Posted By Paul Duell
Hi all...I've done a search and can't find this on the fora anywhere, so I hope someone can help me.

We've supplied alcohol hand sanitising gel in all our offices, partly to be ready for swine flu and partly to show our employees that we're taking steps to protect them in the event of an outbreak. As an aside, I know the usefulness of these is debatable, it's at least partly about showing we care, as well as actually doing something useful...

One muslim employee is now apparently greatly offended that we are supplying alcohol-based products which his faith prevents him having contact with.

So - is there anyone out there, maybe in the healthcare sector, who's faced this before, and if so what did you do about it?

Interestingly, he's not our only muslim employee but so far is the only one who's said anything.

Posted By Yossarian
Easy there.

It is actually a legitimate issue that has been the subject of a paper in The Lancet.

It is however a pay per view article, but a summary can be found here:

http://www.lancet.com/jo...et/article/PIIS0140-6736(06)68431-6/fulltext

I would suggest doing a lot more research before agreeing a policy.

Posted By Yossarian
Good point Stephen, soap and hot water is a legitimate and already available alternative in most cases.

Posted By Ian Blenkharn
What a waste of time, and alcohol gel, in the first place

Posted By Chris Packham
Lotions, in the form of emollient are not classified as medical treatment. Actually they are classified as 'cosmetics', so no problem in employers insisting on their use. Alcohol sanitisers are also not treating a medical condition, so again no problem in their provision and use.

Chris

Posted By Coshh Assessor
What's all this about forcing people to use it - Paul only said he had supplied it, mainly to show the company cares!

Posted By Francis E S Hone
Soap & water no probs even then there will be those that don't use it are you going to monitor the use of these things I think not. Advise & provide is all you can do some will still not wash their hands before eating even after a visit to the cloakroom.
regards
Frank

Posted By ScotsAM
TonyB,

Working in a food production facility, there are contractual requirements for employees to obey a strict hygiene regime regarding hand washing and use of sanitizers.

However that said, there must be some give and take with this wherever a person cannot use a product due to allergys and sensitivities.

I would say that if somebody refuses to use it on religious grounds then fair enough.

Not all people off a faith practice it the same way and I think a good employer would take this into consideration and perhaps issue the employee with an excemption after viewing the cases merits.

Posted By Chris Packham
Reading the original posting again, I have to ask: "What is the problem?"

The sanitiser is not something that is essential for the business, as it has only been provided as a precautionary measure in the event that swine flu becomes a pandemic with significant health effects. (Whether this is necessary or even a positive move is another topic.)

So if one individual declines to use it, how significant a problem is this? At the moment, as I see it, it isn't even an issue. There is no need for everyone to use the sanitiser at the moment, unlike in a hospital where cross-infection is an on-going issue.

That individual can easily compensate by washing his or her hands more frequently. It has been shown that this is effective in reducing the level of transient micro-organisms on the skin.

Chris

Posted By AJM
Just something else to throw into the boiling pot is a HSE inspector once told me that Health and Safety law outguns every other law if reasonable and practicable.

Posted By Buzz Lightyear
We have to walk on eggshells with this debate. I'm sure if someone said anything that could remotely be seen as disrespectful to any religion, the post would be removed - I presume it would have to be under the forum rules. This is an interesting thread but sadly cannot be discussed in full.

Posted By Chris Packham
Regarding problems with the use of alcohol gel sanitisers:

These are in widespread use across the world in healthcare. To date the problems due to reactions to the ethanol/isopropanol have been minimal. Neither ethanol nor isopropanol are recognised as skin sensitisers. The same cannot be said for the non-alcohol based sanitising rubs as these frequently contain actives (e.g. Triclosan) that are sensitisers and can initiate an allergic contact dermatitis.

If properly buffered, and the word 'gel' suggests that this is the case, then the sanitiser will also act as an emollient. Studies have shown that with this type of product there is no problem with drying of the skin.

Chris

Posted By David Passmore
I have a tendancy to agree with Simo79 on this one.

Although I respect a persons beliefs, why do we have to seemingly tread on eggshells when dealing with such matters?

Does the said employee allow his car to freeze up in the winter to avoid alcohol based anti freeze being used to protect the cooling system?

Will the employee in question refuse to eat food in fear of the delivery vehicle used to transport his baked beans was also transporting a pallet of whisky at the same time?

It is madness - Sure, a valid question was asked, but come on - it's no wonder the h&s profession is being ridiculed by the media.

It would seem that pre employment interviews or induction processes (in particular with ethnic groups) are going to have to consider asking workers if they have any objections to washing their hands in alcohol or being exposed to products that may not be compatible to their religion etc.

Then, when the person does have such reservations and is refused employment, expect a claim for racial discrimination.

It is madness - sheer madness! Common sense in our litigious society has gone out of the window.

Rant over.

Posted By David Passmore
The Koran doesn't ban alcohol, it just warns against drunkenness.

Posted By ScotsAM
See this link for a completely different view

http://www.greencarrepor...ed-vehicles-may-be-a-sin

I'd suggest it's taken with a pinch of salt however.

Posted By Swis
An interesting topic. Just wanted to clear few things here;

First for the fact that most muslims have no reservations with using alcohol sanitisers. However there are a minority who wouldn’t use any products containing alcohol (i,e, wipes, body sprays etc)

Alcohol sanitisers are used in all muslims countries and pose no problems what so ever (in hospitals, surgeries, labs etc)

Secondly, Islam does not prohibit the use of alcohol for medicinal purposes (that includes consuming as well) – Weather cleaning hands with alcohol stained sanitisers come to this class is an other issue. (yes, there will be some muslims who would still prefer to use an alternative if available – will agree with Chris on this debate)

Another point to note is the fact that it’s Sikhism that strictly prohibits the use of alcohol in any form, also supported by guide provided by World Health Organisation (although majority of Sikhs consume it).

as pointed out by jay, discussing religious point of view is something different to discussing someone’s personal point of view and that needs consultation and considerations. (as failures would result in poor performances).

Also, It would be interesting to talk to HSE inspector who said that H&S laws outright any other laws. Please note that all laws must be adhered to and any breach can result in prosecution, regardless. There’re always some exemption, whenever there’s a clash. If H&S laws were that superior, what was the need to introduce law exempting helmets for Sikhs at construction sites?

Posted By Hossam
for the vast majority of islamic scholars..
no problem with products containing alcohol and not taken by mouth like in this case rubbing gel,perfumes or soap

Paul you can guide him to this link
http://www.islamonline.n...aE%2FFatwaEAskTheScholar

very reputable islamic site for fatwas (islam religious inquiries)

Hossam

Posted By peter gotch
Hi AJM

Your HSE Inspector should do some research. Plenty of worldwide case law dealing with the occasional conflicts between H&S and equal opportunities.

See http://www.iosh.co.uk/in...iew&forum=1&thread=41666

Regards, Peter

Posted By Andrew Meiklejohn
Interesting.

IMO I would say that 'there is always one'.

I don't see why there is an issue with him using alcohol. As long as he is happy washing hands with the alternative.

With regard to H&S related law overiding other law the I would agree. There has already been precents set with DDA vs PPE regs.

I really don't know what the HSC were thinking with the construction head protection regulations. It was a bad idea. I have been told stories of builders throwing bricks etc at their turban wearing counterparts and shouting @ Oi you should be wearing yer hard hat mate'.

I don't think treating individuals or groups differently from the whole is never a good idea.

Just my point of view.

Andrew

Posted By AJM
Peter, I don't know where your looking but the thread you sent me to look at backs up what i originally said. There is even a thread from a HSE inspector agreeing.

I didnt say it for debate or effect i just said what i was told.