Posted By Neil Pearson ...or did they just want to reduce their catering budget?

Posted By Jack I think it was the ridicule not the potential for ridicule that made them change their minds.

Posted By Sean Fraser I have a certain sympathy for that story, Karen. Bleach IS a nasty substance and familiarity with it has dulled many peoples attitude of the risks. The COSHH Regs DO ask for substition - this story illustrates where the law is for once being applied correctly. Again, I suggest that failure here is effective communciation of those involved and the full reasoning behind the change hasn't been understood. There is a lot of media coverage of MRSA and others, and the health service is under pressure to be seen to be doing something. I doubt that they would make this change if it were in fact making things less safe - although I could be wrong. They will have looked at what they are doing and have decided that this substitute is the best way to go. Without being derogatory about it, what makes the cleaners think they know more than the people who have studied and decided on the issue - assuming it was properly evaluated by qualified chemists of course! A well known brand is currently advertising it's new bleach-free product as being totally safe but still doing the job required - this isn't totally unprecedented. I presume this new product is something similar to what is being used in the hospital. It would be ironic if the cleaners then smuggled in bottles of this new product! Whenever there are changes, people rail against them. Sometimes they are wrong . . . and sometimes they are right. But most times they have no valid facts and figures to support their opposition - often only time will tell if the decision was right or wrong, and by then no-one cares are the protestors have found something else to be unhappy about. The only way to prevent a fight over any change is to be prepared with the full reasoning, communicate it and check it has been understood.