No Image Available
LinkedIn
Email
Pocket
Facebook
WhatsApp

Employers urged to promote staff health

pp_default1

The government is urging employers to develop a culture of promoting staff health via workplace gyms and healthy food in canteens.

Health promotion is seen as the next step up from risk prevention. Employers are also being encouraged to not only enable disabled people to find work but also prevent people from falling out of work in the first place.

Speaking at a RNIB conference, Department for Work and Pensions minister Lord McKenzie said that employers play a crucial role in ensuring that disabled people are able to play a full part in society.

Lord McKenzie said: “Increasing the number of disabled people in mainstream employment has the potential to tear down the last barriers to social inclusion for disabled people.

“Just as important as getting disabled people into work, is keeping people in work and preventing them from falling out of work in the first place. Employers are particularly important. We would like to see them play their part in a number of ways.

“First we want them to seek to prevent ill-health or injury from occurring in the workplace. This is about sensible risk management and often involves only simple changes to working practices – for example, eye protection for employees. But we’d like to see employers go further and use the workplace as a way of improving general staff health – for example, improvements such as workplace gyms or healthy food in canteens.

“Most importantly though, we want them to develop supportive cultures that allow staff with health problems and impairments to work, making the necessary adjustments to help them do so.

“Mostly these adjustments will be neither as difficult nor as expensive as people think. But clearly we have an important job ahead to engage, educate and support employers.”

Want more insight like this? 

Get the best of people-focused HR content delivered to your inbox.

2 Responses

  1. Post-traumatic stress disorder
    Another side to this issue of promoting staff health is the issue of what are the responsibilities and the duty of care an employer has in the event that the employee witnesses or is involved in a major incident or accident.

    What are the employer’s responsibilities with regard to Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTST). Should we wash our hands of the issue and say that it is the responsibility of the NHS. With events like 7/7 and 9/11 still fresh in many people’s minds we should rememeber that large number of our employees were exposed to events that could lead to PTST. Many organisations have willingly allowed staff to undertake TA detachments to support the Services.

    Whose responsibility is the Health Care of these people?
    What if any support is available to these people?

    Train Operating Companies actively promoted support and counselling for Train Driver involved in incidents. Whilst the train driver played no active part in the death of an individual who decides that they will just step in front of the 7.16 from ****** it still does affect them.

    How many organisations follow their example?
    Should we follow their example?

    Like my previous comment the Government Record on promoting health care in this field in respect of ex-service personnel is a perfect example of what not to do.

    With the 25th Anniversary of the Falklands war just round the corner we should remember that about 300 men who survived the war have since killed themselves. Many more ex-servicemen are battling with PTST with veterans Northern Ireland, Iraq and Afghanistan are swelling their ranks.

  2. Accident Prevention
    I don’t normally make what I call political statements but before the Government or Government Ministers start telling employers what their duties are in ensuring that staff do not fall out of work due to unnecessary injuries it should look at it own record of accident prevention.

    There have been numerous injuries and even deaths in the Armed Forces due to the failure of their employer (HM Government) failing to provide the proper equipment. (Body Armour, armoured vehicles and there were even reports last year that it had provided troops with defective ammo etc)

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/23/nammo23.xml

No Image Available