Health & Safety

cathy tye
Member - 6 posts

Hi Irene,

As an OH advisor - I can think of no reason as to why this should be the case. What the indivudal may find is that applying clear labels is more tiring to the eyes if they have to be accurately applied, than opaque ones.

I would suggest having a private conversation with the individual and get them to explain in detail their concerns and what they are based on.

Eyes are muscles and like any muscles get tired when they are are static i.e. fixed on a point a set distance away (akin to standing still for a any length of time) and when you look up your eyesight can be a blurry for a while until they focus again - this is normal.

The individual will start to notice changes for close working (approx 14 inches) i.e. 'reading vision' sometime in their 40's when they can no longer focus close to the face and need to move the object further away. This is normal. The work they do, just like computer work makes you more aware of normal changes to your eyes - it is not caused by the work.

Obersve them doing the job and look at their postures - if they are out of neutral i.e. bent at the neck, upper back, arms away fom body then they will be at higher risk of upper limb problems, headaches, tiredness etc. Look at the dexterity required and the label dispensers you use. Encourage frequent stretching breaks and looks at the flooring if they are standing or chairs if seated.

So make sure that the risk assessment for this task covers the musculoskeletal risk - you may find that by improving the working postures through the height of the equipment used etc that any eyestrain experienced is reduced. Also, ensure lighting is appropriate. If the labels are particularly small and you cannot automate it in some way then you could trial the use of magnifyers.

I cannot see any reason to accept his refusal - this is an HR issue, employees cannot self-select out of jobs they don't like without very good reason. Your risk assessment will demonstrate that as an employer you have considered the risks. You could send the individual to an optician which may provide reassurance, but the others might expect it too. Has he actually ever attended an optician? If he is that concerned I suggest he attends an optician and pays himself (you can find half price vouchers in local papers etc.)

Nigel DuPree
Member - 146 posts

Close up work, in fact anything less than 20ft, requires the ability and visual stamina to sustain 'convergence' i.e. the eyes turning in toward the nose.

Obviously stamina play a part in this along with refractive acuity for both eyes to focus on the object of interest, display screen, work bench / material / task or reading material.

However, for around 40% of the population visual fatigue may present in convergence insufficiency and/or binocular instabilities leading to discomfort as a visual coping strategy over time that is designed to encourage taking a break.

This not related to refractive acuity in that the person may have 20/20 vision but just does not have the stamina to maintain a clear steroescopic view and will be experiencing a degree of double vision.

Ask them which eye they would look through a telescope as this will be an indicator of the eye that is dominant and enquire whether they had any treatment for a lazy eye like patching as often in childhood many people suffer from strabismus, lazy eye, eye turns etc. and this may provide a clue to whether or not they are at any increased risk of visual fatigue or eye strain.

David Price
Member - 80 posts

Also ask the person if they have any allergies of any kind, like being allergic to work? As there apprears to be no reason as to how this person coluld ever know how carring out this function will effect their eyes at a later date.

Other wise everyone who does close work will want to stop tomorrow if based on "it may injure my eyesight in the future". I could put the obvious joke in here, but I won't?

Irene Farrar
Member - 7 posts

Thanks everyone, your comments and advice most appreciated
Irene

Nigel DuPree
Member - 146 posts

They may well be trying it on, swoing the lead etc.

But, if you 'believe' they are 'genuinely reporting or anxious about a real problem' in the sense that they are experiencing and/or presenting or manifesting symptoms of "visual stress" - eye or headaches etc. related to the work then you are stuck between a rock and a hard place without a risk assessment and/or some evidence.

So, having advised that they should visit an optician if they are not able to produce evidence or a better rational or reason for their problem or indeed their misplaced 'anxiety' that there may be a problem their refusal to undertake a normal task completed by their peers is a work issue and not a health and safety issue unless others have the same problem?