I have been asked to order a blood pressure monitor for an employee at work to monitor their blood pressure on a daily basis. 

I have responded to say there's no legal precedent requiring us to purchase one, and also advised of the possible implications of supplying such specialist equipment on our site. 

To me, such a device would require various documented processes, cleaning, calibration etc. and I feel it could land us in proverbial hot water. 

I have since been overruled by management and would be grateful to know the thoughts of others. 

Is it one of the managers after kit on the company expense (@£16 - £100)?

There is no requirement under law and to be honest taking blood pressure readings at work is incredibly wrong anyway - our Occupational Health (Blood Pressure being a part of their service) refer a lot of staff unecessarily due to "White coat syndrome" as they rush from the production line to be checked.

To get accurate readings involves not bathing, drinking alcohol or caffeine, smoking, excercising or eating for thirty minutes prior to a reading. Not taking readings when stressed. My GP also suggests resting for five minutes feet flat on the floor and avoiding shallow breathing. Can your firm afford someone the best part of an hour away from work to get a suitable reading?

Monitors are widely available my Omron M3 is the same model my GP uses. It does not require specialist cleaning, calibration or elaborate procedures just the occasional battery change.

From experience they do need to be used correctly to avoid artificially high readings - readings an hour after getting home from work are sigificantly lower than those when just walking through the door from rush hour traffic.

I appreciate your initiative for such a thing, being overrule the company management is not an easy task.

I hope that the monitor can help the employees to self-access their pressure on a daily basis.

I agree with AK and Kate above. How is this even an issue for the employer to get involved in?

If someone needs their blood pressure monitored, then they should source and pay for it themselves and manage using it and recording any information themselves. Or have they suggested their issue is compounded by the work they do (the new 'old chestnut')? In which case, get HR involved and look at how their tasks can be better managed to reduce stress.

I would take a very large step back from this and not get further involved. Tell your 'management' you do not work in the medical profession, it doesn't fall within the remit of OSH and advise to hand it over to HR to resolve.

Only my advice, other advice is available.

First step to becoming the general dogsbody.

Methinks some of you need to monitor your blood pressure before you bust a gut or something ha ha.

The factory I worked at after retiring from the brigade had a health department with two nurses and a visiting doctor.  If anyone needed anything medical they went to see one of them.

I have a personal blood pressure monitor at home and we all check our BP occasionally and as we get older the GP requests we check something like BP for a few days at certain times and send in the record.  All done by text message.

How long does that take?  How long is a piece of string but no more than 5 minutes.

Personally, I'd start by asking the manager if the employee concerned has provided a Fit Note with any restrictions on it.

If he hasn't, then he's Fit for Work, if he's fit for work, why does his manager want to know his blood pressure ?

I personally would be asking his manager to send him/her for an Occ Health Assessment, if you don't have in-house Occ Health, and then make the 'Reasonable Adjustments' based on an OH professional advice, not a managers whim.

If you do provide the employee with a  BP monitor, and the employee misses taking a reading, and suffers a medical event,  you've got liability written all over your company.

Finally,  Stay clear of this one, unless you're a registered Occ health practitioner employed by your company as such.

On commercial television yesterday was a health campaign advertising FREE free blood pressure checks as available from the local pharmacy - keep the finance director happy.

Originally Posted by: Kate

Are they only to use this monitor at work, and not when they are away from work?

If so, why?

If not, why would the company pay for it?

Hi Kate

Curiously, despite the advice of Health and Safety, HR has decided to overrule and supply it without any justification whatsover. 

I'm quite frankly flummoxed. 

For diabetics I would be more interested they were frequently monitoring their blood sugar levels rather than their blood pressure especially where there is possibility an attack could see them collapse.

As already mentioned workplace readings are not accurate when conducted under stress, in a hurry or after taking food, drink or medication.

Hi Hendlem

As has been said on these Forums, employers do do things that go beyond what might be legal requirements and I would take the view that this is a decision that HR have chosen to take.

You appear to have the paper trail to show that this is NOT a decision clearly taken on the grounds of 'elf and safety but a decision made by HR, so HR can own the issue.

If you wish, you could make a song and dance about why this monitor is likely to quite give misleading information, some of which ought to probably be medically confidential and nowt to do with the person's employer, let alone you in "H&S".

However, if I were you,  I would make sure you have the document trail available but otherwise step away. HR has made a decision to do the "nice thing to do" and they can deal with any adverse consequences that PROBABLY won't materialise.

....and there is nothing obvious to say that HR were prohibited from making the decision they have made, nor that such a decision is strongly advised against by any authoritative source of guidance.

If HR wish to get some support for their decision, then the obvious route would be an occupational medical practitioner who would probably point out why this device might produce some misleading results which might result in inappropriate management decisions, but e.g. suspending somebody from work supposedly on grounds of "H&S" would be a matter for consideration by an Employment Tribunal.

Organisations do all sorts of silly things and try to say these were for safety reasons. Sometimes their decisions come back to haunt them, but you have made your position clear, so time to walk away.

If nothing else, this thread highlights the difficulties that can arise when H&S people are asked to get involved in medical issues that are outside their competency, and the also the folly of trying to advise on these matters without knowing the full story behind why a medical decision was made.