Comments by David Ransome

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Marie Claire had, after her initial posts, made it clear that she was talking about those people, usually the minority, who misuse or abuse the system to the detriment of the majority. There are those who see every case as genuine and others who see them all as false. Nigels last post gives an excellent overview of the situation and Jacqui's comments are very valid too. It is a shame that MC, possibly suffering from verbally induced stress, has decided to go.
I must say in all sincerity that it's a pity that we don't have more people like Jean around doing an excellent job as an interface between management and staff. Let's hope, going back to the thread starter, that the increased levels of compensation go to the genuine cases and not the non-genuine ones usually picked up bythe media and alluded to by Marie Claire..
Have a great Christmas and a hopefully prosperous and happy 2009!

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Hi Linda, there was a previous thread on this issue. From having gone into the legals and set schemes up previously - it should be the employees personal choice as to whether or not to use bikes, as it is with private car or public transport. Do not get into the minefield of providing anything you mention, employers don't have any obligations until employees arrive on the premises (other than travel FOR work).
However, you can encourage green alternatives to personal car use by possibly giving a grant of say £150 to an employee toward the cost of obtaining a cycle or cycling gear. You could also provide shower arrangements, secure drying area for wet clothes, and lockers for personal cycling gear. Externally make sure that you have provided a secure and relatively weather protected cycle park/rack.
Your company travel policy should encourage cycling in but without discriminating against those using cars. Some car users may cite the £150 grant as discrimination but only you know your employees!

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Presumably you are carrying out a normal business activity? Have the council measured the noise level? Have the plasterboard walls been correctly built ie double board either side of studding above and below ceiling, and has sound /thermal insulation been installed between either parties walls? Correct fire 'proofing' sometimes helps with sound issues. Sometimes useful to have fire resistant insulation above false ceilings and possibly below floors. Check that holes around heating pipework etc which is shared are sealed.

I could go on but it would be useful if the answer to first two questions is yes for the council, as landlords, to come up with some positive and manageable suggestions/solutions.

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Hi Carole, can't speak for Nicholas but I hadn't missed the point!

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Well said Nicholas, some of which I was alluding to earlier!

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Thanks and well said John!
BH, whoever you are, you obviously do not know me. In 1908 there were no Facebooks or YouTubes, instead the written word was to the fore, followed by artistic comment often made in cartoons, and 'indiscretions' made through either would often be vigorouly pursued through courts of law, just as now. The mention of communist Russia is meaningless as their methods in this area were the same as countless other countries previously, then, and now. The Virgin employees were not dismissed for making comments in their own time, but for making them in the public domain.
Lorraine, I do generally agree with your comment, but I have been told that much of the comment on Facebook related to opinions and views of customers, some of whom raised the complaints.

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Well done Virgin I say, the individuals were apparently bringing their employers into disrepute by their actions and statements which, in many businesses, can lead to instant dismissal. Free speech, even in a democratic society, can never be truly free as it is constrained by the rules and regulations that keep it democratic. If speech and actions were totally free we would live in a totally anarchistic society with little or no thought to the various minority groups that currently have protection, and maintain their resilience, through equality.

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Mark, I have - I wouldn't supply the bikes. They have to be adjusted to suit each individual and you have no control over their use or abuse! Consider too the maintenance costs. In the past I have given vouchers to the value of, say, £150 to the cost of a bike for those wishing to bike it. I also made sure that we had sufficient changing, showering and drying areas along with larger personal lockers and sheltered bike storage areas. I seem to recall 8-10 bikes per standard car park spot.

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Sorry James, I have to agree wholeheartedly with Bruce et al.

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Surely the 2-4 days would be covered by self certification, the advice was good.
I had to deal with someone given the same advice who chose to work almost straight away. Guess what, severe internal bleed, collapse in workplace, other staff terrified and person confined to bed for a few weeks.
Whilst I agree that some Drs note advice may appear irrational I think that it's about time that we gave up whingeing about it and let a persons OH dept Dr deal with the GP and come up with a consensus view.
If my car mechanic advises or tells me not to drive faster than 20mph because the wirbelgrommet is about to pack up and could cause an accident (apart from the fact that there is no such thing) I'm pretty sure that I would take his advice. And yes I know another mechanic may take a different view, but he may not know that I'm a lunatic driver at anything over 20mph!
Absolutely agree with Carole. Considering that no patient is exactly the same as another I also think that bandying about percentages is almost meaningless in this situation - when I had my appendix removed I was in hospital for seven weeks...............................

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Absolutely agree with Adam on this, it's just a pity that other businesses aren't as switched on. Type 1 surveys are almost useless, Type 2 surveys are the ones that asbestos registers are often based on, Type 3 surveys are carried out before any works are carried out which may disturb finishes or materials. Type 2 is non-destructive with regard to sampling, type 3 is destructive.
Have a look at the HSE website for more info or contact firms such as Apec, Alcontrol, Burton Environmental Services et al, (Yellow Pages etc) for more info.

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

I recall seeing something last year over the issue of taxable benefit for disabled parking spaces provided free. It went along the lines that a Disabled Person HAD to have the car for personal mobility, and that it was necessary then to supply the space - right to work etc. Any other person had a personal choice as to using a car or not, it wasn't a must for their access to work. A case of perk (even if paid for) or genuine need. If I can find the reference I'll come back to the thread!

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Glenn, calm down! I am a Dr involved in occupational health and I agree with what you have said regarding OH and GP opinions but generally the GP is more au fait with the medical condition and possibly personal issues of the individual and would give the ultimate sign off. Most GPs would look to sign off if a good case was put by OH and would take on board comment about a patients working environment and their activity within it.
Regrettably there are still some OH depts that are overly management led and occasionally in need of a GP or consultant to help achieve a balanced view.

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Regardless of OH if the Dr hasn't signed her off sick she must not go back to work. If her contract states that she is only due SSP during sickness so be it, but there may be other benefits that she is entitled to also.
I am suprised that she is only signed off 'for at least 4 weeks' and I would expect to see another note stating the same at the end of the period! James is absolutely correct mentioning driving, if she does then she should report the stroke to the DVLA.

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

It's MAIN purpose was whaaaaat!!! Why now when followers of other religions have had to do without in years past? Instead of kow-towing to one particular group why can't people accept that this sort of idea benefits all, and doesn't need to have a religious motive behind it.

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Regrettably, whilst I agree that the use of fingerprint scanners can be relatively innocuous, it is the thin end of the wedge. Digital fingerprints are almost as good a record as actual fingerprints, and a scanner can be used to read them so they are open to abuse/misuse. Next step.... DNA check...?

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Regrettably, David, it's usually when you have done your job well that they get rid! This is because most Fms get rid of the problems, and tend to the pro-active. Becase senior management don't realise that there could have been problems they think you have nothing to do, or that they are paying for nothing!
I send you best wishes and good luck in finding another position.

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

What gets me is that he made the statement, presumably believing it, and he's still working!

David Ransome
Member - 24 posts

Absolutely with Janet & Nigel! Dissemination of personal data in any format is covered I understand - and I once worked with an Assistant DP Registrar who said just that.