Posted By Wayne Schofield Hi there to you all, Pragmatic and level headed advice needed! The company I work for in heavy engineering company has just started a Occupational Health Surveillance Programme to monitor and screen personnel identified through risk assessment of exposures to a variety of issues synonymous with heavy engineering, as surveillance has been limited in the last 10 years or so. The make up of personnel is a mix of permanent and contract personnel. In recent weeks a number of personnel, with the majority being permanent employees have refused to attend to see the Occ. Health nurses for various reasons, with some stating that; "it has nothing to do with you...." "I am already under my doctor for...", "I don't want to attend as I am a Contractor and don't want the Taxman to find out." to give a few reasons. Understanding the employers duties under a variety of legislation to carry out Occ Health Surveillance, that is targeted to those that need it and the employees duty under similar legislation to help the employer fulfill their duties, I am looking for a level headed pragmatic advice to tackle this issue. If anyone can please pass on some succinct advice on dealing with those that refuse to attend the Occ. Health surveillance programme it would really help me. In the past I have had the backing of a central Occ. Health team, but as this company is a single site and with a rather naive safety attitude, I am finding it difficult, although the majority of those asked are welcoming the changes to the culture of the company. Many thanks in advance.

Posted By Kieran J Duignan Options for level headed pragmatic advice include: 1. avoiding dwelling on refusers at this point in your OH cycle, other than to keep them fully informed of the availability and their legal responsibility 2. systematically survey users of the OH service so that you can enhance your account of benefits and correct any nonrandom deviations from your standards. 3. keep publicising the free OH service and its benefits

Posted By Chris121 the Management regs state:- Those employees concerned and their safety or other representatives should be given an explanation of, and opportunity to comment on, the nature and proposed frequency of such health surveillance procedures and should have access to an appropriately qualified practitioner for advice on surveillance. I woudl therefore suggest this issue is rasied at the next staff meeting or whatever you channels or communciation with staff are- and the outcome of the meeting documented. The Regs also clearly state:- Employees' duties under section 7 of the HSW Act include cooperating with their employer to enable the employer to comply with statutory duties for health and safety. As Health surveillane is clearly a statutory duty failure to comply would mean they are in breach of this and the issue could be dealt with via company disciplinary procedures. hope this helps

Posted By Wayne Schofield Thanks to all of you that have taken time to offer your thoughts to my issue. I shall take on board every aspect of your advice as it was of a similar approach to what I am in the process of constructing, and having it verified by your peers is certainly very very helpful. Many thanks again and I wish you continued success in your field of work. Regards, Wayne

Posted By Kieran J Duignan Wayne Here are a couple of action points to add to your range of options 1. Collect trus case studies from OH, HR and Safety professionals in companies which use OH surveillance cost-effectively, and use them to illustrate good practice until your own scheme is moving well 2. Avoid EVER using disciplinary action about OH UNLESS a. there is evidence that an individual is harming him/herslf as does happen in instances of MSDs, when it may be necessary to suspend the person with pay in the first instance and then take them to the point of 'frustration of contract' which is technically legally different to 'discipline' b. there is evidence they are directly impairing the health/safety of others, when this should be the sole focus of discipline. There are two practical reasons for avoiding discipline about OH in other situations 1 it may result in 'sympathetic' widespread disruption by other employees 2. it may result in a 'grievance' followed by litigation tot he point where you risk a court decision that restricrts you in unanticipated ways without being entirely in favour of the compliance you are aiming for. The educational information about OH should include the message that OH is a complex labyrithn, with the result that in countries without a health service paid for by the taxpayer, employer-funded OH is a major benefit to employees and that there are even some employees, including officers of trades unions, who are only too happy to use access to employer-funded OH as an alternative to waiting for publcly funded OH services.