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 : 11 December 2008 13:56:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By warderic
I would like to open a discussion on the following please. Those of you who have spent many years in the H&S profession will be familiar with the awkward employee. I am particularly interested in your approach to those employees who want more then their share of personal protective equipment. As an example: Employees are issued with one pair of safety footwear each year, but there is always one particular employee, for what every reason, who has an excuse to have two pairs. Time after time they approach their manager saying 'these boots are rubbing on my toes' or 'these boots have become too tight and I cant wear them' etc. You know that they need to wear safety boots, but how do you stop, what you believe to be, just an excuse to have a new pair of boots. I have dealt with this situation many times over the years in various ways , but I would be interested to know how you deal with such situations. Many thanks.
Admin  
#2 Posted : 11 December 2008 14:22:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ian Futcher
If there is an awkward employee like you describe in my organisation, I flood them with interest and concern.

"So, you have problems with shoes? that's TERRIBLE! What does your Doctor say about your bad feet? Have you been to an orthotist? Let us make an appointment, so that you can then get special shoes for your everyday life, because they must also give you such JIP!, and when you've had your special shoes made, we will use the same pattern for Safety Shoes" etc etc

It's worked for me

Ian
Admin  
#3 Posted : 11 December 2008 14:29:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul D
I kick em in the sweets......

...no mods only joking....

The key for me is ownership of issues, I would put my arm round the awkward guy and butter him up a bit.. then ask him how he would do things better.

For instance when I go in to do a risk assessment, I go straight to the worker on the 'shop floor' before management and make that person feel like he is the most important person within the process (Which he is by the way). I then make it known to that person that they have carried out the risk assessment and it is their work, the results are that they are more likely to comply with the findings and more importantly get their peers on side and still comply when there are no managers around.

Admin  
#4 Posted : 11 December 2008 14:35:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Crim
The safety shoe supplier will be happy to meet you and that employee to resolve his foot problem. Your should go that way and then as stated above look after that person as he just could turn out to be your biggest problem if you ignore him.

Invite the shoe people in first!
Admin  
#5 Posted : 11 December 2008 14:40:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Raymond Rapp
Well, in the past I can think I might have been one of those awkward ones...anyway, I tend to adopt the view that not everyone is the same. In a workforce of many, sometimes it might just be easier to accept the odd 'awkward' one and just get on with the job.

Crack on.
Admin  
#6 Posted : 11 December 2008 14:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul D
If the shoe people dont come....invite the smurfs or as a last resort...the flumps!
Admin  
#7 Posted : 11 December 2008 15:02:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John J
I'm with Ians aproach. Get him to seek medical advice but send along a note to his doctor outlining his issues. He may, without realising it, have a medical problem.
This should be in his own time or you may as well save money and buy the shoes in the first place.
Admin  
#8 Posted : 11 December 2008 16:08:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Kirsty Davies2
Agree with Ray.
Admin  
#9 Posted : 11 December 2008 16:51:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John J
The problem with accepting the odd 'awkward one' is that you set a precedent that becomes the norm.
Fine in a small workforce but time consuming, and costly, in a large one
Admin  
#10 Posted : 11 December 2008 17:43:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By warderic
I agree John J. It makes others think that by being awkward you can get your own way. Its OK ignoring these things, but there is a principle involved. I find that these people always have an answer and seem to spend more time finding problems with what has not been done then working towards getting things done. This type of attitudes will always be with someone in the workplace, its part of our job to deal with this. I was just interested as to the way others deal with the situation. I'm of the opinion that you are never to old to learn.
Admin  
#11 Posted : 11 December 2008 18:07:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jean
My experience has been with DSE specs. I had an employee who advised me that his eye test needed to be rechecked after only about 4 months. When I directed him to the policy of every 2 years or as recommended by his optician. He told me that if I didn't pay for a further eye test, and make a contribution towards his new glasses, he wouldn't work. So I consulted our HR advisor, and we agreed that he should go back to have his eyes checked with the same optician, we would pay again if there were changes, and the optician stated that there was a need for a change in prescription.

We paid for the eye test, however, as he was not recommended a change in prescription, we advised him to visit his GP. Never heard from him again. We changed our policy to reflect that additional eye tests may be undertaken as part of the company policy subject to the discretion of the Health and Safety Advisor.

Employees may be awkward but it doesn't nec. make them dishonest.
Admin  
#12 Posted : 12 December 2008 08:47:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Raymond Rapp
I have heard this comment on many occasions about 'setting a precedent' and quite frankly it's nonsense. So-called precedents are set all the time by organisations when it suits their purpose. Hard and fast rules rarely work in a large and diverse organisation and in any case, with the plethora of regulations and guidance there is usually a clause which can be invoked.

Managing people is about being flexible and accepting that there will be circumstances which dictate deviating from the norm. For example, one company that I worked for provided staff with approved sturdy footwear aka PPE. I like some others found them uncomfortable to wear and it was agreed that we could wear our own shoes/boots that conform to the company standard. No Doctor's note - job done.

Ray

Admin  
#13 Posted : 12 December 2008 09:51:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John J
Ray,

I'm all for flexibility and encourage a wide range of choice.

The problem arises when somebody goes along and speaks to a salesman who tells them their product is the best thing since sliced bread, which it may be, but is entirely unneccessary for the task in hand.

A good example is designer label boots which must be more comfortable as they have a label on. I've known people develop foot problems within hours of speaking to the salesman.

If you set a precedent that you will supply anything on request and based on this example alone I would be adding a conservative 10K onto our PPE budget.

I'd sooner challenge all requests and use the 10k on other things rather than fashion items or nice to haves.

John
John
Admin  
#14 Posted : 12 December 2008 10:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By warderic
I opened this discussion regarding the "Awkward Employee" and not the genuine employee. The person who endlessly has a problem with standard issue PPE such as shoes, always wanting something different or more pairs then others doing the same job. The type of person who when given the choice of 6 different pairs ranging from £20 to £50 will undoubtedly pick the £50 pair. I personally will do everything possible to help the genuine employee, but like John J, I will stand up to the know complainer. If I didn't do this it would surely be unfair to all the other employees and be an unnecessary expense to the company. Its OK giving in but that's not facing up to the problem.
Admin  
#15 Posted : 12 December 2008 12:28:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By justgossip
for the employee who is having a 'crack' just because its clever. I just inform them to clear off.
its quick, its cheap and it teaches them a lesson.
plus there is more than one way to skin a cat.

one of mine tried it, he had size 8 feet and we gave him a tried and trusted size 8 boot.
Sent him home whilst I ' investigated' the issue as I did not want to make his 'injury' worse . that cost him his overtime.

we then had a chat the following day and both agreed that in future we would work to gether constructively

RESPECT

garry

garry
Admin  
#16 Posted : 12 December 2008 12:58:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By jervis
I agree with most comments but he may have good reason to complain about them. One pair a year i go through 2-3 pair of trainers in that time!
Admin  
#17 Posted : 13 December 2008 10:45:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John Richards
He/she may even need more than one pair. He/she may have to work indoors most of the time, but occasionally go onto site...or maybe even onto sites with chemicals around...paint shops etc..
He/she/it may get through several pairs of boots in a year, especially if required to work on construction sites with all that messy mud and slush...etc.
But then, he/she/it may well just want someone to talk to...or maybe he/she/it fancies you ?
Admin  
#18 Posted : 16 December 2008 14:06:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By rhea
After reading Garry's response I worry even more about how employees are being treated.

Garry refers to them as 'his' and teaching them a LESSON!!!

No wonder H&S is seen as a burden and off no use.

My partner works in a high risk area outdoors and has been there over 2 months. He is still waiting for protective clothing.

With H&S officers like Garry he will have a long wait.

It's ok Garry, we will purchase it ourselves. At least I know he has more chance of not being crushed by a lorry or suffer hypothermia.

I will inform my partner of Garry's advise, 'I just inform them to clear off.
its quick, its cheap and it teaches them a lesson'.


Regards

Rhea
Admin  
#19 Posted : 16 December 2008 15:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John J
Rhea,

I don't think anybodys suggesting that failure to issue PPE is acceptable. Its clearly not.

John
Admin  
#20 Posted : 16 December 2008 15:26:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By warderic
I'm surprised this discussion has opened up again. Like most discussions after a short time it turns into Chinese whispers and the original question is lost. The question I raised was "Awkward Employees", not entitlement to PPE or employees with medical problems. I'm talking about the bloody minded employees who wants more, or what he is given is never good enough. Yes people must have the correct PPE, yes people with medical problems must be assessed for the correct PPE, we all know this, but they are not part of the question.
Admin  
#21 Posted : 16 December 2008 16:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Raymond Rapp
Warderic, clearly you got some responses that were not too agreeable with you, but if you post a thread you takes your chances on the quality of the responses...that's how it is.
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.