Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

IOSH Forums are closing 

The IOSH Forums will close on 5 January 2026 as part of a move to a new, more secure online community platform.

All IOSH members will be invited to join the new platform following the launch of a new member database in the New Year. You can continue to access this website until the closure date. 

For more information, please visit the IOSH website.

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 : 29 October 2007 13:08:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ian Clay1
Hope people can help. i have carried out a risk assessment on a pregnant employee when she informed me, and all was OK. Since then her health has caused her concern due to the lateness of the shift she works. I have carried out another risk assessment which alters her work pattern slightly to allow her to finish earlier and start earlier. She is happy, her doctor is happy but the HR section says she must approach it through a "Family friendly Policy" that the company have.
i believe this to be incorrect and believe that this should be through the health and safety policy as the other is for people who already have children and not unborn babies. the ladies doctor is prepared to keep signing her off work because of her health.
is there any case law that I can put in front of HR to stop them making a terrible mistake, or am I wrong?
Having had to deal with this at a previous company I have read all the H&S literature so believe the company will make a big mistake if this lady has to stop off work without even trying reasonable adjustments?
Any help please!
Admin  
#2 Posted : 29 October 2007 14:26:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Tabs
http://www.hse.gov.uk/mothers/law.htm

You are right, this is a reasonable adjustment required to protect the mother to be and the unborn baby.

Take a look at the FAQ section available there too.

Tell HR to read and digest.
Admin  
#3 Posted : 29 October 2007 15:59:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Brian Welch
The HSE link mentioned above is excellent for the H&S argument, which I tend to favour. From the HR point of view I guess the debate is driven out of the Works and Family Bill. This is probably the Labour government looking to be seen as family friendly…

http://www.publications..../cmbills/060/2006060.pdf

Brian
Admin  
#4 Posted : 29 October 2007 17:03:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Merv Newman
I think the HSE publication makes (on a quick reading admittedly) a fundamental mistake ; it assumes a binary condition : you either are or you ain't pregnant. Not helpful if we are thinking about the lady's health and Safety.

Any mother, and even some fathers, will tell you that if you is, then you is not just in the static position of "being pregnant"

Pregnancy is a dynamic state such that any risk assessment carried out, with appropriate action plan and SSOW, in the early stages (3 to 4 months) can be totally useless, even damaging, two to three months later.

I would suggest that from the start you plan on regular (1 to 2 months ?) reassessments of the risks and of the SSOW. In consultation as much as possible with the lady, her doctor and HR.

And I hope you have an appropriate action plan for when push comes to shove.

Merv
Admin  
#5 Posted : 29 October 2007 17:09:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Merv Newman
Secondly,

If your company's "Friendly Family Policy" is based on the "Work and families Act" then that has absolutely no relevance to H&S. It should be exercised IN ADDITION to any H&S responsibilities that must be undertaken vis-a-vis pregnant women.

Not bad though if you are a prospective father looking for a bit of paid leave.

Merv
Admin  
#6 Posted : 29 October 2007 19:59:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bob Shillabeer
Glad you have done a risk assessment on the pregnant woman, lets hope it is not catching. Dambed dangerous thing this pregnancy bit, it may lead to more babies and where will we be then? Possibly a growing population and where will be be then, up to our necks in disposable nappies I should think.

Seriously why are we treating the woman as sub normal. I understood that being pregnat was a natural thing. Its some of the activities we do that are not human and they pose a risk to the woman who is naturally pregnant. Lets get off this pregnant is bad thing, please. We need to adapt the way we do the unnatural bits to ensure the natural bits can be normal.

I have two children both girls who Have had two children each, in a modern world without risk. Why because we try and make sure their activities when pregnat are controlled and as free from risk as our knowledge knows. That is what we must do not traet them as unusual people who cause problems for what we do.

Children have been about since the time of Adam and Eve, its normal, so lets protect that situation from modern ways of doing thinks.
Admin  
#7 Posted : 29 October 2007 20:01:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bob Shillabeer
By the way why do a risk assessment on the pregnat woman, it is surely the activities she does you risk assess.
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.