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
Admin  
#1 Posted : 24 August 2006 11:37:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Brian Welch
Interesting one, normally with risk assessments its Hazards, Person(s) at Risk, Existing Control Measures, and actions to mitigate any inadequate controls, all relatively standard stuff. What happens when one individual of a gang is medically restricted, the existing R/A would generally only cover F1 medically fit staff. Occupational Health would supply details of restrictions and recommend individual R/A are carried out. Standard R/A covering all the existing controls are on longer sufficient and there is a need to adjust the inadequate controls that were previously adequate. You then start nearing that line of what are reasonable adjustments. Suddenly you find the risk assessment being used to balance cost of facility improvements against being able to accommodate medically restricted employees.

Any body out there been down this road and have any advice?
Admin  
#2 Posted : 25 August 2006 11:54:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Glyn Atkinson
We have similar situations where work is paid in gang pools to all work areas on a time and motion basis.

Each completed production unit earns a bonus payment into the pool fund as well as normal attendance money per gang member.

These people can be moved around areas or production lines as skilled multi-task "floaters" all of the time, so could be paid bonus money each week from up to eight different pools, depending on total hours worked in each section.

This can obviously discriminate against one member of any gang who perhaps is capable of the job requirements, but cannot achieve the required speed element of the task to hand - each bay area moves up the production line at set time periods - usually around 25 minutes depending on model being produced.

Is a reasonable adjustment made where a gang "carry" a work mate and costs them cash?

Does the person under health surveillence or return to work review or permanent disability have to be temporarily or permanently moved to an ancilliary function area where the time element is not such an issue - eg stores etc?

The worker may be relying on the bonus element of his money, whether rightly or wrongly, and ask to stay with their gang - a difficult situation to control.

The worker's welfare and recovery has to be paramount, but can then drag in HR problems - where do we fit the person, is there really going to be a future position?

It's a nightmare to oversee the safety elements of this type of working environment.

You can involve Occ Health, HR, medical experts, H&S, trade unions, safety reps, senior managers and directors etc, and still not come to a totally amicable solution - but hey, that's life and work, folks !!

My sympathies to any others in similar circumstances !!
Admin  
#3 Posted : 25 August 2006 12:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jim Walker
Surely it is for exactly this reason you should not use generic risk assessments.

Goes back to the old civil case with the one eyed operative and extra duty of care owed.

Come on some recent Dip grad - cite the case!
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.