DSE regulations: both employers and employees are unaware

john norton-doyle
Member - 1 post

I am somewhat surprised by the comments you have reported attributed to Dr Hogan as clearly there are a number of incorrect comments as regards legislation here. A VDU is that - not a PC, [PCs are included] and there were screens 15 years ago and 1 hour is not a definitive definition of user. DSE usage is in general terms for most organisations the least hazardous area people work in and yet in many sectors [disappointingly] it appears to be their prime area for concern.

Nigel DuPree
Member - 112 posts

Maybe "worse eyesight" when operating their DSE (linked to a PC whateveer) is not direct evidence of harm nevertheless, there is significant indirect evidence and not just self-reported discomfort, eye, headaches, migraine etc.

HSE 2007 report rr561, a scientific review of research since the introduction of the DSE Act including regulation '5', now reports that RSI type injuries have been overtaken by "Screen Fatigue" as most reported hazard by operators.

Of course this is a so called 'temporary' condition as the level of screen fatigue and it's debilitating affects are related to prolonged usage, more than five hours a week, of DSE/VDU use and is also linked to the intensity of use.

Nevertheless, as this temporary hazard affects more than 50% of operators it will have to be taken more seriously by employers and if the response of ABI (Association British Insurers) is anything to go by sooner rather than later as the insurers a trying to negotiate with government to establish a hedge fund for for the day when research finds, unknown risks like display screen use, office lighting and mobile phones, do actually cause harm or permanent injury.

Or perhaps it is the near 20% reduction in productivity that will stimulate interest from the employer when they work out that equates to 33 days a year lost production making "sickies" (ave 8.3 days/annum) pale into insignificance by comparison.

Or perhaps when slip, trips and other post display screen work mishaps start underpinning claims for damages or compensation in road traffic accidents following work hit the courts we will see a change in the current apathy toward the subject.

Employers or anyone else unaware of 'old laws', workplace or otherwise, will sit up then and pay attention as it has never been about compliance just about cost/benefit of compliance.

Can't wait for the research paper due to be published next year from Portsmouth University faculty of Visual Psychology who are looking into the Risk Assessment of 'Vigilance Decremation' associated with screen fatigue.

Perhaps that will provide the much needed objective evidence required to back up the subjective reporting display screen operators and start to have some impact on the level of harm and injury users suffer and is dismissed as temporary.........

Claire Fuller - Workplace Law Network
Online advisor - 32 posts

Thanks for your comments - listening back to Dr Hogan's interview, it seems he was providing a lay-person's overview when he mentioned the "one hour" user definition and the use of the term PC instead of VDU, instead of offering definitive guidance on the matter. To avoid any confusion, I have included a full definition of a DSE user at the bottom of the article.

Apologies for any confusion caused.

Nigel DuPree
Member - 112 posts

RISK - Cause & Effect or Consequences - One hour to five hours or more, the DSE Act, Screen Fatigue, Visual Stress, Vigilance Decremation, Refractive Problems, Eye Discomfort or Disease, Eye, Ear nose & throat, Head, neck, shoulder, arm, wrist, hand & back aches, migraine, Digital Literacy, RSI's & MSD's all inter-related risks associated with DSE use exacerbated by sick building syndrome along cultural, demand and other psycho-social problems like 'Performance Anxiety' that may be manifested in emotional difficulties from short temper and agression to chronic fatigue and depression.

Stress in all it's forms rarely presents in isolation from, although will be exacebated by, many other work/life enviromental conditions that persist over a prolonged period of time and if NOT recognised and mitigated early will manifest in a wide range of disperate symptoms.

Specifically regarding DSE usage "research" since the introduction of the 1992 DSE act has found that there are few reports of problems for those who spend less than an hour per day on screen whereas those who consistently spend more than an hour per day and up to five hours per day do report experiences statistically in great enough numbers to make a direct link between activity and symptoms reported.

Unfortunately, up until now, these reports have, by and large, remained just reported and subjective in the absense of something diagnosable persisting for a significant period after DSE usage as in a recognisable and treatable injury.

However, this (and recent HSE 'Better Display Screen' RR561) has prompted a study into the development of an "objective DSE Risk Assessment" designed to provide a standard set of given safe conditions for DSE users to operate.

This should also provide a diagnostic tool for those who subjectively report problems to objectively evidence the level of their discomfort and risk that this represents with prolonged operation. (reasonably for more than 1 hour/day)

I am sure should members and/or workplacelaw.net be interested in facilitiating participating in the research that this may be possible subject to consultation.

Mark Andrew
Member - 1 post

When I attended DSE training about 6 years ago, I understood Display screen to be ANY screen i.e. Microfische, microfilm, CCTV monitors etc. Is this still the case or are the updated reg's now purely for PC's?
If the former is the case, workers such as Security operatives who monitor CCTV cameras on a number of screens which will almost cetainly be at a further distance than your average PC ( a screen bank on the wall) may require different correction prescriptions

Nigel DuPree
Member - 112 posts

Mark, you are right, got it in one and whether monitoring CCTV, editing video or digital material or sat at a checkout in any well known or otherwise store Screen Fatigue is the risk for the operator and VD (Vigilance Decremation) is the operational hazard.

In other words cause and effect. Fatigue whether mild or not affects everyones functionality and performance increasing the risk of errors and/or mishaps.

Of course in the extreme, on a trading floor where the user probably has to be attentive to at least three screens the error may end up loosing millions or a call centre DSE operators visual fatigue may end up a homeward bound drivers misjudgement that could total their car and/or themselves or others !

Visual stress and fatigue has been glossed over for too long with " it's alright we are sort of sure'ish that the affects are only temporary " so until we have evidence to the contrary lets just keep telling them not to worry too much.

I just wonder how the insurance company and courts are going to react if they should find out that an individual involved in an accident was suffering from Screen Fatigue ?

Not sure they are going to view it as anything other than neglegent regardless of the individuals protestations that they didn't know it was dangerous to drive following a shift / day operating DSE and if more than 50% of users report experiencing fatigue how would you prove you were not one of the 50% + ?

Could the operator then in turn make a claim that their eployers were liable for not rask assessing the problem and mitigating it ?????

Messy already what ! Just a matter of time.............

Nicholas Batten
Member - 15 posts

"The DSE Act" does not exist - there is no such thing.

Martin Stock
Member - 13 posts

Quite correct Nicholas, but the Health and Safety(Display Screen Equipment) Regulations 1992 does and can be viewed at www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1992/Uksi_19922792_en_1.htm. This was amended in 2002 with the Health and Safety (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2002 para. 3. which can be viewed at www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20022174.htm.
The HSE publish a document Working with VDUs which can be viewed and downloaded at www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg36.pdf.
If this still does not answer everybodies questions then perhaps you should purchase the Workplace Law, Display Screen Equipment Policy and Management Guide.
I hope this will answer the majority of peoples questions. your questions!

Christopher Ingram
Member - 1 post

Soem good points here - and some banal!!

Nigel DuPree
Member - 112 posts

Quite right except for those 50% + experiencing Screen Fatigue and other RSI's who are "captive" (in terms of their employment depends on it) operators of insidiously dangerous equipment.........

If the operator were in charge of a vehicle or other equipment purceived as mechanical machinery where the harm or injury more instantainious or instantly obvious with lots of blood and gore people would be up in arms about occupational Health & Safety.

However, where the connections or chain of causation less obvious or immediately messy apathy rules OK.

That doesn't mean that the Collateral Damage caused to DSE users is any less a Friendly Fire incident than bombing your own front line fighters in any other field of endevour.

By the way is that a typo i see ( soem ) or are you visually dyslexic ? As, if the latter, you should have a VRA (Visual Risk Assessment) done and get your DSE optimised if not already done so becuase, over time you are at greater risk of VD (Vigilance Decremation) that could lead to significantly increased risk of error, slip / trip or worse mishap.

Bezz Williams
Member - 2 posts

Nigel
Perhaps a similar assessment for yourself, check your typo's (because) it may be relevant!! only joking