James Marston, Trainer and Inspector at the British Institute of Cleaning Science, reports.
Smart uniforms and presentability can be top of many employers’ list when portraying a professional team at work. What the company wants and provides in some organisations is not always what the company’s cleaning operatives want to wear to look smart or protect them when completing long shifts of hard, physical work.
Frontline operatives do not want to be restrained by their workwear, they want to move freely, crouch down to the floor or reach up above their heads without the uniform getting in the way or exposing skin. Tight clothing causes these problems. Very loose garments can catch on door handles and in machines, jackets or fleeces can slip off or get in the way.
A comment from an operative recently stated: “Our uniforms look great but the material in the garments makes them feel hot and very uncomfortable especially in the summer months.” Often staff may replace items with their own more comfortable clothes which is not company policy.
A balance of presentability, comfort, practicality and protection are necessary for compliance to organisational policy. This may include seasonal wear depending on the site. A sensible budget and shopping around are the answers. You get what you pay for, and the result can have lasting negative results or wow staff who are proud to wear the company uniform.
Another area of general debate is shoes at work. Employers are subject to The Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) at Work Regulations 1992. When considering risks PPE should be the last resort to protect staff. During the risk assessment process employers must consider the controls in the correct order. Elimination being the most effective and PPE being the least effective.
Employers must consider the hazards to staff feet and legs in some cases. Factors include temperature, electrostatic build-up, slipping, cuts, falling objects, heavy loads, metal and chemical splash, or being struck by a vehicle. The answer is not to buy the safest footwear that will withstand all the above. Risk assessments should also reflect foot movement, weight and foot health. Is a boot required or will a shoe suffice?
Staff need to feel comfortable, agile and safe from hazards identified in risk assessments. My advice is don’t select footwear using just brochures or colleague endorsement. Trial them and consult with staff before committing to buy.
Cleaning office buildings, schools or universities for example may not require much protection as staff are cleaning in open spaces where the risk of crush or weight landing on one’s foot is unlikely. Here, arguably, the biggest risk is slips and trips - still one of the top causes of injury or death at work.
The UK government’s Health and Safety website (www.hse.gov.uk) advises generally a softer sole and close-packed tread pattern work well with fluid contaminants and indoor environments. A more open pattern works better outdoors or with solid contaminants. The only sure way to tell is to trial footwear in your environment. Target a few examples and try them out.
A change in brand or uniform requires informed consideration. Many start with a budget target which can lead to mistakes. Go for the most suitable for your team regardless of cost considering your risk assessment. Once identified you can look for cheaper outlets to purchase from or compromise a little if you have to. If you are going to break the budget this is a good reason for doing so.
As I stated earlier personal protective equipment is the last resort. Consider carefully the clothes and footwear you provide for staff. Ask yourself, would you wear them seven hours a day, five or six days a week?
www.bics.org.uk
About the contributor
James Marston
Trainer and Inspector
BICSc