Ppe

scooby088

This may have been on here before but who is responsible for PPE is it the employer or the employee?

The reason I ask is that many jobs which are advertised ask for prospective employees have their own PPE.

dickydonkin

Employer - absolutely!

Refer to section 9 of the Health & Safety at Work Act.

I suspect that you are referring to agencies who require candidates to supply their own PPE.

It makes no difference - the employee should never have to pay for PPE - or anything else for that relates to health & safety.

Takeaway_Addict

dickydonkin wrote: »

Employer - absolutely!

Refer to section 9 of the Health & Safety at Work Act.

I suspect that you are referring to agencies who require candidates to supply their own PPE.

It makes no difference - the employee should never have to pay for PPE - or anything else for that relates to health & safety.

Quite, though if the employer requests it those that have it will be more likely to get the job I guess.

Saves the employer some money at least!

dickydonkin

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Quite, though if the employer requests it those that have it will be more likely to get the job I guess.

Saves the employer some money at least!

I reckon you are correct.

Some get confused in respect of the issue of agencies providing PPE (many may argue that some agencies have 'selective confusion') mainly in respect of who is actually the 'employer'.

The HSE however, has stated its opinion in relation to the charging of PPE where agency workers are involved:

“A temporary worker in an explicit or implied employment relationship with either an agency, a user business, or both, may not be charged for personal protective equipment provided to meet health and safety requirements, whether by the employment business or client hirer. Nor may a refundable deposit be charged against non-return of the equipment. However, it will be lawful to make a deduction from final wages if the equipment is not returned on termination of the employment for which it was issued, provided this is made clear in the contract with the worker.”

Source HSE/Croner

My experience is that most reputable companies (clients) who use employment agencies to supply workers will provide a candidate with the appropriate PPE.

In my opinion, this is in the best interest of the duty holder of the business as they can ensure the correct equipment is supplied, maintained and of the required quality and is suitable for the tasks involved.

They are after all responsible for the safety of agency workers when on their premises using their plant and equipment and issuing appropriate PPE and training on how to use it puts them in control of the situation.

If left to the agency to supply safety equipment, it may be tempting to offer the cheapest and nastiest available.

Not that an agency would do that of course!

scooby088

I asked the question to an agency at a group interview and said will you be providing PPE you can guess that went down like a lead balloon. Now I know why I wasn't offered a position.

paddyrg

I suggest it's worth getting your own PPE anyway - then you can make sure you're buying good stuff not the cheapo uncomfy stuff any agency might get. It's VAT-free, so you can get comfy steel toecap boots for £20-odd (ideally with sole protection too, so you can jump up and down on nails!). Hi-Viz waistcoats can be as little as a quid, but spend a bit more and you can get completely winterproof hi-viz coats for under a score, or at least a hi-vis waistcoat which separates if snagged (essential for rail industry). Hard-hats vary in comfort and protection, from bump caps to climbing/rigger helmets to just plain hard hats in all colours. Again, you can get a real, rated one for under a fiver.

So, PPE is cheap enough to make sure you get the best rather than hobble round on achey cardboard shoes with an uncomfy and overspec (or underspec) hard-hat and a hi-viz jacket which doesn't break away if caught in plant. I'd suggest getting your own so you're always match-fit and able to turn up on site on your first day ready to go, not turned away because they haven't got spare PPE in your size.

ohreally

paddyrg wrote: »

not turned away because they haven't got spare PPE in your size.

What do you mean by spare ppe?

dickydonkin

paddyrg wrote: »

I suggest it's worth getting your own PPE anyway - then you can make sure you're buying good stuff not the cheapo uncomfy stuff any agency might get. It's VAT-free, so you can get comfy steel toecap boots for £20-odd (ideally with sole protection too, so you can jump up and down on nails!). Hi-Viz waistcoats can be as little as a quid, but spend a bit more and you can get completely winterproof hi-viz coats for under a score, or at least a hi-vis waistcoat which separates if snagged (essential for rail industry). Hard-hats vary in comfort and protection, from bump caps to climbing/rigger helmets to just plain hard hats in all colours. Again, you can get a real, rated one for under a fiver.

So, PPE is cheap enough to make sure you get the best rather than hobble round on achey cardboard shoes with an uncomfy and overspec (or underspec) hard-hat and a hi-viz jacket which doesn't break away if caught in plant. I'd suggest getting your own so you're always match-fit and able to turn up on site on your first day ready to go, not turned away because they haven't got spare PPE in your size.

I fail to find the connection - Cheap and Best???

It's a fact that there are many imported items of PPE on the market that will very likely display a CE mark and supposedly conform to BS/EN standards - the reality is that some of these items are imported from China and are of poor quality - in effect - Fake!

See this

It is cheap for a reason - as the old adage goes, you get what you pay for.

Supplying your own PPE is something I would not condone.

For example, in a noisy workplace, I would have to assess the environment and then if any excessive noise could not be 'engineered out', I would ensure that any ear protection had the correct attenuation value (noise reducing capability at the ear)to ensure that the user was not placed at risk of noise induced hearing loss.

I had a situation where many workers found the defenders available were uncomfortable, so I ensured they had a choice.

The majority found a suitable brand that were legally compliant and fit for the environment they were being used and everyone was happy.

Staff bringing in their own ear defenders that may not be fit for purpose is a real possibility. The type you sometimes get in an airline amenity pack may be comfortable and reduce background noise on a plane - they would be totally unsuitable for a heavy engineering environment where noise was an issue.

The same goes for foot protection. You have to assess what the user may be potentially exposed to and base what type of PPE will be suitable.

I have seen workers using totally unsuitable dust masks (B&Q cheapos) to 'protect' them from vapours/fumes from chemicals.

Allowing staff to use/purchase their own PPE would set a dangerous precedent IMO.

I would strongly advise people not to use their own PPE - not only does it place them at risk, but the employer may also be on a sticky wicket if he does not provide suitable PPE and in a worse case scenario, may render any personal injury claim null and void if failure/inappropriate PPE was a contributory factor in any accident - and it would go without saying the HSE would take a very dim view as well.

Takeaway_Addict

dickydonkin wrote: »

I fail to find the connection - Cheap and Best???

It's a fact that there are many imported items of PPE on the market that will very likely display a CE mark and supposedly conform to BS/EN standards - the reality is that some of these items are imported from China and are of poor quality - in effect - Fake!

See this

It is cheap for a reason - as the old adage goes, you get what you pay for.

Supplying your own PPE is something I would not condone.

For example, in a noisy workplace, I would have to assess the environment and then if any excessive noise could not be 'engineered out', I would ensure that any ear protection had the correct attenuation value (noise reducing capability at the ear)to ensure that the user was not placed at risk of noise induced hearing loss.

I had a situation where many workers found the defenders available were uncomfortable, so I ensured they had a choice.

The majority found a suitable brand that were legally compliant and fit for the environment they were being used and everyone was happy.

Staff bringing in their own ear defenders that may not be fit for purpose is a real possibility. The type you sometimes get in an airline amenity pack may be comfortable and reduce background noise on a plane - they would be totally unsuitable for a heavy engineering environment where noise was an issue.

The same goes for foot protection. You have to assess what the user may be potentially exposed to and base what type of PPE will be suitable.

I have seen workers using totally unsuitable dust masks (B&Q cheapos) to 'protect' them from vapours/fumes from chemicals.

Allowing staff to use/purchase their own PPE would set a dangerous precedent IMO.

I would strongly advise people not to use their own PPE - not only does it place them at risk, but the employer may also be on a sticky wicket if he does not provide suitable PPE and in a worse case scenario, may render any personal injury claim null and void if failure/inappropriate PPE was a contributory factor in any accident - and it would go without saying the HSE would take a very dim view as well.

He didn't say cheap, he said cheap enough. To me it read that you can buy adequate PPE at a good price.

dickydonkin

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

He didn't say cheap, he said cheap enough. To me it read that you can buy adequate PPE at a good price.

Cheap - Cheap enough??? What's the difference?

Sure, you can buy reasonably priced Hi Viz jackets, safety gloves etc, however, my concern would be is that people may buy safety footwear, eye/ear protection etc assuming they may offer enough protection for the hazards they may encounter during the course of their work.

As the last line of defence in safety controls - I would prefer good quality kit to stop me from getting hurt as opposed to some low grade product sold in a discount store.

But why should employees be buying their own protective workwear anyway?The law is quite clear - employees should not be buying their own PPE and by doing so may place themselves at risk.

I'm sure many employers are quite happy for their workers to pay for their own PPE - until something goes belly up.

ValHaller

dickydonkin wrote: »

Cheap - Cheap enough??? What's the difference?

I think you are reading a little too much into this, although your concerns are entirely understandable.

Paddy is saying that the best PPE for the job is cheap enough, that you should not let the cost dictate an inferior choice.

You can't argue with that.

As for the CE mark, you are aware that there are 2 CE marks of very similar appearance but very different meaning?

• The genuine CE mark meaning Conformit! Europ!enne which indicates compliance with European Safety Legislation
• The entirely disingenuous and IMO fraudulent Chinese Export mark

Section 11 of the wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CE_marking explains