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
Curious1  
#1 Posted : 16 August 2021 09:23:20(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Curious1

One of our operatives has told us they cannot wear safety footwear due to their foot being swollen , (not work related) and has been getting ice treated over the weekend.

Do we send them home because it is against company and client policy not to wear safety footwear on site ?

No alternative tasks can be found for them not requiring safety footwear.

Kate  
#2 Posted : 16 August 2021 09:49:40(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

If it would be safe for them not to wear the safety footwear, why wouldn't it be safe for everyone else not to wear it either?

thanks 1 user thanked Kate for this useful post.
Curious1 on 24/08/2021(UTC)
Blackburn31728  
#3 Posted : 16 August 2021 10:24:02(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Blackburn31728

He goes home as risks still there for footwear

thanks 1 user thanked Blackburn31728 for this useful post.
Curious1 on 24/08/2021(UTC)
CptBeaky  
#4 Posted : 16 August 2021 11:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
CptBeaky

Health and saftey law only gives one exemption for not following PPE rules that I am aware of, and that is for "turban wearing sikhs" and safety helmets. If they cannot wear PPE for any other reason then they should not be allowed to work. This does not have to be time paid, unlike other suspensions.

thanks 1 user thanked CptBeaky for this useful post.
Curious1 on 24/08/2021(UTC)
Kate  
#5 Posted : 16 August 2021 13:36:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

In this case the inability to wear the PPE required for the job is a temporary one due to an injury acquired outside work. If they cannot work for this reason then they should be off sick, and what pay they might receive will depend on company sick pay policy and statutory sick pay requirements.

thanks 1 user thanked Kate for this useful post.
Curious1 on 24/08/2021(UTC)
firesafety101  
#6 Posted : 16 August 2021 13:39:50(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

No Hat, No Boots, No Job.

Tough.

thanks 1 user thanked firesafety101 for this useful post.
Curious1 on 24/08/2021(UTC)
peter gotch  
#7 Posted : 16 August 2021 14:01:35(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Curious

Are the company and client policies "necessary"?

If CDM applies then "site rules" is a defined term....

“site rules” means rules which are drawn up for a particular construction site and are necessary for health or safety purposes;

Plenty of contractors and their clients adopt blanket rules which are sometimes far beyond the "necessary".

Is there scope for both your company and your client to review whether the work actually requires safety boots?

....which will require assessment of what those boots are intended to protect against - are you looking at e.g.

(a) dropped objects - so are effective measure in place to stop this happening rather than rely on Personal Proective Equipment (PPE)?

(b) penetrating objects - so are the measures in place to ensure that nails etc are NOT sticking out of the ground, rather than rely on.....?

(c) ankle protection - so is the ground firm and stable, and people are unlikely to trip, rather than rely on....?

I am not going to suggest that it is easy to get a client to flex on their "golden rules" but some are ill thought out. 

So, as example, there could be a rule that everyone has to wear a helmet anywhere on site. So, instead of telling the roofer that once there is nothing above them to fall they can take off their helmet, the blanket rule is applied.

Some will then point out that the roofer could fall and bang their head but their helmet is unlikely to be designed to protect against such an incident. In general a helmet (except for the rare ones that provide lateral protection) is designed to protect against falling objects - despite research indicating that well over half of head injuries in construction arise from other sources of danger!

Once you establish that the site rule is in fact necessary, then there is no legal opt out as your worker cannot contract out of the criminal legal responsibilities placed on them and others.

thanks 2 users thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
Curious1 on 24/08/2021(UTC), Paul S12 on 21/01/2022(UTC)
Pirellipete  
#8 Posted : 21 January 2022 16:24:41(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Pirellipete

PPE should be appropriate for the Task

What job are they doing ?

TBRA might help,

It's very easy to say NO,  then you don't have to do anything else, where, on a Risk Based Approach, the persons work might not need Safety Boots....

But then of course you'd have to review all your RAMS and PPE requirements, which is why most places have blanket rules

thanks 1 user thanked Pirellipete for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 21/01/2022(UTC)
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.