risk assessment, is provided and made available, exposed persons are informed and instructed on why, how, where etc but the company is tacitly accepting the lack of use, the chance of a civil claim succeeding after an eye injury is great. As to where "you" stand jodieclark1510, I suggest the best place is well to one side, if the brown stuff starts flying, unless of course, you have a managerial or supervisory role here!

David, that's am interesting conundrum...PPE identified as a risk control as a result of an adequate risk assessment. Not necessarily in this case, but all too often PPE is mandated as a blanket control and without a risk assessment as per MHSW Reg 3. Is this a breach of the law, specifically PPE Regs 6(1) I wonder?

That is a great question RayRapp. I have not heard of any prosecutions under this Reg but has anybody else? On the face of it, imposition of a site-wide blanket rule for, say, eye protection without a valid R/A to support the decision appears to contravene this Reg.

Thanks for your comments guys. I do apologise to the originator of this thread for hi-jacking it. It was a tongue firmly in cheek posting. I would be very surprised indeed if there has EVER been a prosecution pursuant to Reg 6. Yet, it is always presumed that prior to the introduction of PPE a RA has been conducted - which clearly is not always the case. Proving it might be a bit tricky. So, when I read something to the effect 'can an employee be prosecuted...'

The rule and being able to defend it are 2 different things...you have to show that your disciplinary system is being used to enforce the PPE message..therefore David comments are spot on this is a supervision/management failure. You need to show that you have followed the process...it is quite easy to get it to final written when it comes down to it. Although the severity of the impact will need to be taken into consideration....