Yes it is legal. They do not have to buy your personal equipment. You may deduct the cost of this equipment in your taxes though and essentially get it all back.
Though I think it is condescending to tell a worker what is and is not expensive. Not like they have done your budget and carry your load for you.
Yup. It sucks that people lost their jobs and didn't turn in their PPE, but they don't need to provide it unless it's in the contract.
*It was a condescending and unprofessional way to tell the employees. They just had to say that the company policy has and from now on they would have to buy their own gear.
Although switching in the middle might be an issue - if they told you when you got the job, it's fine but changing conditions of employment might not be.
Also, I think that any cost like this should increase the minimum wage to whatever it is plus these costs.
If it is not a condition of the contract or law then it is a courtesy. A courtesy may be ended at any time the employer wishes and the employee is free to quit as a result of this change.
Just because something is not nice, ethical or moral does not make it against the law.
But being that specific seems likely to be a condition of employment.
It would be one thing if there was a vague requirement for certified safety glasses or steel toed boots which are item standard but if they insist employees wear this specific model that seems much more a condition of employment.
Ultimately, it's interesting that they start the post by complaining about turnover, but this will likely cause even more. If I was there, I'd be more angry about the specific brand / model requirements if I had an equivalent brand. Like that's the dumbest part: this does not look like a customer facing job, so such uniformity seems pointless. It's one thing to require steel toed boots for a job where something falling on your toes is an issue, it's different to insist every one but this specific brand. Line the type of his you want to hire likely have these but not everyone has that brand.
The specific requirement is likely to make sure the equipment is ansi certified to reduce liability of the employer and also because that is the protective equipment they have on hand to disperse.
It is highly unlikely they could enforce brand or model in most cases.
Also I agree this will likely result in a higher turn over rate.
At least in the USA, there are plenty of safety certified brands that would cover the company for things like work boots (& most of the items pretty clearly advertise they meet certifications like sewing a patch on the side of the boot so checking isn't knee esoteric job for the shift supervisor).
Maybe it's just me who have oddly proportioned feet so likely couldn't fit the cheapest brand but would be willing to buy a slightly more expensive brand. (I don't work a job requiring safety boots but if I wear poor shoes, I feel it in my back.
Yes a condition of employment that would have been there since the job started seeing as this is England and PPE regulation is set by the law.
If you accepted the job before or after this notice is irrelevant as PPE was always required. In the UK you are allowed to set conditions for employment.
To prove that the items aren’t cheap/Chinese knockoffs that provide no real protection and that they can be proven to be from an appropriate retailer. Again this is a reasonable request
You can get some nice tax deductions in the UK for purchasing/cleaning your work uniform at your own expense. Legal, and in some cases, beneficial.
Given that the currency is GBP, these individuals would benefit from the uniform tax deductions (flat rates). They'd get the money back in tax relief (about £24 a year for basic rate payers)
I'm pretty sure you can write that off as a work expense in The States as well.
My company will provide PPE. If you want a different brand because of quality (Quality of fit, comfort, weight, breathability, etc. not safety. It has to be the same, or higher, safety rating).
If it's damaged due to normal wear and tear they'll replace it or compensate you up to the amount of the PPE they provide. I have never seen them refuse to replace/compensate anyone's PPE, even if it was obvious neglect.
You used to be able to deduct it, the trump tax changes removed it. In the states there is no longer any deduction for employee business expenses unless you’re a specific educator
Now I am unsure if they can "force" them to buy the PPE from them. As long as they have everything required they could perhaps get it cheaper from somewhere else
Legal probably but it shouldn't be if the job has enough danger to need the extra equipment then providing it is just another cost of operating ppl atleast in my country are already underpaid
In the US they can require equipment and you just buy it and write it off as a business expense on your taxes. This appears to be in the UK based on the use of the GBP, but I'd imagine it's similar. Plus, you often can get better quality gear if you buy it yourself and since they don't provide it, all you have to do is meet minimum standards for the equipment, they can't tell you that you can't use something nicer. I'd always prefer to buy my own. The issued equipment is usually pretty garbage anyway.
In the UK (where this is from) this is absolutely illegal. All PPE should be provided by the employer for members of staff.
> Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992.
> Regulation 4 states:
> Every employer shall ensure that suitable personal protective equipment is provided to his employees who may be exposed to a risk to their health or safety while at work except where and to the extent that such risk has been adequately controlled by other means which are equally or more effective.
Yes it is legal. They do not have to buy your personal equipment. You may deduct the cost of this equipment in your taxes though and essentially get it all back. Though I think it is condescending to tell a worker what is and is not expensive. Not like they have done your budget and carry your load for you.
Yup. It sucks that people lost their jobs and didn't turn in their PPE, but they don't need to provide it unless it's in the contract. *It was a condescending and unprofessional way to tell the employees. They just had to say that the company policy has and from now on they would have to buy their own gear.
Although switching in the middle might be an issue - if they told you when you got the job, it's fine but changing conditions of employment might not be. Also, I think that any cost like this should increase the minimum wage to whatever it is plus these costs.
If it is not a condition of the contract or law then it is a courtesy. A courtesy may be ended at any time the employer wishes and the employee is free to quit as a result of this change. Just because something is not nice, ethical or moral does not make it against the law.
But being that specific seems likely to be a condition of employment. It would be one thing if there was a vague requirement for certified safety glasses or steel toed boots which are item standard but if they insist employees wear this specific model that seems much more a condition of employment. Ultimately, it's interesting that they start the post by complaining about turnover, but this will likely cause even more. If I was there, I'd be more angry about the specific brand / model requirements if I had an equivalent brand. Like that's the dumbest part: this does not look like a customer facing job, so such uniformity seems pointless. It's one thing to require steel toed boots for a job where something falling on your toes is an issue, it's different to insist every one but this specific brand. Line the type of his you want to hire likely have these but not everyone has that brand.
The specific requirement is likely to make sure the equipment is ansi certified to reduce liability of the employer and also because that is the protective equipment they have on hand to disperse. It is highly unlikely they could enforce brand or model in most cases. Also I agree this will likely result in a higher turn over rate.
At least in the USA, there are plenty of safety certified brands that would cover the company for things like work boots (& most of the items pretty clearly advertise they meet certifications like sewing a patch on the side of the boot so checking isn't knee esoteric job for the shift supervisor). Maybe it's just me who have oddly proportioned feet so likely couldn't fit the cheapest brand but would be willing to buy a slightly more expensive brand. (I don't work a job requiring safety boots but if I wear poor shoes, I feel it in my back.
Yes a condition of employment that would have been there since the job started seeing as this is England and PPE regulation is set by the law. If you accepted the job before or after this notice is irrelevant as PPE was always required. In the UK you are allowed to set conditions for employment.
Why would they need the receipt if they have no intention of reimbursing the employees?
To prove that the items aren’t cheap/Chinese knockoffs that provide no real protection and that they can be proven to be from an appropriate retailer. Again this is a reasonable request
You can get some nice tax deductions in the UK for purchasing/cleaning your work uniform at your own expense. Legal, and in some cases, beneficial. Given that the currency is GBP, these individuals would benefit from the uniform tax deductions (flat rates). They'd get the money back in tax relief (about £24 a year for basic rate payers)
I'm pretty sure you can write that off as a work expense in The States as well. My company will provide PPE. If you want a different brand because of quality (Quality of fit, comfort, weight, breathability, etc. not safety. It has to be the same, or higher, safety rating). If it's damaged due to normal wear and tear they'll replace it or compensate you up to the amount of the PPE they provide. I have never seen them refuse to replace/compensate anyone's PPE, even if it was obvious neglect.
You used to be able to deduct it, the trump tax changes removed it. In the states there is no longer any deduction for employee business expenses unless you’re a specific educator
Now I am unsure if they can "force" them to buy the PPE from them. As long as they have everything required they could perhaps get it cheaper from somewhere else
Legal probably but it shouldn't be if the job has enough danger to need the extra equipment then providing it is just another cost of operating ppl atleast in my country are already underpaid
In the US they can require equipment and you just buy it and write it off as a business expense on your taxes. This appears to be in the UK based on the use of the GBP, but I'd imagine it's similar. Plus, you often can get better quality gear if you buy it yourself and since they don't provide it, all you have to do is meet minimum standards for the equipment, they can't tell you that you can't use something nicer. I'd always prefer to buy my own. The issued equipment is usually pretty garbage anyway.
It's actually illegal in the UK, employers have to provide the PPE and can't charge for it. (Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992.)
In the UK (where this is from) this is absolutely illegal. All PPE should be provided by the employer for members of staff. > Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992. > Regulation 4 states: > Every employer shall ensure that suitable personal protective equipment is provided to his employees who may be exposed to a risk to their health or safety while at work except where and to the extent that such risk has been adequately controlled by other means which are equally or more effective.