Rank: Forum user 
|
Morning all, I have a group of operative whos are refusing to give blood for lead in blood testing. All operatives are aware of the need for this testing but this group have refused due to not liking needles (who does?).
These are low risk opertatives however we've not tested them for a number of years. Last time the tests were done they were done on urine. The probelm with this is urine test is organic lead which is not what we need to test for.
I have advised that the team should have the blood and the reasone why to the management team and left it with them to decide. Has anyone got operatives to complete a refusal form?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Refusal form? I "insert name" have had the purposes and benefits of biologcal monitoring for "insert susbtance" explained by my employer representative "insert name (and position)" on "insert date (and time)" at "insert venue" and have chosen not to participate with the testing being provided to support the employers actions in Controlling Substances Hazardous to Health. Not sure that would pass muster with an HSE inspector otherwise we could have a raft of cop out documents for every piece of inconveneint legislation with a cost. Is there one of the team you can convince to be tested? If your work is "low risk" an exemplar could be used to argue excessive testing is not cost effective because other controls are mitigating the risk. Also check the work being conducted is actually covered by the definition.
https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/l132.htm the lead form must be either inhalable (dust, vapour or fumes), ingestible (powder, dust, paint or paste) or skin absorbable (alkyls or naphthenate)
|
 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Refusal form? I "insert name" have had the purposes and benefits of biologcal monitoring for "insert susbtance" explained by my employer representative "insert name (and position)" on "insert date (and time)" at "insert venue" and have chosen not to participate with the testing being provided to support the employers actions in Controlling Substances Hazardous to Health. Not sure that would pass muster with an HSE inspector otherwise we could have a raft of cop out documents for every piece of inconveneint legislation with a cost. Is there one of the team you can convince to be tested? If your work is "low risk" an exemplar could be used to argue excessive testing is not cost effective because other controls are mitigating the risk. Also check the work being conducted is actually covered by the definition.
https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/l132.htm the lead form must be either inhalable (dust, vapour or fumes), ingestible (powder, dust, paint or paste) or skin absorbable (alkyls or naphthenate)
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Thanks for the reply R. All have them have historically refused bloods and they have been allowed to do so. The refusal form was a suggestion but the comment was that it would evidence that we have tried but failed to get them done due to their refusal. None of them will volunteer to be tested, as I said because they have not been "forced" (for want of a better word) previosly this gives them the get out of it now scinario and has allowed them to have urine testing. We have solid and ihalable lead, they are not direct lead workers so no anual testing is required but my concern is that they have not been tested correctly before and it has been a number of year since they were tested. You would think that for their own peace of mind they would want to be tested but there is an outright refusal to do so. So I'm a bit stuck, but is this a battle I should fight or because they are low risk just leave as is????
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Push it back at management - "find an examplar volunteer or send them all". There are very few people truly phobic of needles.
As children they will have had jabs and recently we were all being turned in to pin cushions thanks to Covid. If they were off on holiday to some "exotic" location they would be queueing up for their jabs - even Paris has dengue fever! https://www.nhs.uk/vaccinations/nhs-vaccinations-and-when-to-have-them/
I know HR will hate this comment but pick on someone older and/or with health issues who will trigger various innoculations based ontheir age or underlying health.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Push it back at management - "find an examplar volunteer or send them all". There are very few people truly phobic of needles.
As children they will have had jabs and recently we were all being turned in to pin cushions thanks to Covid. If they were off on holiday to some "exotic" location they would be queueing up for their jabs - even Paris has dengue fever! https://www.nhs.uk/vaccinations/nhs-vaccinations-and-when-to-have-them/
I know HR will hate this comment but pick on someone older and/or with health issues who will trigger various innoculations based ontheir age or underlying health.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hi Thunderchild I suppose the question is whether you have all the other ducks in a row. Thence giving you confidence as to whether exposure of ANY of the workforce to lead is "significant" via any of the ways that that adjective is defined in the Regulations. If you are REALLY and JUSTIFIABLY confident that exposure is NOT "significant", then this is probably not a battle worth pursuing. I think I would be spending more time looking at the adequacy of your controls and environmental/personal sampling before worrying too much about a need to decide on whether blood sampling should be enforced. I would note that there are probably only a fraction of workers who SHOULD be subject to medical surveillance for lead exposure who are actually subject to such surveillance. A study of demolition and scrapyard workers in California in the 1980s concluded that over 60% of the workers had substantially elevated lead in blood levels, yet decades later when I checked the HSE website the number of workers in such sectors in GB identified as being subject to medical surveillance was tiny.
|
1 user thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Interesting Peter. I don't think we monitor the maintenance team to actually check their exposure. It is one way of deciding there actual risk. I will look into it as an option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Maintenance team is often a good choice as they will be working without the process controls afforded to other operatives. In another employment when we started working with a new substance subject to monitoring we chose the maintenance staff for the initial monitoring as they were involved in stripping and cleaning the plant being used.
On the basis their tests were coming back negative we used this as justification not to test the full workforce.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Maintenance team is often a good choice as they will be working without the process controls afforded to other operatives. In another employment when we started working with a new substance subject to monitoring we chose the maintenance staff for the initial monitoring as they were involved in stripping and cleaning the plant being used.
On the basis their tests were coming back negative we used this as justification not to test the full workforce.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Roundtoit, Oh we defo know we have other ops that must be tested, they understand that and its not a problem. The probelms I have is a team that has not had the correct type of testing to start with, they have never actually been monitored so the risk is just assummed (I am pretty sure its low but I myself would like proof of that) and they are totally pandered to. I am going to suggest that we do air monitoring on them to prove the assumtions being made.....or not! sorry for any spelling mestakes, spelling is not my strong point!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.