Bike Schemes Options  Watch this topic  Print this topic » Normal Threaded

Previous Topic Next Topic

Admin		#1 Posted : 15 October 2009 11:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Ucan What implications from a H&S side would a bike scheme have on a company???? The company would actually own the bike for 12 months, then the employee whould purchase it out right from the supplier.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#2 Posted : 15 October 2009 11:29:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By David Gault I have worked with our Occ Health dept. on bike initiatives in the past. Th eone you mention fell foul of the FInance Dept but I won't go into that. From a health perspective there are some clear wins. It is a proven fact that excercise can help people who suffer from depression. I will add my usual caveat that I am a psychologist and I do lecture on the subject (so I am admitting to an axe to grind in that last comment). Physically, the effects are, according to the OCc Health people I have dealt with, significant. The general improvement in fitness, reduction in blood pressure, strengthening of the heart etc. that riding a bike can contribute to are really worth while. I have seen other threads on the forum recently about helmets and so on that may be worth referring to.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#3 Posted : 15 October 2009 11:40:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Ucan I know it may sound like a daft question but how do we as a company know that the person is able to ride a bike???? Schools undergo a Cycling Proficiency Test.....now called the National Standards for Cycle Training What about helemts, hi viz clothing etc????
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#4 Posted : 15 October 2009 12:44:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Mike DF So long as the bikes are used for commuting I don't think you need to worry too much as regards competence. On the scheme here we are informed that we can bundle lights, high vis, hats etc into the purchase that is then put through the scheme. I would suggest that you put similar information into the signed agreement and perhaps maps (or links to maps) of cycle routes to the premises
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#5 Posted : 15 October 2009 12:48:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Bob Youel The overall idea is very good however using bikes for work activities is a can of worms
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#6 Posted : 15 October 2009 16:17:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Phil H Cycling schemes are an excellent idea.It doesn't need to become an 'elf and safety' issue.Yes there is a danger of getting knocked off your bike, but most people signing onto these schemes I would suggest are upgrading their bikes anyway or have had some experience. Hopefully there will be showers and bike storage but the health benefits are considerable so I hope there are no health and safety advisors ready to put the blocks on the schemes
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#7 Posted : 15 October 2009 16:26:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Jay Joshi Is this for communting to and from work or is it for work related travel ? If it is for commuting, the company liabilities are negligible/nill.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#8 Posted : 15 October 2009 16:33:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Ian MacAskill I got an excellent bike through one for these schemes for around half price. The scheme is "cycle to work" not "cycle at work" so I think that would clarify responsibilities.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#9 Posted : 16 October 2009 07:57:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Peter F. Would this for the first 12 months come under PUWER (Stark v Post Office), the maintenance etc would be the companies responsibility.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#10 Posted : 16 October 2009 08:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Paul Leadbetter Surely that would depend on whether the bikes were work equipment? If they are to be used for cycling to work rather than cycling at work, then where does PUWER come into it? Paul
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#11 Posted : 16 October 2009 08:43:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Peter F. Paul, I believe it will depend on who owns the bike, it will be a piece of equipment provided by the employer, is a car still a company car when using it for leisure purposes? Do they still need to maintain it?
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#12 Posted : 16 October 2009 09:03:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Paul Leadbetter Peter A company car is used for company business at least some of the time and the company's responsibilities for the use at work will, of course, cover the leisure use, too. If a bike is to be used only for leisure use (which includes cycling to work), are the company responsibilities the same? Paul
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#13 Posted : 16 October 2009 09:07:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Peter F. We could discuss until the cows come home, we don't even know the full extent of how the bikes will be used, they may be required during work as well. They might also have to sign a disclaimer to the effect that the company owns the bike but they will ensure that it is maintained. I would always be wary in this day and age if I was a company and cover all bases.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#14 Posted : 16 October 2009 09:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Jay Joshi This is an approved scheme by HMRC etc. There is a difference in that unlike company lease cars, employees pay monthly installments, but the cost of the bicycle is less as the value of income tax, national insurance and VAT is discounted. Yes, until the amount is paid off the bicycle is "loaned" to the employee. After a final "fair price" has been paid by the employee, it becomes the employee's property. I cannot see how the employer can be made liable for its maintenance if it is used only for commuting to & from work or leisure purposes- as it is on loan--there can be terms & conditions for the so called loan period. Refer to:- http://www.dft.gov.uk/pg...meimplementat5732?page=1 http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/s...ist/salary_sacrifice.pdf
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#15 Posted : 16 October 2009 09:45:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Peter F. Where in the orginal thread does it say only for commuting?
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#16 Posted : 16 October 2009 10:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By John J Peter, from the description of the purchase scheme it implies that its the national scheme which has requirements that the bike is used occasionally for commuting to and from work. Of course you can only read this into it if you know about the scheme, John
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#17 Posted : 16 October 2009 11:36:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Peter F. John, I know about the scheme as we are part of travel wise within merseyside and encourage the use of cycles, we however did not get involved. However for me it's like having business insurance on your own car as sometimes you may travel a short distance for work, i.e. attending travel wise meetings.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#18 Posted : 16 October 2009 11:39:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Ucan The bikes would only be used for commuting to and from work.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#19 Posted : 16 October 2009 22:30:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By andy.c. having signed up to the scheme the T&Cs state. "The purpose of the agreement is to provide you with a bicycle and safety equipment for commuting and leisure". nowhere in the agreement does it mention work related use and why would it, its a hire purchase agreement. Andy
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#20 Posted : 20 October 2009 13:02:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Ian Stone Ive been asked this very question today from our legal team. The company who runs the scheme state in their FAQ section that it must be used for work purposes for 50% of the time, so does it then become work equipment and as an employer would we then need to maintain the bikes??
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#21 Posted : 20 October 2009 13:13:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Jay Joshi The official information on the DfT website had previously referred to states that:- http://www.dft.gov.uk/pg...meimplementat5732?page=1 The tax exemption only applies when an employee mainly uses the cycle and cyclists' safety equipment for qualifying journeys. A qualifying journey for an employee means a journey, or part of a journey, # between his or her home and workplace, or # between one workplace and another, in connection with the performance of their duties of employment. So, for example, cycling to and from the station to get to work would qualify. [In this case, 'mainly' means that more than 50% of time using the cycle and safety equipment must involve a qualifying journey. The term used is a qualifying journey, which can be commuting only
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#22 Posted : 20 October 2009 13:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Paul Leadbetter Ian If the bikes are used at all for work, then PUWER will apply, won't it? Paul
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#23 Posted : 20 October 2009 13:19:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Jay Joshi The reason why the minimum 50% has been introduced is because that was not the case with the previous schemes and almost anyone could have legally signed up and used the tax exempted bicycles for non-qualifying journeys ( i.e would never use them for commuting!) In my company's case, we did not have any takers for the new scheme as there wasn't anyone who could sign up to using the bicycles for at least 50% of the qualifying journeys i.e commuting --we do not use bicycles for work.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#24 Posted : 21 October 2009 09:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By andrew morris Hi, Basically, as someone trying to use the scheme, the answer is: - if the bike is for commuting to and from work, it is not a work piece of equipment, even if loaned by the company using the governments tax incentive scheme. - if the bike is used for work (e.g. postie, travelling between campuses, etc.) then it is. The 50% rule on the tax incentive scheme is 50% of the week travelling TO work (i.e. don't drive more than 2 or 3 days). It does not mean cycling FOR work. However, for transparency, if the bike is loaned for commuting: You need to ensure that whatever contracts are signed and sealed make it clear maintenance and safety is on the individual user.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#25 Posted : 21 October 2009 15:04:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Andrew Robertson-Böber The scheme itself it cool. But remember if the company owns the bikes then this will be straightforward PUWER. It is worth having a look at (i) No liability for employer for work equipment not within their control - http://www.wragge.com/analysis_4554.asp# (ii) Stark v. Post Office - http://oxcheps.new.ox.ac...%20v%20Post%20Office.doc B CMIOSH FRSPH FRGS
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Admin		#26 Posted : 21 October 2009 15:07:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest		Posted By Ian Stone Thanks for the information and a big thanks to the IOSH technical help team
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Users browsing this topic

Guest