Rank: Forum user 
|
An employee wants a sit/stand desk. He says this is what he uses when Working From Home and that he has noticed his back suffers when he sits at his desk in work. The Manager has asked for an updated DSE & Workstation Assessment which I am to carry out as the HSE Officer on site. I am sympathetic with him being given a sit/stand desk but I am not sure how supportive (pun intended!) the Workstation assessment will be as he currently has a standard desk and adjustable chair etc. His job is also active without extended sit times and there is no 'evidence' (docs note etc) that he requires reasonable adjustment. I will note on the assessment that the desk ergonomics comply with HSG57 etc but the employee reports back issues he associates with his current seating arrangements. Has anybody come across a similar situation and what happened?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
We have a few users of sit/stand desks, but the only people who have been provided with one for their exclusive use are those where a medical professional (of some sort - including our external occ health bunch) have indicated it should be provided, i.e. not just where a user says they'd like one or they 'feel' it would help. Most of our offices do have a few sit/stand desks that are not allocated to anyone in particular, so a member of staff that wants to take a break from sitting could move themselves to one of those for a morning or a day, or whatever. We've never had cases of anyone 'squatting' and taking up one of teh shared sit/stand desks indefinitely.
|
 1 user thanked achrn for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
In my experience, they have simply been provided on request. If it helps the employee, why not?
|
1 user thanked Kate for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Might they be a little bit more expensive? and open up the flood gates for others who would like preferential treatment?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Originally Posted by: Evans38004  Might they be a little bit more expensive?
Cost should no longer be a consideration for health and safety following changes to the sentencing gudelines The £ being firmly pulled from ISFAIRP because what employers were doing was ISFAIRA (affordable)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: Evans38004 Might they be a little bit more expensive?
Cost should no longer be a consideration for health and safety following changes to the sentencing gudelines The £ being firmly pulled from ISFAIRP because what employers were doing was ISFAIRA (affordable)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: Roundtuit Originally Posted by: Evans38004 Might they be a little bit more expensive?
Cost should no longer be a consideration for health and safety following changes to the sentencing gudelines The £ being firmly pulled from ISFAIRP because what employers were doing was ISFAIRA (affordable)
However in this specific case, what are the chance of a sucessful prosecution under the DSE Regs that leads to the sentencing guidelines being applied?
Has there EVER been a prosecution under DSE Regs? Are they even relevent anymore? (We all know the answer to this one) The very fact that the manager involved has aksled the SHE bod to do an assessment is a tacit acknowledgement that the sit/stand desk is not going to be approved on a purely 'do the right thing for the employee' basis, I should think. Edited by user 15 February 2023 16:59:36(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
1 user thanked Holliday42333 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I stand to be corrected but I don't think the Sentencing Guidelines have been changed since publication in 2016. Health and Safety Offences, Corporate Manslaughter and Food Safety and Hygiene Offences, Definitive Guideline (sentencingcouncil.org.uk)
Which means that you don't even reach the Sentencing Guidelines until there is a conviction - either the defendant pleads guilty or is convicted at trial. So, the question of whether something is reasonably practicable should be determined in any case that goes to trial on the basis of the case law, Edwards v NCB or the lesser known Marshall v Gotham - whichever of those judgments you choose £££ forms a part of the cost element of the balance of cost v risk - BUT with hte onus being on the defendant to prove on the balance of probabilities that it was NOT reasonably practicable to do more. AND even at sentencing stage, these issues will resurface as HSE found out painfully in R v Squbb, where it mostly the risk part of that equation that was questioned.
|
2 users thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Yes the DSE regs are probably out of date - so lets go pack to basic H&S principles - do everything that is reasonably practicable. When we designed our new office we scattered a few sit sit desk around so people had a choice. I thing there is sound erganomic evidance that a mix of sit standing can be good for you. Where we get individual requests for dedicated kit we would look to an occupational health assessment to justify.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
We have had a number of requests but we insist on an Occupational Health report and recommendation for nearly all our adjustments. We cannot provide a new sit/stand desk so we provide a desk top solution that moved up and down and allows the user to stand when they need. The cost is a lot less and it can be moved to another area if need be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Thanks for the replies to date. I dont think the line manager is particularly against the stand desk. We are a very large organisation and the request originates from the office equipment supply department's box ticking. I will do the assessments and note the individual's opinion that they feel sitting is contributing to their discomfort. From my side, as HSE Officer, that is prima facia evidence that an adjustment to a stand desk in terms of welfare provision is reasonable. If the organisation want more, such as a doctor's note, then they can ask for it , or they can take onboard the 'risk' that the worker's condition worsens to the point medical intervention is required and considered to be occupational.
|
1 user thanked mrkjd for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
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.