pregnant and dangerous job, please help!

Feisty_Fairy

Hi again all,

I need to clarify something here, its seems that my original post was unclear:o, when i told my boss i was pregnant, i knew that previously pregnant women have been moved to the other house, i did initially say i would like to if possible stay where i am, i also said that i know that may not be possible. BUT they also did say that moving me wasnt an option because the house doesnt have the available hours there for me to fill, (they dont have a position) so i would have to stay where i am, there was mention of looking into travelling for 2 hours each way to do some office work at head Office, but the company said no as it was not cost effective. So i HAVE NEVER declined anything offered as i havent been offered anything.

I know i would be impossible to remove ALL risks but feel me being a 3rd member of staff with 3 clients inevitably means i am at risk, my boss did at one stage mention having a 4th staff member on duty so that more risks were reduced but i assume the company said no, it would actually cost them less to suspend me than to have an extra staff member!

I am going to make an appt to see someone at CAB on monday and a friend has put me in touch with a union rep who says that the company are already acting illegally by asking me to sign a risk assessment.:eek:

Thanks all for all your replies and sorry for the confusion.:o

Regards

Feisty

Googlewhacker

can someone explain why it is illegal for someone to sign a risk assessment form?

thanks

Morty_007

Feisty_Fairy wrote: »

Hi again all,

it would actually cost them less to suspend me than to have an extra staff member!

Feisty

This confuses me...if you aren't there they will have to backfill your post with someone anyway so you might as well be there with the 4th person too...

Can you not see if there is someone/ a couple of people in a different house who could swap hours with you for your pregnancy? Its worth asking. wont cost the company any more money at all then...

Feisty_Fairy

Morty_007 wrote: »

This confuses me...if you aren't there they will have to backfill your post with someone anyway so you might as well be there with the 4th person too...

Apparently for them to get a 4th person it would mean a full time position as im the only part time member of staff, so they would need to make it worthwhile for the other person.

Can you not see if there is someone/ a couple of people in a different house who could swap hours with you for your pregnancy? Its worth asking. wont cost the company any more money at all then...

They have already looked into this and there is no way of changing things around, there is already a pregnant lady in the other house and some staff who simply cannot work in the house where i am for numerous reasons.

dickydonkin

Googlewhacker wrote: »

can someone explain why it is illegal for someone to sign a risk assessment form?

thanks

As I alluded to in my earlier post, it seems strange to ask someone (other than the person carrying out the assessment) to sign a risk assessment form, however, it can make sense for someone who has been given a risk assessment and its content explained to sign a register to confirm that they have received a copy and understands the content.

This ensures that the hazards and risks that are inherent to a process or task and the control measures in place have been fully explained - this is a legal requirement and is usually covered in the induction and/or training process.

Many employers carry out a risk assessment (and believe they are legally compliant) and shove the document in a file and store it in a cupboard - often without the employees ever seeing it - quite pointless really - the only exception to having a risk assessment recorded is if there are 5 employees or less.

The only signature(s) that should be on the document is the person or people who have undertaken or been involved with the assessment, the date it was carried out and an explanation of the circumstances that the assessment may need to be reviewed.

As I also mentioned earlier, I fail to see that by asking an employee to sign a risk assessment as a means of attempting to deflect any liability to the organisation should anything go awry is a wise thing to do - blatantly stupid in my opinion.

This leads me wonder about the competence or advice the organisation is receiving and is quite worrying to be honest.

Following a risk assessment, a safe system of work should also be implemented - I suspect that this has not been considered.

This action is like buying car with no brakes and the dealer asks you to sign a document that informs you of the dodgy situation and you 'accept' the vehicle in its dangerous condition but still decide to drive it.

Signing the 'disclaimer' will not prevent an accident and will not prevent prosecution for the dealer OR THE DRIVER as statute law has been broken.

Something to remember for the OP as well - she has a duty of care to herself and others and by working in an environment where she is KNOWINGLY placing herself at risk can not only lead to prosecution for the organisation, but potentially she could also be liable.

Why anyone would want to disregard the significant findings of a risk assessment is beyond me - particularly when pregnancy is involved - irrespective of any financial implications.

Person_one

Feisty_Fairy wrote: »

PLEASE can i make something very clear, i HAVE NOT been offered an alternative position and so i HAVE NOT declined anything offered!:(

Feisty, I completely understood this from your initial post and was just as confused as you as to why people were assuming something different.

MrsE_2

Feisty_Fairy wrote: »

They have already looked into this and there is no way of changing things around, there is already a pregnant lady in the other house and some staff who simply cannot work in the house where i am for numerous reasons.

Faced with paying you for doing nothing (gardening leave) I'm fairly sure they will find you "something" to do.
If it was my business I would. Its unlikely they will pay you 9 months + maternity leave if there is any possible way around it.
They might insist you do paperwork behind the scenes, or insist you work in the less challenging house & I know you say there is already a pregnant woman there but she doesn't work 24/7 does she.

Feisty_Fairy

MrsE wrote: »

Faced with paying you for doing nothing (gardening leave) I'm fairly sure they will find you "something" to do.
If it was my business I would. Its unlikely they will pay you 9 months + maternity leave if there is any possible way around it.
They might insist you do paperwork behind the scenes, or insist you work in the less challenging house & I know you say there is already a pregnant woman there but she doesn't work 24/7 does she.

Thanks for your reply, yes i know they will try to find me something, and they have tried but they cant, i cannot work in the other house because of my hours (i work 9 till 3), the other house have no use for my hours apparently and it wouldnt fit in with their needs. There is no way of me doing paperwork either as this would mean doing it in the office in the house with no escape route, therefore they see it as a bigger risk.

MrsE_2

Feisty_Fairy wrote: »

Thanks for your reply, yes i know they will try to find me something, and they have tried but they cant, i cannot work in the other house because of my hours (i work 9 till 3), the other house have no use for my hours apparently and it wouldnt fit in with their needs. There is no way of me doing paperwork either as this would mean doing it in the office in the house with no escape route, therefore they see it as a bigger risk.

So can no-one use the office then?

The other house may not "need" you from 9-3, but if it were my business & I was faced with paying you to sit at home or have you in the other house as a spare (to cover people sick/holiday) or just doing odd bits, or just extra staff, thats where I would put you.

Wouldn't you?

dickydonkin

MrsE wrote: »

Faced with paying you for doing nothing (gardening leave) I'm fairly sure they will find you "something" to do.
If it was my business I would. Its unlikely they will pay you 9 months + maternity leave if there is any possible way around it.
They might insist you do paperwork behind the scenes, or insist you work in the less challenging house & I know you say there is already a pregnant woman there but she doesn't work 24/7 does she.

I agree - but one thing I missed in my other posts is that if there is a risk of injury in a workplace -the hours worked in that environment may not necessarily reduce the likelihood of harm.

Of course the hours worked determines the time one is exposed, however, where the risk is unpredictable (such as in this case) it is possible to get hurt in the first minute of a shift or indeed the last.

There is no way of me doing paperwork either as this would mean doing it in the office in the house with no escape route, therefore they see it as a bigger risk.

No escape route? then how do you get into the office?

If there are issues with escape routes - then this should be adressed for ALL of the employees - not just pregnant staff.