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
nic168  
#1 Posted : 24 October 2018 08:29:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
nic168

 I have been asked to undertake/review some Risk assessments for a member of staff who has a protected characteristic- Dyslexia-. Not a problem in this instance as the Line Manger has put measures in place but no-one has actually recorded this.

A bigger concern is the Individuals health, they are obese (23 stone at a conservative estimate) and part of their role involves unacompanied home visits. This does not seem to have been considered as a hazardous activity. Due to their size the individual cannot always get up from a  seated posistion easily and is frequently short of breath.

My concern is that they will not be able to make an exit from a situation that is turning nasty.

I have convinced the LM that home visists and Lone working should be looked at as Hazards for the whole team but this one individual is I think in a seperate catagory.

I know obesity is not a protected charateristic but I have a niggling feeling that there have been some cases where it was a factor.

Any thoughts or suggestions greatfully recieved

A Kurdziel  
#2 Posted : 24 October 2018 09:40:28(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

Hi

Could you tell us the nature of the home visits and why it is reasonably foreseeable that they might “turn nasty”?

nic168  
#3 Posted : 24 October 2018 10:25:06(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
nic168

  Public sector Housing officers- deal with a range of subjects connceted to housing :- entitlement, benefit, changes to either. Unfortunatly there is often a disconnect between wht customers feel they should have and what they are entitled to.

There is also the reality that there are some individuals who need very little provocation-real or imagined- for them to become unpleasant or aggressive.

The team do have a protocol in place involveing telephones and special words  , I am not sure how effective it is and cannot find any evidence of it being used. I am currently pushing for Personal safety devices ( lone worker alarms).

My concern with tis individual is that I don't think they are physically able to make an exit in a timely fashion should they need too.  

Roundtuit  
#4 Posted : 24 October 2018 11:22:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Why are you making assumptions based upon physical appearance of an individual?

The perceived protaganosists may not react in your anticipated manner in the presence of this particular employee who may posses soft skills which stop such antagonistic situations flaring in the first place.

Sound research - who committed / who received - may show a pattern indicating a lack of inter-personal skills

Roundtuit  
#5 Posted : 24 October 2018 11:22:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Why are you making assumptions based upon physical appearance of an individual?

The perceived protaganosists may not react in your anticipated manner in the presence of this particular employee who may posses soft skills which stop such antagonistic situations flaring in the first place.

Sound research - who committed / who received - may show a pattern indicating a lack of inter-personal skills

nic168  
#6 Posted : 24 October 2018 14:05:46(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
nic168

 This is not based on an assumption. The individual was taken to their first visists by a supervisor and om two occasions had to be hefted from the sofa.

I have personally observed them becoming breathless on climbing/desecnding a short flight of stairs

This individual is very likeable, has good soft skills and is hard working, they know their subject and have given some thought to the tasks required of them.

My concern is that their health puts them at additional risk as a lone worker, but I don't know how best to address this in the context of a Risk assessment without making it seem they are not up to the job.

 Unfortunatley as far as the protagonists element goes, the public sector has come as a bit of a shock to me in terms of how little it can take for some people to " kick off", just being told that their in the wrong office can do it for some, others don't like being asked to wait.

In the last 6 weeks we have experienced 4 episodes of physical violence directed at staff in the offices, verbal aggression is fairly common also but does not always get reported. ( I am working on that)

The actual number of unpredicatable, potentailly violent people may be small but the impact is great.

Elfin Davy 09  
#7 Posted : 24 October 2018 14:36:07(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Elfin Davy 09

Personally, I'd give this a wide berth if I were you - stick to the dyslexia assessment and leave it at that for now. 

Okay, the person may have weight issues, but any attempt to "risk assess" him/her solely on this basis could well be construed as discriminatory.  If their weight ever does (with proof) impact upon their ability to do the job they're paid for, refer it to HR and get them to treat it as a performance issue rather than a health and safety problem. 

Lone working for this sort of work is a potential risk for anyone I would imagine, so do you treat the archetypal "five stone weakling" in the same way (ie would you deem them worthy of a separate RA because they're at the other end of the weight spectrum) ?

thanks 1 user thanked Elfin Davy 09 for this useful post.
PeterP on 24/10/2018(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#8 Posted : 24 October 2018 19:19:40(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: nic168 Go to Quoted Post

The individual was taken to their first visists by a supervisor and om two occasions had to be hefted from the sofa.

The condition of clients furniture is unfortunately something you can have absolutely no control over - my father in law struggles rising from the leather suite he bought five years ago but is perfectly fine rising from the dining chairs they have had for the last twenty years.

The difference being the seat height whilst on one his knees are bent upwards on the other his feet naturally rest flat on the floor - "man spreading" is the resulting phenomenon of a low seat.

Edited by user 24 October 2018 19:32:55(UTC)  | Reason: FFS

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
Elfin Davy 09 on 25/10/2018(UTC), Elfin Davy 09 on 25/10/2018(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#9 Posted : 24 October 2018 19:19:40(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: nic168 Go to Quoted Post

The individual was taken to their first visists by a supervisor and om two occasions had to be hefted from the sofa.

The condition of clients furniture is unfortunately something you can have absolutely no control over - my father in law struggles rising from the leather suite he bought five years ago but is perfectly fine rising from the dining chairs they have had for the last twenty years.

The difference being the seat height whilst on one his knees are bent upwards on the other his feet naturally rest flat on the floor - "man spreading" is the resulting phenomenon of a low seat.

Edited by user 24 October 2018 19:32:55(UTC)  | Reason: FFS

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
Elfin Davy 09 on 25/10/2018(UTC), Elfin Davy 09 on 25/10/2018(UTC)
nic168  
#10 Posted : 25 October 2018 14:02:11(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
nic168

 our only 5 stone weakling moves like greased lightning.

 I am going to go with Davey on this and pass it back to the management chain, these are intelligent people and they know the problems- I have already recommended  some resilliance training and some de-escalation training be offered across the team.

 I suspect this ended up on my desk because i am not in the direct management chain and I was out!

Thank you for the input and for the opportunity to get my own thoughts in order

nic168  
#11 Posted : 26 November 2018 11:31:41(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
nic168

 My efforts to avoid this one have been unsucsseful, it is back on my desk and being pushed by a particularly unpleasant Manager with an agenda that seems to be at odds with the recomendations of Access to work and my initial recommendations.

I have had a rummage through some of the old postings on this subject- Back in 2004 the topic of obesity as a work place issue was being debated by Ron todd and Kelvin, the subject of should obese workers have individual risk assessments was not resolved then either.

I now have two personal RA in progress where obesity is a significant factor, this suggests to me that this is a topic that will feature  in future discussions.

rach108  
#12 Posted : 26 November 2018 17:43:53(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
rach108

Personally I think it's a valid point. Individual circumstances/abilities should be taken into account when assessing risk. You wouldn't ask someone with a bad back to help with a lifting task.

How you deliver it is a different thing.

I guess you could ask generic questions around the individual's own perception of whether or not their moblity is limited in any way.

Roundtuit  
#13 Posted : 26 November 2018 20:16:06(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Unfortunately reading between the lines this is a "new" employee and the manager is not happy with the engagement so is seeking to use "elf & safety" as a get out of jail free card to remove them from post.

You can RA the backside out of this BUT be warned you may find yourself having to justify any findings at an employment tribunal.

If there are "capability" issues these belong squarely with HR not H&S - get the full request and reasoning for the RA in writing from the manager (please could you confirm to me... you need..... because....) at least that way you have evidence of why you have undertaken the task and drawn your conclusions, and in line with all the best RA make sure you engage the individual - probably won't keep the employer off the hook but at least your conscience can be clear.

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
nic168 on 27/11/2018(UTC), nic168 on 27/11/2018(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#14 Posted : 26 November 2018 20:16:06(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Unfortunately reading between the lines this is a "new" employee and the manager is not happy with the engagement so is seeking to use "elf & safety" as a get out of jail free card to remove them from post.

You can RA the backside out of this BUT be warned you may find yourself having to justify any findings at an employment tribunal.

If there are "capability" issues these belong squarely with HR not H&S - get the full request and reasoning for the RA in writing from the manager (please could you confirm to me... you need..... because....) at least that way you have evidence of why you have undertaken the task and drawn your conclusions, and in line with all the best RA make sure you engage the individual - probably won't keep the employer off the hook but at least your conscience can be clear.

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
nic168 on 27/11/2018(UTC), nic168 on 27/11/2018(UTC)
nic168  
#15 Posted : 27 November 2018 11:59:11(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
nic168

 I had a session with the manager yesterday, and I think I got the point about Reasonable Adjustment across.

Obesity is a major concern here but there are a couple of recognised disabilities as well  which impact on their abiliity to do the task in question ( 20-25% of the role). I have focussed the assessment on the protected charateristics and acknowledged the part played by the obesity.

Realistically I think there is little choice but to move them sideways into another, less physical role.

I have done some background reading on this which may be useful to others downstream.

 Obesity is not a protected charactertistic or a recognised disability, however it is possible for disabilities to arise from the condition that should be traeted as such in the work place. As an example- Joint pains affecting mobility, Gout, diabetes. ( This is from "Fit For work")

There is also the problem with discrimination- overweight people are often percieved as lazy, self indulgent or stupid. (I would hasten to add that that is not a problem here, but I have come adcross it elsewhere). 

Addictions are not covered by the Equalities Act, but underlying conditions may be- the example given was Mental Health giving rise too drug abuse ( source "Personnel Today").

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.