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
Stefan Healey  
#1 Posted : 06 October 2022 16:12:40(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Stefan Healey

Hi,

A few months back I read that a new bill was introduced into the House of Commons on 23 March 21 by Dean Russell MP, who wants a new law to ensure that every workplace has a Mental Health First Aider.

Did this ever materialise, and has a specific time frame been set, we are currently in the process of sending multiple managers for mental health training and would like to select the most appropriate training.

Thanks.

peter gotch  
#2 Posted : 06 October 2022 16:52:23(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Hi Stefan

I think the probability of such a law ever seeing the light of day under the current Westminster administration is about as close to ZERO as you could imagine.

Jacob Rees-Mogg has had a list drawn up of health and safety legislation to be considered for the axe, not for new legislation to add to the so-called "burden on business".

So, you are effectively left with the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

HSE published its "stress management standards" years ago, but seems very reluctant to do much to enforce anything that would mitigate the risks of work-related stress, particularly when it comes to tackling the real causes - usually poor management.

As happens I doubt that HSE would be supportive of anything that precribes a minimum number of MHSAs for every workplace. They would say that the number (if any) should be decided on the basis of a risk assessment.

The better the management of the root causes, the less need there should be for sticking plaster solutions when people are ALREADY suffering.

This is NOT to say that MFHAs are not a good idea, but just that they are way down the "general principles of prevention" as set out in the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.

thanks 1 user thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
Stefan Healey on 07/10/2022(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#3 Posted : 06 October 2022 18:53:25(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

1) The recipient needs to acknowledge their issue

2) The recipient needs to reach out to the provison

3) The recipient needs to trust the provision

4) The recipient needs to believe they are gettting the assistance they need

A legally mandated provision fails to pass the test at 1) and would probably fail at 3) especially if the designated aider is the recipients perceived problem aka manager/supervisor

Roundtuit  
#4 Posted : 06 October 2022 18:53:25(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

1) The recipient needs to acknowledge their issue

2) The recipient needs to reach out to the provison

3) The recipient needs to trust the provision

4) The recipient needs to believe they are gettting the assistance they need

A legally mandated provision fails to pass the test at 1) and would probably fail at 3) especially if the designated aider is the recipients perceived problem aka manager/supervisor

achrn  
#5 Posted : 07 October 2022 07:53:11(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
achrn

Originally Posted by: Roundtuit Go to Quoted Post

A legally mandated provision fails to pass the test at 1) and would probably fail at 3) especially if the designated aider is the recipients perceived problem aka manager/supervisor


Sorry Roundtuit, your response makes no sense at all to me.

How would a legally mandated requirement to have a mental health first aider in every workplace fail any of those requirements?

You may as well argue that there's no point having a requirement to have a source of drinking water, becasue 1: the recipient needs to acknowledge they are thirsty, 2: the recipient needs to try to access the provision, 3: the recipient needs to trust that it's drinking water, 4: the recipient needs to actually drink the water.

A legally mandated requirement to have mhfa AVAILABLE for the cases where someone DOES want to talk to one in no way 'fails' on the days that no-one wants to talk to them.  I don't consider the provision of physical first aiders in my office has failed because they didn't do any CPR or stop any haemorrhages yesterday.

It was a ten minute rule motion that the government should introduce a bill "to make mental health first-aid part of first-aid training requirements" : commons order paper and hansard report.  No-one opposed it, as far as I can see. However, it was only a proposal that someone should come up with a proposal some time.

Having said which, this bunch aren't going to introduce the requirement, imo

thanks 1 user thanked achrn for this useful post.
Stefan Healey on 07/10/2022(UTC)
Pirellipete  
#6 Posted : 07 October 2022 08:23:54(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Pirellipete

should any legal action be raised against any company I suspect the solicitors will lump it under, 'Welfare' in the  Workplace H, S & Welfare Regs...... ??

Which is probably where the lawmakers will currently see it sitting so they don't have to do anything either.

Edited by user 07 October 2022 08:26:54(UTC)  | Reason: added text

A Kurdziel  
#7 Posted : 07 October 2022 09:51:30(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

There has to be a specific  legal requirement to do something; you don’t need to do it just because people think it may be a good thing. That’s how the law works and for example why in the UK there is no general duty to help if someone is injured for example. As said the First Aid at Work regulations place a duty on employers to provide first aiders for employees who might be ” injured or become ill at work”. Nothing about mental health there. In 2021 an MP proposed a 10 minute bill which is just  a suggestion to test people’s appetite for actual legislation. The HSE response to this which appeared not long afterwards can be found here. In a nutshell the HSE concluded that “There is no evidence that the introduction of MHFA training in workplaces has resulted in sustained actions in those trained, or that it has improved the wider management of mental ill-health.” ; which has probably killed any chance of there being any legislation on this in the foreseeable future.

thanks 2 users thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
Kate on 07/10/2022(UTC), peter gotch on 07/10/2022(UTC)
achrn  
#8 Posted : 07 October 2022 11:11:39(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
achrn

Originally Posted by: A Kurdziel Go to Quoted Post

There has to be a specific  legal requirement to do something; you don’t need to do it just because people think it may be a good thing. That’s how the law works


Sorry, can you explain what you mean here.  My employer does a number of things for staff wellbeing or health or safety for which there is no specific legal requirement - like free fruit, free yoga, providing more comforable (and expensive) than the minimum PPE.

I agree completely that you don't need to do something just because someone somewhere thinks it's a good idea, but I'm not sure what point you are making with "there has to be a specific legal requirement to do something", which isn't true.

On the particular topic under discussion, there is currently no requirement to have mental health first aiders in the workplace, but my company has trained and appointed mental health first aiders in every office.  We did that, without there being a specific legal requirement to do it.

thanks 1 user thanked achrn for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 07/10/2022(UTC)
A Kurdziel  
#9 Posted : 07 October 2022 12:02:51(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

My clumsy attempt at the English language!

Often people on the forum say you must do this or that but, in many cases, it turns out that there is no legal  requirement to do it ie no NEED. It’s might still be a good thing ( fresh fruit always a good idea)  but just because someone (who might be selling you something) says you SHOULD something does not mean you must do it.

Hopefully I am making myself clear  and I am not advocating minimalist approach to H&S but just suggesting that people don’t just rush onto the nearest bandwagon because everyone else is doing it and it is assumed to be a legal requirement.

thanks 1 user thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
peter gotch on 07/10/2022(UTC)
Rasput01  
#10 Posted : 17 January 2023 16:02:27(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Rasput01

Originally Posted by: achrn Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: A Kurdziel Go to Quoted Post

There has to be a specific  legal requirement to do something; you don’t need to do it just because people think it may be a good thing. That’s how the law works


Sorry, can you explain what you mean here.  My employer does a number of things for staff wellbeing or health or safety for which there is no specific legal requirement - like free fruit, free yoga, providing more comforable (and expensive) than the minimum PPE.

I agree completely that you don't need to do something just because someone somewhere thinks it's a good idea, but I'm not sure what point you are making with "there has to be a specific legal requirement to do something", which isn't true.

On the particular topic under discussion, there is currently no requirement to have mental health first aiders in the workplace, but my company has trained and appointed mental health first aiders in every office.  We did that, without there being a specific legal requirement to do it.


@achrn, I'd be very interested in talking to you about mental health and wellbeing programmes that your company runs as I am currently working on implementing a programme..
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
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.