Human Capital Management :HIV/AIDS

-
It should be unnecessary to have a specific policy regarding employees suffering from HIV/AIDS as the disease may be better regarded as a sickness to be covered by the employer's SICKNESS policy - although specific reference might be needed to advise employees of the fact that the employer has retained counselling and medical assistance. The ignorance and prejudice that surrounds the illness however, may make it advisable to address the problem separately.

Commentary
In view of widespread concern at the proximity of AIDS sufferers, such victims may need to be included as a category within the organisation anti-discrimination policy. Employees should be advised that those suffering from AIDS are rarely a risk to other employees. If despite informal re-assurances, an employee refuses to work alongside or to relate to an AIDS sufferer the employer should arrange an interview with a medical adviser to provide expert advice on the subject. If this is not effective it may be necessary to raise the matter under the DISCIPLINARY procedure although if there are any other means by which re-assurance can be given these may be preferable. If the employer has included AIDS sufferers as a category in a DIGNITY at WORK policy, this should be referred to, indicating that the full weight of the disciplinary procedure can be utilised. Ultimately of course, the disease may affect the performance of the employee's work, so that dismissal might need to be considered on these grounds under the normal policy for long-term SICKNESS and disability.

Employee Guidance
1. Acquired Immune-Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is a disease which is less contagious than many other diseases. AIDS can only be generated by the Human Immune-Deficiency Virus (HIV) but even those who have the HIV virus do not necessarily contract AIDS for several years.

2. There is virtually no way that an employee who works with or alongside someone suffering from the HIV virus, is at risk of contracting the disease. An employee believing this not to be the case can apply for a counselling session with the [organisation] medical adviser.

Warning (Should employees work with sharp implements immediately adjacent to each other it is just feasible that the disease could be transmitted as a result of simultaneous cuts. Employers should take specific advice on minimising even such a remote possibility.)


3. The HIV virus (which causes AIDS) can only be spread by sexual contact, by an infected mother to her unborn child, or by blood infection (for example, by using a drug injection needle that has been used by an AIDS sufferer or someone who is HIV positive). Other than these three main contagion-risking areas, and those whose work involves piercing the skin (e.g. tattooists) or handling blood who may need to take precautions, it is not possible to contract HIV or AIDS in employment.

4. Employees who fear the risk of contagion from an HIV or AIDS infected colleague should be re-assured by the foregoing but the [Organisation] is prepared to arrange counselling sessions for anyone still concerned as set out in 2 above.

5. First Aiders who may be required to treat open wounds, etc., of HIV or AIDS sufferers will receive special training as well as having available airways for mouth to mouth resuscitation, plastic gloves and breathing masks. There is no recorded case of the virus being transmitted in this way.

6. In view of the foregoing, employees are expected to work normally with and alongside any HIV or AIDS sufferer, and to treat them as they would anyone else with a serious disease. Refusal to work with an HIV or AIDS sufferer will be regarded as a breach of the organisation discrimination and disciplinary policies to which the attention of all employees is drawn.

7. The [Organisation] appreciates the concern that there is regarding this disease but stresses that, in view of the lack of risk to fellow-employees, although it will be sympathetic to those who have concerns, it expects everyone to behave with maturity and to give HIV/AIDS sufferers normal respect. Failure to act in accordance with the requirements of this policy will be grounds for disciplinary action.


Advice
Leaflets 'AIDS at work' and 'AIDS in the Work Place' are available from the Department of Employment. Providing employees with copies, possibly backed up by a briefing by a medical expert, may assist in what can be an emotionally charged situation.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Canteens and Rest Rooms for Employees-Cooperation, Employee's Duty Of

-
Canteens and Rest Rooms for Employees Key points Whether or not employers are legally-bound to provide their workers with dedicated canteens or rests room will depend in large part on the type of activity or process in which an employer is engaged. Regulation 25(5) of the Workplace (Health, Safety & Welfare) Regulations 1992 - that apply to every workplace - states that 'suitable and sufficient facilities shall be provided for persons at work to eat meals where meals are regularly eaten in the workplace'. By way of explanation, the accompanying Approved Code of Practice points out that 'seats in work areas can be counted as eating facilities provided they are in a sufficiently clean place and there is a suitable surface on which to place food. Eating facilities', it continues, 'should include a facility for preparing or obtaining a hot drink, such as an electric kettle, a vending machine or a canteen'. Furthermore, 'workers who work
Read more

Dismissal for Lack of Qualifications

-
Image
Key points §   'Lack of qualifications' is one of the permitted (or legitimate) reasons for dismissal listed in section 98(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The expression qualifications means any degree, diploma or other academic, technical or professional qualification relevant to the position that a dismissed employee held ( ibid. section 98(3)(b)). §   Although an employee can legitimately be dismissed for not having the qualifications needed to do his (or her) job, that is not necessarily an end to the matter. What an employment tribunal must decide is whether the dismissal was fair. Given the particular circumstances (including the size and administrative resources of his undertaking) did the employer act reasonably or unreasonably in treating the employee's lack of qualifications as a sufficient reason for dismissing him? That question, says section 98(4) of the 1996 Act, shall be determined 'in accordance with equity and the substantial merits of the case&
Read more

Pseudo-Employees | Part-Time Employees

-
Individuals carrying out work for an Organisation for payment are not necessarily employees of that Organisation. The distinction between the self-employed who carry out work for an Organisation under what is a 'contract for service', and employees who carry out work under a 'contract of service' is unclear. Employment legislation sometimes gives benefits and/or rights to 'workers' rather than 'employees'. All employees are workers but not all workers are employees. Determination Guidance as to whether a person is or is not self-employed and therefore not an employee, can be gained from the answers to questions such as: a. Does the person have managerial control over their own activities? b. Do they have investment control over their actions? c. Have they the right to hire and fire their own staff? d. Are they registered for VAT? e. Can the individual refuse to carry out work offered without sanction? If the answers are YES then almost certainly the pers
Read more