Lack of safety clothing at work.. suggestions please

xxdeebeexx

Hi, I need some advice on how best to deal with a tricky situation.

My son, who is 18, has a little part time job at a supermarket.

He usually stacks the shelves and deals with reductions.
However, this evening he was asked to off load a lorry using a hand pallet truck.

My concern is that he has had no training to use this equipment (I'm sure it's quite straight forward)
but more importantly he was not wearing safety boots or a high viz jacket.

I am pretty sure that this clothing would be highly recommended when using this type of equipment - am I right or is it ok to simply wear trainers?

If safety equipment is recommended what's the best to tackle the situation if he is asked to do it again?

He has only just turned 18 and hasn't always got the confidence to speak up for himself.

tia

dx

lollipopsarah

No way is he allowed to help without training and the appropriate clothing.
All training is recorded and signed by the staff member.
Gross misconduct from the shop as far as I am concerned.
Although It could be a one off I would suggest if he would like to venture into other departments it might be an idea to suggest that he asks for other on job training.
xx

Dovah_diva

Did he ask if they had any safety equipment he could borrow for the duration of the job? Did he explain that he'd not done that task before and could someone show him how to do it? Perhaps the person that asked him to do the job assumed he was wearing safety shoes, given that one can buy all types of safety shoes, including trainers.

Can he not get himself some safety boots and a high viz? I appreciate that the store should provide them, but is it not worth a few quid to potentially save his toes from injury?

peachyprice

Is this one of the big supermarkets?

He mustn't be using any equipment he has not been signed off for training on, full stop. It's not a simple case of someone showing him how to do it and letting him get on with it, he needs proper documented training before he can use a pump truck.

Also, it's not up to him to provide PPE, it is the legal requirement of the store to provide any that is necessary.

http://www.hse.gov.uk/contact/faqs/ppe.htm

I know he's only 18, but he really should have stood up for himself and refused to do this, if he'd have had an accident he wouldn't be covered by any insurance.

He needs to speak to the person above the one that told him to do the job and make it clear that he won't be doing it again without the appropriate training.

This is a serious mistake by the person who told him to do it, he/she has taken advantage of his lack of knowledge of the situation, he relaly needs to take this further.

Imp

We don't know the full story here, so no point in jumping to conclusions. PPE should be the last form of protection in a safe system of work. If the loading bay is set up so that vehicles and pedestrians are physically separated, then there is no need for high vis. If the risk of something falling on your toe is minimal, there is no need for safety boots.

Documenting training is purely for the protection of the employer, so they can put the blame for any accident on the employee. For simple tasks, there is no harm with being shown the correct way to do things and then being allowed to get on with it.

pollypenny

You don't have to drop much in order to break a toe! Trainers are not suitable for most jobs.

Health and safety regulations are there for a purpose , in spite of being much mocked.

He must speak to his supervisor.

peachyprice

Imp wrote: »

Documenting training is purely for the protection of the employer, so they can put the blame for any accident on the employee. For simple tasks, there is no harm with being shown the correct way to do things and then being allowed to get on with it.

Rather a contradictory statement that. There is everything wrong in being shown how do do something and being allowed to get on with it without documented training. If OP's son had had an accident and lost his leg he would have no recourse against the employers liability insurance.

Imp

peachyprice wrote: »

Rather a contradictory statement that. There is everything wrong in being shown how do do something and being allowed to get on with it without documented training. If OP's son had had an accident and lost his leg he would have no recourse against the employers liability insurance.

Let me take you through the conversation.

Employee: I've broken my leg
Employer: How
Employee: That crate fell on me
Employer: You have had the training to show you how to secure that crate, there is your signature. If you had followed the training, there is no way that that crate could have fallen on you.
Employee: err
Employer: There has been no equipment failure, the only failure was that you didn't follow your training to the letter
Employee: err
Employer: Sorry to hear about your injury, here is your P45 for failing to follow a safe system of work.

peachyprice

Imp wrote: »

Let me take you through the conversation.

Employee: I've broken my leg
Employer: How
Employee: That crate fell on me
Employer: You have haven't had the training to show you how to secure that crate, there is your signature. If you had followed the training, there is no way that that crate could have fallen on you.
Employee: err
Employer: There has been no equipment failure, the only failure was that you didn't follow your training to the letter
Employee: err
Employer: Sorry to hear about your injury, here is your P45 for failing to follow a safe system of work.

What?

I can't quite see what that 'conversation' has to do with OP's son using mechanical equipment he has received no training for.

stir_crazy

Without the proper training and PPE your son can actually refuse to do a certain aspect of the job on the grounds of health and safety. It's the employer's responsibility to provide PPE and adequate training for their work force.

xxdeebeexx

Dovah_diva wrote: »

Did he ask if they had any safety equipment he could borrow for the duration of the job? Did he explain that he'd not done that task before and could someone show him how to do it? Perhaps the person that asked him to do the job assumed he was wearing safety shoes, given that one can buy all types of safety shoes, including trainers.

Can he not get himself some safety boots and a high viz? I appreciate that the store should provide them, but is it not worth a few quid to potentially save his toes from injury?

My son didn't think about any of the safety issues.
He thought it was ok to do the job since a manager told him to do it.

I'm 'fussing' because he has come home and told me (briefly) what he had been doing at work and I felt it was inappropriate.

I have no idea if he was offered safety boots but I doubt that they would have any to fit him as he is a size UK13.

I think peachyprice is right - because he is naive he was taken advantage of

I know he's only 18, but he really should have stood up for himself and refused to do this, if he'd have had an accident he wouldn't be covered by any insurance.

Unfortunately he didn't think about any risk of accidents, he was told to do the job, by a manager, so he got on with it.
It's me who's horrified.

At the moment I haven't said too much but I will talk to him this evening about the protective clothing issue.
If he is asked again, hopefully, he will have a polite refusal up his sleeve. Also, if he really enjoys that type of work he could asked to be trained and equipped properly.

(I want to go up to the supermarket and give the manager a piece of my mind - I am really angry - how can a grown , experienced man be so stupid)

thanks for the advice

dx