Anxiety and Stress at work

shikoku

At the end of the day both HR and OH are there to do their masters' bidding, and in my experience they will do whatever is 'required' of them.

I only have one observation to make and it is this.

If at any time your wife feels that a meeting with either would aggravate her condition further - I have been there myself so I know exactly how this plays out - then she should advise them in writing that she is not well enough to attend.

The only real solution to this is to leave, unless an early recovery is expected. Otherwise by the time she finds herself needing to look for another job she will be in no fit state to do so. I speak from horrible experience.

Best of luck with this, but be ready for lies and underhand behaviour from people you previously trusted.

Uncertain

shikoku wrote: »

At the end of the day both HR and OH are there to do their masters' bidding, and in my experience they will do whatever is 'required' of them.

I only have one observation to make and it is this.

If at any time your wife feels that a meeting with either would aggravate her condition further - I have been there myself so I know exactly how this plays out - then she should advise them in writing that she is not well enough to attend.

The only real solution to this is to leave, unless an early recovery is expected. Otherwise by the time she finds herself needing to look for another job she will be in no fit state to do so. I speak from horrible experience.

Best of luck with this, but be ready for lies and underhand behaviour from people you previously trusted.

I agree 100% about HR!

With Occupational Health it depends on the setup. In my earlier post I suggested only considering to see an OH doctor of consultant level, not some nurse who is full time on the payroll.

A doctor has a very clear legal duty to act in the best interest of the patient at all times. Most have the integrity to stick to this regardless of who is paying them. However, if it can be shown that they have done otherwise then a complaint to the GMC is in order as they can get into very serious trouble.

I agree that she should not allow herself to be harassed by HR and I found the best thing was to gently take the initiative rather than respond.

dickydonkin

At the end of the day both HR and OH are there to do their masters' bidding, and in my experience they will do whatever is 'required' of them.

But at 'the beginning of the day' the company had a legal and moral duty of care to prevent illness and injury and I totally disagree with the suggestion that 'the only solution is to leave' - however, that would be up to the discretion of the affected individual, but let's not forget that potentially, that person may not be in any fit state to make this decision.

Many people who have psychological issues may believe suicide is the only way out of their problems - are they right? Of course they are not but their condition potentially allows them to believe that to be so.

Another aspect which is being overlooked here is that this is a workplace related illness and there are discussions on this thread as to how to deal with the consequences of the problem with very little opinion relating to the cause.

Sure, the employer has a duty of care to deal with the 'injury' of the affected person, but it would seem that such a duty of care was found lacking prior to her illness due to the lack of assessment of the duties the OP's wife had to carry out which likely resulted in her condition.

Like most injuries and illness, prevention is better than cure and one of the legal requirements of preventing injury and illness in the workplace is by undertaking a risk assessment.

As I indicated in an earlier post, many such risk assessments are started by questionnaires that are distributed to staff and the results are a basis to identify where a problem may or could exist in the future.

Here is a guide for MANAGERS to ensure he/she meets with the HSE's Management Standards approach to preventing stress in the workplace. http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg430.pdf

Here is a MANAGERS check list which ensures he/she has carried out a suitable risk assessment http://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/pdfs/checklist.pdf

Can the OP'S wife be now convinced the company have done everything to PREVENT her illness?

Best of luck with this, but be ready for lies and underhand behaviour from people you previously trusted.

Bit of an unfair statement, although I am not disputing that this was the case on an individual basis, however, to suggest that every case is the same is unwarranted.

If you are referring to HR personnel however, then that statement may have an element of truth about it. I have learned that you never trust these people - only tell them what you need to be carried into the higher echelons of the company - and make no mistake - it will. I can tell some horror stories about the supposed confidentiality of HR staff - but not for these forums.

In many of my postings I have shown disdain for HR people based on my experiences as a workers representative and no doubt the feeling would be reciprocal!

I have found that many HR people (but not all) do indeed 'do their masters bidding', however, these were the easiest people to deal with because on many many occasions, they knew and I knew that the master was sometimes legally and morally wrong which only strengthened the representatives argument.

Certainly in one of my former workplaces, the HR person had to perform their duties with one hand tied behind their back and the other tied with string directly to the MD'S office and although I have to state I did feel sorry for this person, it did make my colleagues disputes much easier to resolve.

loopy_lass

as mentioned above, worth a read, http://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/index.htm

I am in same situation, just back to work this week, seeing OH etc. but i am claiming DDA, so they have to be more flexible, so if i find some days i cannot cope with a full day i ask to be moved or go home early. Under DDA they have agreed to this till i feel well enough to stay for full time.

I would definately not leave, the OP may soon get better, may be placed in another department etc. Employers do have a duty of care but i think as employees we also have a duty to ourselves to get better if possible.

i would go see OH you may be surprised, if it isnt to your liking then say so, pick out the bits you feel comfortable with and leave the rest, for sure you will feel better once your back in work, full time, part time or gradual return.

http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=815



hope all is well soon.

loops

Marmaris08

1st of all, a huge thank you to everyone who replied with fantastic and helpful advice, it's very much appreciated.

I will post up all the details of my wife's meeting with OH, her manager and HR when I have more time, but I am glad to say that everything went really well. The OH were fantastic and agreed that at this stage she is no where near fit enough for work. She even critizised the way HR and her manager have handled the situation, this was all put in her report.

A huge thank you to everyone again.:T:T:T

paulofessex

Thats great news, bet your wife will no doubt sleep that bit easier tonight

Debt_Free_Chick

ACAS are great at advising employees on their rights, but they also advise employers on how to "manage situations" within the law.

You may find it useful to read the ACAS guidance on managing absence as it ought to equip you/your wife with details of what is considered to be "good employer practice", including the process for dismissal due to incapacity.

I find it useful to know what the other side is required to do as well as what they might do next!

dickydonkin

ACAS are great at advising employees on their rights, but they also advise employers on how to "manage situations" within the law.

find it useful to know what the other side is required to do as well as what they might do next!

Well hopefully, ACAS will have advised the company that they should have prevented the illness in the first place which is their moral and legal obligation.

The company may indeed now attempt damage limitation, however, the OH persons damning report will certainly not help the company.

I find it useful to know what the other side is required to do as well as what they might do next!

I would suggest consulting a manual on how to tread on eggshells!

jdturk

dpassmore wrote: »

Well hopefully, ACAS will have advised the company that they should have prevented the illness in the first place which is their moral and legal obligation.

The company may indeed now attempt damage limitation, however, the OH persons damning report will certainly not help the company.


I would suggest consulting a manual on how to tread on eggshells!

The problem is for something like stress/anxiety etc you cannot account for everything and some people react badly to situations and some people suddenly start getting mental health.

So whilst there is a Moral and Legal obligation it is impractical to try and account for everything (however the obvious they should!)

dickydonkin

jdturk wrote: »

The problem is for something like stress/anxiety etc you cannot account for everything and some people react badly to situations and some people suddenly start getting mental health.

So whilst there is a Moral and Legal obligation it is impractical to try and account for everything (however the obvious they should!)

Which is absolutely true of course and we all have our own way of dealing with situations, however, as you alluded to, some people react differently to others with stress being a potential outcome to certain people.

When this situation arises, the question that has to be asked is whether this illness was a foreseeble outcome due to organisational and/or other factors withinin the workplace.

It is arguably easier to foresee risks in the workplace such as unguarded machinery, unsafe scaffolding, contaminated floors etc.

It would also be easy to foresee that someone who is very frail and carrying out repetetive heavy lifting work that there is a likely risk of musculoskeletal injury. One of the obvious factors determining this would be the physical attributes of that person (or lack of them in this case) and the demanding work required.

Furthermore, where a person who is performing duties above their physical capabilities, physical injuries and pain will be key indicators there is a problem, although, a manual handling assessment should have been carried out that may have determined that the person was not physically capable.

It can be difficult however to ascertain how a person is coping psychologically with their workload as there are no immediate visual indications.
Psychological issues such as stress do have symptoms, however, these are not usually recognised until it is too late and many people (including the affected person) may not be aware there is a problem until it is too late. That is why I am of the opinion that stress awareness should be as much a part of Health & Safety training as fire, manual handling etc.

Unfortunately, stress in the workplace is not risk assessed as frequently as it should be. As I mentioned in an earlier post, it is relatively easy to do and the time and effort it takes will in the majority of cases be cost effective - not only by warding off compensation claims, but it is also a legal requirement.

Have you seen some of the compensation payouts for work related stress and its consequenses?

Until companies realise they have to attempt to prevent stress in the workplace and treat it the same as fire prevention and other physical injuries, they are leaving themselves liable to litigation, but worse, is the suffering of the worker and their families.

I am of the opinion it will get worse as the economic climate is resulting in companies increasing workloads on employees as redundancies are requiring the need for roles to be merged.

Browsing through the employment and redundancy threads on this forum just compounds that view.

Sorry for going on a bit, but people getting illnesses and injuries at work just gets to me.