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 : 04 June 2007 17:49:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By patricia topping
I have read somewhere that you can obtain a tax disc holder for use for company cars for No Smoking Signs.
Can anyone tell me where these can be obtained?
Admin  
#2 Posted : 04 June 2007 20:17:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Geoff Ferneyhough
Patricia,

If you e-mail me I will provide you with the details of the Disc we have used.

Regards

Geoff
Admin  
#3 Posted : 05 June 2007 14:15:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul Durkin
Regards company vehicles, is there something in the regs about signs in each compartment?
I attended a talk by an enthusiastic barrister who implied that each entrance door to a vehicle should have a no smoking sign,OTT or what ?
Regards,Paul
Admin  
#4 Posted : 05 June 2007 15:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Michael Battman
I understood that if the company car was allocated to 'a specific person' then the no-smoking ban did not apply, as it was effectively that person's own car - given the tax on company cars this appears to be reasonable.
In other words it only applied to pool cars.
Admin  
#5 Posted : 05 June 2007 15:32:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul Durkin
Hi Patricia,
Depends on what you mean by 'company car,' is it shared?, then signs, if sole use/lease then no.
I will give you the name of the barrister !!!
Regards, Paul
Admin  
#6 Posted : 05 June 2007 16:25:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John w Smith
If a vehicle is used - either driven or as a passenger - by more than one person (even if its once on a blue moon)for work, it is a 'no smoking' vehicle. This is regardless of if its a company car or owned by the employee. As such a sign must be displayed in each passenger compartment.
I know that this might sound daft. One of our directors who smokes and only takes a passenger a couple of times a year must now have a sign and not smoke in his Mercedes!
The tax disk option for the sign seems like a good option.
Admin  
#7 Posted : 05 June 2007 16:35:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By PH
My company is issuing everyone with no smoking stickers/ signs for their cars. I know that in reality many will not use them (and I don't necessarily blame them, especially the ones who have a car allowance) and wonder how this can be properly enforced.

P
Admin  
#8 Posted : 05 June 2007 17:15:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dar
Staff who receive the car allowance can still smoke in their cars as it privately owned, I spoke to Local Council today.
Admin  
#9 Posted : 05 June 2007 17:28:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Zaphod
I've been issued with one of those tax disc holders from our lease company for my company car - but the only people who drive the car are myself and my wife and we are avid non-smokers.

This no-smoking sign thing seems to be getting out of hand.

I work for a national organisation that supports people with learning difficulties in small domestic homely environments - in typical houses like yours or mine. For years we have argued against putting up fire signs everywhere - except in buildings where the risks justify them. This approach has been reluctantly accepted by the Fire Service and Commission for Social Care Inspection inspectors.

Now suddenly this new legislation comes in on smoking with big threats about fining people for not putting signs up everywhere. There does not seem to be any sense of proportion to the risks and the nature of the environment they are being put up in.

I remember the Howletts Zoo case - when a keeper was killed by a tiger. If my memory serves me correctly, the company succeeded in their defence that the Health & Safety at Work act allows for the nature of the business or undertaking. I gather the keepers were expected to have direct contact with the animals because that was what the zoo was all about. I couldn't find confirmation of this exact interpretation but here is a link to a site that summarised the case.

http://www.swarb.co.uk/lisc/HltSf19961996.php

I would like to use the same argument for not putting up smoking signs - or indeed other safety signs except where they make a significant contribution to reducing risks and that they are appropriate to the business or undertaking. Any thoughts? Or how about the term 'so far as is reasonably practicable' - whatever happened to that. Perhaps someone could clarify - does teh H&SW act have anything to do with the new smoking law?
Admin  
#10 Posted : 05 June 2007 20:58:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John Murgatroyd
No. It's the health act 2006. Nothing to do with safety !
It's not exactly a voluntary thing, the law REQUIRES you to display signs in smokefree premises or vehicles. It doesn't say "if you want to". A bit like thinking you need not display "hearing protection required" signage because everyone should be able to tell by the noise !

This whole smokefree stuff is a load of laughs.....the REALLY stupid reasons people are thinking-up to avoid stopping people smoking "we can still smoke in the offices because the public doesn't come into here" (wrong)
And what about the poor company (sorry, pool-car) driver....if it's a pool car they have to have the signs....if it's a company car given and used primarily for private use, they don't....pity about any tax problems...
Try telling the 20 stone paranoid schizo that he has to stop smoking or leave the premises....
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.