Posted By J Knight The specific exemptions seem to be to do entirely with Sikhs, though other religions could probably claim that this is discrminatory. The bloke is wearing his headgear; I suppose to play devil's advocate, who has the duty to issue headgear etc which is fit for purpose? Maybe some creative thinking is called for, John

Posted By J Knight Yeah, well, I'm busy scribbling an employees guide to stress at the moment, so most of my creativity's kind of tied up with that. All I can think is a) maybe a bigger hat or b) he is wearing it, and since hard hats are only limited use anyway since falling hammers don't always aim for the head, maybe he is OK as he is, especially since dreads will act as a very effective extra cushion, John

Posted By David Whitelegg I tend to agree with Martyn. It seems this is a similar issue to the wearing of half face dust masks by those with beards. The PPE will not work effectively so it is not suitable. The only way this could be legal is for there to be a change in the legislation to include Rastafarians the same as sikhs who have a derogation in the act to allow them not to wear headgear. There is also the civil liabilty issue to consider in that if you allow him to continue without suitable PPE and he is injured you could be liable. Sorry there is no magic answer.

Posted By Calum R Cameron Having had this very issue on a site of ours in London recenlty, I was initially of the opinion that the exemption would apply to rastafarians. I spoke to the HSE at Rose Court who told me that rastafarianism is not a true religion and niether is it Sikh therefore is no exemption. This is as someone previously said, is possibly discriminatory in relation to religion but unfortunatley that was the enforcement authorities view which we had to take on board. Not PC i know but what can you do-take a chance with a criminal/civil action for a head injury-not me Im afraid.......

Posted By Rachel West Is the gentleman in question able to wear his hair up losely over the hat? It may a look a little different but the protection would work and the hair would be up. It can't be any less practical that wearing the hat on top of the dreads and it ensures the PPE is being used correctly in line with the legislation.

Posted By Ralph Baqar Rachel, the problem is that he wears his hair up and if he had it flowing down behind his head we would not have an issue. He is a really nice chap however, if anyone questions him about the hardhat issue he fly’s off the handle. Unfortunately we will be requiring him to work in other areas of the site soon.

Posted By Jack I'm not sure HSE are competent to judge what is and what is not a religion. I agree with Hilary, they could come unstuck. However, they are in a position to say that they are not exempt head protection (unlike Sikhs).

Posted By Max Bancroft If you get rid of him then prime your PR people beforehand because I am sure that the media will get to hear of it and we will have the usual headlines about silly H&S people. So before taking any drastic action just check again with the HSE and positively tell them that you will have to get rid of the guy because he refuses to comply with the PPE Regs.

Posted By Ralph Baqar Thanks Andy, for your very useful point of view. Live long and prosper!

Posted By wesley james mason My former company had the same problem once where we were advising a contractor who had a Rastafarian turn up on site and refused to wear a hard hat, because it would not fit on his head due to his hair style. We did some basic checks on the religion, and there was no requirement of the religion to have hair styled in this way, unlike the Sikh religion in relation to Turbans. Therefore, this was not a completely valid reason for refusing to wear head protection. We consulted with the HSE who said that due to the risks involved, it came down to risk assessment. If head protection could not be worn, or suitable alternatives could not be provided, then he should work in an area of low risk. But depending on the nature of construction the work, this is not always possible. I would recommend treading carefully, and maybe get some advise from HR/Legal rep. But if the individual had an accident as a result of measures not being taken, then I am fairly sire that the employer would be liable. Therefore, Risk Assessments should form the basis of this, just as you would in relation to any other hazard. The same would stand for sikhs that wear turbans. You must carry out a risk assessment as it may not be safe for soemone without a hard hat to enter certain areas, for example, where works are being carried out overhead. But if control measures are taken, then hard hats may not be required. Remember, PPE is the last line of defence. Sorry I couldn't give concrete guidance, but I would be surprised if there is anything which gives specific guidance. Although under the Construcion Head Protection Regs reg (5) controllers of the site may make specific rules in relation to the wearing of head protection..........although thia must be in writing! Therefore Risk Assessment first, and then write a policy!

Posted By Ralph Baqar Many thanks Laurence. I suppose sec 6 (4) of the construction (head protection) regs quantifies this. I should really amend our policy once I’ve discussed other implications with our HR dept.