What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Idaho.
Ran into a small disagreement with the owner/boss of the small furniture shop at which I work today. Recently we began to manufacture product out of cedar wood, and within days two of my co-workers showed signs of pretty severe allergic reaction to the wood and its dust. In reaction, we received a new amendment to our employee handbook that reads so:
-------------------------------------
3.15a RESPIRATORS
As of March 13th 2009 shop employees will be required to wear a respirator at all times while working in any area of the shop excluding the crew break room and bathroom.
{This business} will provide employees with their own respirator and replacement cartridges as needed.
Compliance Agreement
I, the undersigned, have read and understood the above safety requirement. All my questions have been addressed. I agree to comply with the above safety requirement. I also understand that failure to comply with the above safety requirement may result in corrective action up to and including termination of employment.
Employee Signature ______ Date _____
---------------------------------------
I understand the necessity of safety equipment and do use it when the situation demands it. I understand the business' interest in protecting us, both for our sake and its own. I understand that if I don't follow safety guidelines, not only will my health be at risk, so will my job and the company.
My question arises when I am asked to sign a document that says I agree to comply to a rule that says I will wear this particular gear AT ALL TIMES in the shop. As a point of personal integrity, if I promise to do a certain thing, I do so with the intent to fulfill that promise to the best of my abilities. In this particular case, I feel that the wording of this rule is far to strict to be practical, and leaves no room for extenuating circumstances. Our shop is divided into three rooms which each may have entirely different dust levels, including no dust at all. Certain times of the day trivial amounts of dust are in the air anywhere depending on activity. Often we need to communicate about a project with coworkers and cannot do so without removing respirators. Many times situations arise in which safety would NOT be compromised by the lack of a respirator, or other safety gear. However, if I were to remove the mask when it is unneeded, I would be breaking this rule which I promised to observe. Keep in mind that the two employees showing reaction both had a history of respiratory problems and while cedar is more allergenic than other woods, the reactions these two had are far above normal, and the rest of the crew are showing very little or no response to the wood. Again, I am not arguing about the value of protective gear in a potentially dangerous situation, but rather the wording of a document I am being asked to sign.
My boss claims that this signed document will help his business eliminate liability in case of legal action concerning health issues surrounding dust inhalation.
Neither he nor I are trying to cause problems, but we see this issue two different ways. Can anyone help regarding these questions: What are the legal ramifications of such a "Compliance Agreement?" Would it indeed protect the company in any way were a court issue to arise with an employee? How would this document's power change if the words "I agree to comply with" be removed, leaving the part about "have read, understood, and know I can be 'corrected' with disciplinary action" intact? Might there be a better way to word this document so that a valuable compromise might be reached here?
Thank you for your time and help.
BenWhat is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
Ran into a small disagreement with the owner/boss of the small furniture shop at which I work today. Recently we began to manufacture product out of cedar wood, and within days two of my co-workers showed signs of pretty severe allergic reaction to the wood and its dust. In reaction, we received a new amendment to our employee handbook that reads so:
-------------------------------------
3.15a RESPIRATORS
As of March 13th 2009 shop employees will be required to wear a respirator at all times while working in any area of the shop excluding the crew break room and bathroom.
{This business} will provide employees with their own respirator and replacement cartridges as needed.
Compliance Agreement
I, the undersigned, have read and understood the above safety requirement. All my questions have been addressed. I agree to comply with the above safety requirement. I also understand that failure to comply with the above safety requirement may result in corrective action up to and including termination of employment.
Employee Signature ______ Date _____
---------------------------------------
I understand the necessity of safety equipment and do use it when the situation demands it. I understand the business' interest in protecting us, both for our sake and its own. I understand that if I don't follow safety guidelines, not only will my health be at risk, so will my job and the company.
My question arises when I am asked to sign a document that says I agree to comply to a rule that says I will wear this particular gear AT ALL TIMES in the shop. As a point of personal integrity, if I promise to do a certain thing, I do so with the intent to fulfill that promise to the best of my abilities. In this particular case, I feel that the wording of this rule is far to strict to be practical, and leaves no room for extenuating circumstances. Our shop is divided into three rooms which each may have entirely different dust levels, including no dust at all. Certain times of the day trivial amounts of dust are in the air anywhere depending on activity. Often we need to communicate about a project with coworkers and cannot do so without removing respirators. Many times situations arise in which safety would NOT be compromised by the lack of a respirator, or other safety gear. However, if I were to remove the mask when it is unneeded, I would be breaking this rule which I promised to observe. Keep in mind that the two employees showing reaction both had a history of respiratory problems and while cedar is more allergenic than other woods, the reactions these two had are far above normal, and the rest of the crew are showing very little or no response to the wood. Again, I am not arguing about the value of protective gear in a potentially dangerous situation, but rather the wording of a document I am being asked to sign.
My boss claims that this signed document will help his business eliminate liability in case of legal action concerning health issues surrounding dust inhalation.
Neither he nor I are trying to cause problems, but we see this issue two different ways. Can anyone help regarding these questions: What are the legal ramifications of such a "Compliance Agreement?" Would it indeed protect the company in any way were a court issue to arise with an employee? How would this document's power change if the words "I agree to comply with" be removed, leaving the part about "have read, understood, and know I can be 'corrected' with disciplinary action" intact? Might there be a better way to word this document so that a valuable compromise might be reached here?
Thank you for your time and help.
BenWhat is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?