pregnant and dangerous job, please help!

Sambucus_Nigra

Feisty_Fairy wrote: »

FOR GODS SAKE its a smilie!:eek: Now i have looked i realise it says cool when you hover over it which i didnt realise b4:o, i came on here for advice not to be abused, most people have been nice and offered advice and not been petty, i know of a saying which is very true, if you cant say anything nice then dont say anything at all!:mad:

I know of a saying as well; but I'll stick with the advice which was to work WITH your employer rather than against them....

DVardysShadow

SarEl wrote: »

The employer has to identify and address those risks which are foreseable.

Exactly what I said

SarEl wrote: »

The OP may be at risk of being abducted by aliens, but it is hardly a credible risk, nor one that the employer could control. As has been pointed out, there are always risks that cannot be foreseen or identified and it is thus utterly impossible to remove all risk - just those that can be identified.

The risk has already been identified: adults with learning disabilities and challenging behaviour. Never mind the aliens, the employer has to control the risk from adults with learning disabilities and challenging behaviour There is no wriggle room here on 'unidentified' risks.

Feisty_Fairy

MrsE wrote: »

So can no-one use the office then?

Yes anyone can use the office, the difference is the others are able to use their physical restraint training, i am not.

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?

Yes i would but they are insisting they cant!:o

Feisty_Fairy

dpassmore wrote: »

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.



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.

The office is tiny as this is a house rather than a purpose built building, so there is a door to get in obviously but its a very small space and if a client was to come in there wouldnt be much room to get round them, also if one particular client wants to get to you he has been known to rip doors off the frames to get to you!:eek:

Feisty_Fairy

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

I know of a saying as well; but I'll stick with the advice which was to work WITH your employer rather than against them....

I AM working with them but dont know what else i can do, i am not willing to sign what i see as a disclaimer saying that i am aware of the risks and wish to remain there! I have suggested other things for me to do but everything i have suggested they have said no to! What more can i do?

Person_one

MrsE wrote: »

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?

What you would do doesn't remotely help the OP as her employers aren't giving her that option.

mumps

I am a Personnel Manager in a company that sounds similar to yours. We are probably more flexible as we have more houses.

When a member of staff tells me they are pregnant our H & S Manager does a risk assessment, he is NEBOSH qualified, I then have a meeting with staff member and their house manager. We look at the risk assessment and discuss the points, if continuing in that house isn't possible we look at alternatives . At the end of the meeting we take the risk assessment and minutes of our meeting and if we are all in agreement on the way forward we all sign the minutes and set a date in one month for a review. If we cant agree we would suspend the member of staff and look for alternatives and then go through the process again. This has never happened, we have always been able to work with the risk assessment. The stumbling block is normally a staff member who doesn't want to move or accepts they will need to move but want to wait. After talking through the issues they have always accepted the risk assessment. I haven't had any staff who were too worried to work, in fact I have had to persuade someone to go home as they were in late pregnancy and showing signs of early labour (they were in labour) and service users and other staff weren't comfortable with the situation.

I will also listen to pregnant staff members needs, change of house so they don't need to get a bus to work when suffering morning sickness is one that has come up and we have been able to arrange. Reducing hours when mom to be is at a difficult stage. We very much work together on finding best solutions.

I do understand OPs view of risk assessments, although someone may be an expert in the field there is always the knowledge of the service users which an outsider won't know. Although we set a date to review situation I would expect manager and staff member to monitor the situation and let me know if things were a bit edgy in their house so staff member could be replaced until things calm down. In my organisation the staff are brilliant at reading service users and will often contact me to say they think they will need support later as they can predict situations.

Having said that I always breathe a sigh of relief when maternity leave starts and I know mom and baby aren't my worry any more, not that I don't care but I don't want any of them to get hurt.

I don't think that is going to help the OP, just thought you might want to know what other organisations do.

dickydonkin

It is apparent that foreseeable risks have been identified.

Actually what are the recommendations and control measures?

mumps

dpassmore wrote: »

It is apparent that foreseeable risks have been identified.

Actually what are the recommendations and control measures?

Is that for me or OP?

Googlewhacker

dpassmore wrote: »

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.

So its not illegal then to ask them to sign it? Just shouldn't ask them under duress or force them?