Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Stephen A
Can anyone advise on the following procedure, I need to induct an operative working at a Building site that has a false/ mechanical arm.
He uses the hook where his hand would be to assist with lifting and carrying.
Do I carry out a Risk Assessment on this individual and specifically his arm?
Would that be discriminatory?
He has never registered himself as Disabled and does not want any preferential treatment and unnecessary attention.
What are the duties of care in this instance?
Regards
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Paul Leadbetter
Steve
Think Paris v Stepney Borough Council!
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tabs
Without making a big deal about it, yes it is right to review existing risk assessments and see if there are any new risks introduced.
You can have a chat with the person and ask what difficulties, if any, they have encountered - and whether there are any adjustments that they think should be made.
If anything needs to be done, get on with it without making a fuss, and make sure you chat with them again after they have gotten used to the site. They may find something later on that you can help with.
Absolutely right to think about it though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kevin Brown
Under Manual Handling Regs this is an obvious case of reduced physical capacity. The extent to which the prosthetic limb can be trusted rests on the amount of control it has over the load and the strength/stability of it's attachment to the employee. It's absolutely vital to make a risk assessment of each of the manual handling tasks the guy is involved, or is likely to be involved, in. For instance, does the prosthetic limb actually grip loads, or just support loads? What about adverse weather conditions? Or manual dexterity?
It's certainly discriminatory to make such assessments but it isn't unfair, it's discriminatory for the right reasons. Central to the purpose of the assessment is to identify risk and introduce control measures, one of which may well be exempting people with reduced physical capacity from specific tasks. You'd be conscientiously exercising your duty of care for him and anyone else he could put in harm's way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Pete48
Now that the proper and sensible answers to this post have been made, I just cannot resist saying that I was interested to know what an armed worker was doing in a workplace. Violence at work and all that stuff.
I know that many think that grammar and punctuation are superflous things and I do agree much of the time. Sometimes, however, it can lead to some strange understandings.
Is writing twenty odd workers the same as writing twenty-odd workers? Is a one-armed worker a different scenario to one armed worker?
Sorry!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Barrie (Badger) Etter
Steve
Yes to risk assmt. We have a one functioning arm gent working (forgive if grammar is incorrect) for us albeit as a software eng. Explain the reason for the assmt along with why ie, legal requirement. Yes he didn't want the fuss but accepted it when he found that equipment would be bought to make his life a tad easier because the assessments went in his favour. The assessment also stretches the mind because what you would put in place a 'normal' person may aggravate the situation.
Good luck. :O}
Badger
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.