Nut Allergy At Work
Discussion
esxste said:
Nigel Worc's said:
I agree that it does seem a bad situation, and the employer is going to get lots of grief if they don't sort something out, because the law is like that now, one persons rights or entitlements seems to be more important than the common good.
What do you think will happen when another person comes for an interview with this employer and they have an allergy, a medical problem etc ?
If it is just the food preparation area, then perhaps she should think about not using that area. If just being near a person that has recently eaten nuts that causes her issues (like the other chap posted, door handles etc), then she is buggared and perhaps that job isn't for her.
So... take it to the next logical step. She can't find work because she can't work anywhere that might expose her to the allergen that could kill her. What should she do for a living?What do you think will happen when another person comes for an interview with this employer and they have an allergy, a medical problem etc ?
If it is just the food preparation area, then perhaps she should think about not using that area. If just being near a person that has recently eaten nuts that causes her issues (like the other chap posted, door handles etc), then she is buggared and perhaps that job isn't for her.
You'd condemn this lady to live a sad, restricted life. And all because you think its too much for people to not eat peanuts at work.
Then you've got the gall to suggest she's the special snowflake.
That does indeed make her the special snowflake, as you put it.
Is this a residental facility for brain damaged children where they live? If so i can kind of see the other staff members point, why should the children be denied something from their diet when they don't have a choice to live there, legally and morally you can't limit their life choices to suit one member of staff with special needs who could do literally thousands of other jobs, no one has a gun to her head to work there, in a care facility the rights of the looked after people trump those of paid staff members, and anyone who doesn't respect that doesn't last in that profession.
OldGermanHeaps said:
Is this a residental facility for brain damaged children where they live? If so i can kind of see the other staff members point, why should the children be denied something from their diet when they don't have a choice to live there, legally and morally you can't limit their life choices to suit one member of staff with special needs who could do literally thousands of other jobs, no one has a gun to her head to work there, in a care facility the rights of the looked after people trump those of paid staff members, and anyone who doesn't respect that doesn't last in that profession.
This. I'm all for "meeting peoples needs" but in this instance who has priority? And quite frankly, if your allergy is that severe you need to think about what a job might reasonably entail before your apply.In this instance employer was foolish to put such a person in a role where they knew there would be issue.
That's assuming it was made clear by the applicant at interview it was such a serious issue...
Wacky Racer said:
Stalybridge where I grew up....
That photo is a blast from the past. 
The tracks on the left are heading for the Micklehurst loop 'new lines' on the east side of the River Tame which were closed 50 years ago (30th November 1966). The section through Stalybridge New Tunnel under Cocker Hill as far as Millbrook sidings and Heyrod Power Station remained in use for coal trains until 1972. The line was finally closed on 14th September 1976. The power station itself closed on 29th October 1979 and demolition took place during the 1980s. The cooling towers lasted until 1988. As has happened in many other places, the original 'old lines' have survived. They are part of the Trans Pennine route from Manchester Picadilly to Huddersfield and Leeds.
I'm old enough to remember the infamous London fogs of the 1950s. Fortunately I wasn't in the capital during the 'Great Smog' of December 1952.
Back O/T.
Alex_225 said:
My other half works with children with brain injuries and in a specific house with their age range. One of her colleagues who works with her has a severe nut allergy and on four separate occasions has ended up either signed off or hospitalised due to people not adhering to the signage around the building. One particularly bad episode ended up with her signed off for two weeks due to the severity of it.
It would seem that because of this, this girl has been getting quite a hard time about things. Other parts of the workplace refusing to remove jars of peanut butter from kitchens meaning she cannot enter those parts of the building etc. She is also being told that she may be hauled up for her sickness records due to the two weeks off, which were caused from the incident at work.
The employer should be ensuring their policy/signage is being complied with rather than threatening the sufferer of the allergy.It would seem that because of this, this girl has been getting quite a hard time about things. Other parts of the workplace refusing to remove jars of peanut butter from kitchens meaning she cannot enter those parts of the building etc. She is also being told that she may be hauled up for her sickness records due to the two weeks off, which were caused from the incident at work.
k off somewhere more suitable for her then.Indeed, kids have no choice,so employer has no choice either
That have also employed this lady so have no choice but to avid by the law
Of course some on here would not be happy till all the disabled are out of the workplace, and into council ghettos, with their dole poles and motabily Zafiras, not at work and paying tax!
That have also employed this lady so have no choice but to avid by the law
Of course some on here would not be happy till all the disabled are out of the workplace, and into council ghettos, with their dole poles and motabily Zafiras, not at work and paying tax!
She has a choice not to work somewhere where she has to visit food preparation ares for other people. If she does persist in forcing others to change their practices negatively just to suit her then she is creating a toxic work environment for everyone else. Are you saying this is the only job she could possibly ever do and the only possible alternative is living off benefits? Taking simple situations to ridiculous absolutes is why employing people is such a minefield that employers end up reluctant to give people a chance.
Edited by OldGermanHeaps on Thursday 15th December 22:48
OldGermanHeaps said:
She has a choice not to work somewhere where she has to visit food preparation ares for other people. If she does persist in forcing others to change their practices negatively just to suit her then she is creating a toxic work environment for everyone else. Are you saying this is the only job she could possibly ever do and the only possible alternative is living off benefits? Taking simple situations to ridiculous absolutes is why employing people is such a minefield that employers end up reluctant to give people a chance.
A toxic work environment? We're talking about peanuts. It really isn't a minefield at all, avoiding products like peanut butter is pretty easy.Edited by OldGermanHeaps on Thursday 15th December 22:48
In the situation the employer knew in advance, put signs up to control the situation but then seems to be blaming the employee. It's pretty clear who is in the wrong here.
Most people wouldn't have an issue with this and those that do are actually the problem. In my experience the type to get worked up by stuff like this tends to be a trouble maker in other respects too.
Edited by Devil2575 on Friday 16th December 07:16
I am astonished.
I love Peanut butter but I can have it home easily enough, it is no hardship to avoid it at work if someone has a life threatening condition. It is not anyone is asking to change people's lives drastically, just don't bring in peanut butter.
There are many alternatives:
Marmite
Honey
marmalade
jam (many many flavours)
plain butter
Nutella
Lemon curd
etc
For the record, I have peanut butter on toast every morning (except Friday - Bacon sandwich time) at my office and I love it but if I knew it would cause life threatening issue to a colleague I would give it up in a heartbeat.
Is it not the same as those bumps on the pavement near crossing places? Very difficult for to walk n with heels and it is only for the sight impaired minority to make their lives easier so should we be rid of them too and tell partially sighted people to get over it and arrange their lives to avoid crossing roads? Very minor adjustments to help us all live easier. Courtesy not entitlement is the way forward.
I love Peanut butter but I can have it home easily enough, it is no hardship to avoid it at work if someone has a life threatening condition. It is not anyone is asking to change people's lives drastically, just don't bring in peanut butter.
There are many alternatives:
Marmite
Honey
marmalade
jam (many many flavours)
plain butter
Nutella
Lemon curd
etc
For the record, I have peanut butter on toast every morning (except Friday - Bacon sandwich time) at my office and I love it but if I knew it would cause life threatening issue to a colleague I would give it up in a heartbeat.
Is it not the same as those bumps on the pavement near crossing places? Very difficult for to walk n with heels and it is only for the sight impaired minority to make their lives easier so should we be rid of them too and tell partially sighted people to get over it and arrange their lives to avoid crossing roads? Very minor adjustments to help us all live easier. Courtesy not entitlement is the way forward.
Kateg28 said:
I am astonished.
There are many alternatives:
Marmite
Honey
marmalade
jam (many many flavours)
plain butter
Nutella
Lemon curd
etc
NUTella?...There are many alternatives:
Marmite
Honey
marmalade
jam (many many flavours)
plain butter
Nutella
Lemon curd
etc
Really?
Anyway there really are a lot of clueless people in this thread. So many things these days contain nuts that anyone with a nut allergy is near enough blocked from consuming or coming in to contact with like 50% of things on store shelves.
My friend has a nut allergy and it really opens your eyes to what kind of foods and drinks he can't have. He's never had a proper Curry or Chinese take away, eating out when we went to Japan was a bit tricky to say the least and even drinking Coke can't be done.. Yes Coke contains nut extracts.
Even a little bit of a coconut rum mixed in to a shot will make him throw up all colours of the rainbow.
For the most part people with a Nut allergy are able to go through life without having many issues however I guess if you're working in an environment where objects may have come in to contact with nuts without your knowledge really does make it a minefield
That is my point, its not just peanut butter its 1/3-1/2 of all foods that may contain traces of nuts, and it's not only the other staff who have to be denied these they can eat what they want at home. If its the kind of facility i'm thinking of and have a lot of experience in the kitchens are to prepare food for the disadvantaged service users who live in or spend most of their time at the facility, they have no choice where to eat, why should they be denied the dietary choices everyone else in the country has? They can't readily choose to eat somewhere else, but she can choose to work somewhere else where her personal issue wont impact others.
If one of the service users has a nut allergy or similar a seperate food preparation area would be used and if that wasn't practicable then food would be prepared offsite, sealed and brought in.
All this talk of her going on the dole if she can't work in this one particular role is just typical take everything to a bizarre absolute conclusion to prove a point nonsanse. It is a free country, everyone has choices and opportunities.
If one of the service users has a nut allergy or similar a seperate food preparation area would be used and if that wasn't practicable then food would be prepared offsite, sealed and brought in.
All this talk of her going on the dole if she can't work in this one particular role is just typical take everything to a bizarre absolute conclusion to prove a point nonsanse. It is a free country, everyone has choices and opportunities.
Edited by OldGermanHeaps on Friday 16th December 09:47
Nigel Worc's said:
I read it.
I think SHE needs to go and work in a nut free zone, not rely on everyone else, especially as it obviously affects her health so much.
And what would happen if one of the children who came into their care had an allergy, just throw them out as well?I think SHE needs to go and work in a nut free zone, not rely on everyone else, especially as it obviously affects her health so much.
The reality (like it or not) is that there are more and more and more people showing signs of allergies and not just nut allergies. It's much more common than you think unfortunately.
My daughter has a nut, dairy and egg allergy and is very good at managing her exposure. Contact will make her poorly, but thankfully are not at the life-threatening levels some people have, she comes out in hives, lips swell, vomiting etc but not full anaphylactic shock. We don't have any nuts in the house.
Most schools are able to manage children with allergies, most work places can make adjustments as well, what is happening in this situation, in a so-called care facility is very poor. Take the nuts out, nobody will miss them.
The Surveyor said:
Nigel Worc's said:
I think SHE needs to go and work in a nut free zone, not rely on everyone else, especially as it obviously affects her health so much.
And what would happen if one of the children who came into their care had an allergy, just throw them out as well?The reality (like it or not) is that there are more and more and more people showing signs of allergies and not just nut allergies. It's much more common than you think unfortunately.
My daughter has a nut, dairy and egg allergy and is very good at managing her exposure. Contact will make her poorly, but thankfully are not at the life-threatening levels some people have, she comes out in hives, lips swell, vomiting etc but not full anaphylactic shock. We don't have any nuts in the house.
Most schools are able to manage children with allergies, most work places can make adjustments as well, what is happening in this situation, in a so-called care facility is very poor. Take the nuts out, nobody will miss them.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff