Actually, there’s talk from some of the higher ups that says we may not be permitted to take these employer provided shoes home. We are a medical device manufacturer and people tracking Og knows what onto the factory floor from their street shoes is perceived as being a major source of contamination. This is little better than roumor at this point but if true, the main sticking point is storage for a thousand plus pairs of stinky shoes. The lockers they give us are too small as is.
It’s gonna be interesting to see how this shakes out.
I also have hard to fit feet so I understand your problem. I am curious though - have you positively determined the employer approved selection does not include your size, or do you just assume they do not? If your size is available then perhaps this is not such an issue. If your size is not available, see next paragraph.
I assume that the provided shoes may not allow for a comfortable fit. I have not tried them on and nothing has been proven yet. I may well be worried about nothing. If my employer choose to go with a reputable, name brand shoe with a solid reputation then my fears are largely unfounded. If the pattern holds and they go with the cheapest possible option from some cut-rate, shoddy manufacturer, I’m not optimistic.
Some time in the past few months, your company has aquired someone new in the c-level and that executive has come from another industry. I would not be surprised if in the next few months your going to be wearing the white bunny suit and bump helmets, thats how far standardization of PPE can get.
Bottom line, someone has done a study on your facility and you are substandard in PPE and that leaves the company venerable to liability lawsuits and government fines, even if you have had the safest facility in the country. Accept that your not going to be able to change things imediately and that its going to be at least a year or more before the numbers come in for third party safety gear providers and any accidents post safety change over.
If the change is to prevent contamination of health/medical equipment, I see it as a good thing. While the warehouse obviously isn’t a white suit area, the less likelihood of someone tracking through who knows what and tracking it into the warehouse where it becomes airborne isn’t a pleasant thought for something that’s brought into where I’m already sick.
On a video forum I follow, people ask about buying used VCRs and cameras from a hospital. Sure hospitals are generally the most sterile places, but I’m sure no one cleans INSIDE those electronics.
As for lack of locker space for your shoes, IMO, it’s perfectly within the companies right to demand you store them there for potential contamination control (if that is why they’re being issued) and to ensure they’re there when you need them (versus forgetting to wear them from home). As for the smell, I would think they’d issue some type of dessicant/odor control for it.
Regards the lack of space, we tend to take what’s given to us as a right, not a privilege unless it’s clearly defined in your employee handbook. If you have to take out your workout pants and sweats for your after work visit to the gym, it’s the company’s right to force you to give up that space for your shoes, which are required equipment for your job.
And while employees are riding the current high wave of “We can make demands, because with the low unemployment, we have the upper hand!”, the tide will eventually switch and a successful company thinks of consequences/effects of their concessions/actions years from now and how it affects, in your company’s case the other tens of thousands of employees. As Mcmechanic posted, what occurs in one location can trickle up to the other locations.
To be fair and accurate, I never said I worked in the warehouse. I am on the production floor. Specifically, I run a packaging line for assembled insulin syringes.
Ahhh…even more reason for keeping things sterile, if that’s the logic behind the change. Do the workers doing the actual packaging/boxing of the product wear gloves, masks and hair nets? If so, would booties be an alternative to the mandated work boots?
I always chuckle to myself when I open a band-aid. Sealed for my protection. Yep, but who knows what’s on the outside of the wrapper, especially since it’s been exposed to the poop and pee filed air of the bathroom for months or years! :eek:
Just to be clear before someone jumps on me. Yes, I’m aware that germs and viruses generally are short-lived outside the host. Just giving “What about?” “What if?” possibilities.
Everyone on the production floor wear smocks and hair nets/beard covers as needed. The smocks were currently wear extend several inches below the waist and all the way to the wrist. These smocks will soon be replaced with longer, knee length versions that also eliminate the very convenient pockets. All piercings must be covered and no street clothing may be visible above the bottom of the smock. Given the way our machines are set up, there’s almost no need to ever touch the product itself. Almost the only time this happens is when we have to clear a machine jam and this product invariably goes straight into the reject tub. We do strictly train though that gloves are to be worn not only when touching the product but when we touch anything that touches the product and a variety of different gloves are available to protect ourselves and the product. Additionally, all parts contact surfaces are cleaned every shift with bleach followed by isopropyl alcohol.
Paper booties have been discussed and they are available for guests and contractors that have to enter the production floor. I don’t know why they have not been advanced for use by the production staff. I suspect they might be a safety issue (slips, trips and falls) but I can’t prove this
It’s worth noting that we answer to the FDA regarding production standards including FM (foreign material). We do have to submit test data to them and they perform spot checks. We consistently do quite well on these reports.
Even more short lived in our case. Before any product leaves our warehouse, it spends some time with a Cobalt-60 sterilizer.
A doctor’s note will suffice at my workplace if there can be a medical concern regarding any ppe. The funny thing is the doctors around my area usually know which employers are too severe in their policies, and not just about safety. The word gets around
Ahhh…thank you for the additional info. Makes more sense to mandate footwear as it sounds like a FDA regulation versus an OSHA issue. Good to hear such stringent procedures in in place to ensure sterility.
Still unfortunate, especially in your situation with your feet, it seems like a mandated item, but as stated, you have options to get something that will meet your needs.
As for booties, they’re surely more expensive in the long run and they worn for a multi-hour shift. Possibility of tears or falling off.
[best guess] The FDA wouldn’t care if we had a steel toe cap on our shoes. They might well mandate that street shoes are not to be worn onto the production floor. Management, in response to this demand may decide the easiest way to ensure compliance is to provide a uniform pair of shoes so that outsiders can be quickly spotted. Since they’re biting the bullet and buying the shoes, they may as well buy some protective shoes with toe caps and try to get a break on their insurance/workman’s comp costs. [/best guess?]
None of this makes me happier about the possibility of having to deal with a less than comfortable shoe. If these new models look anything like a traditional leather work boot, at the end of the shift, you’re going to be able to squirt my feet right out the top without unlacing them first.
Time will tell. It’s best to see what they actually hand us before panicking.
You might show your employer this. I just took a class for OSHA-10 certification and steel toed shoes were specifically exempt from employer-supplied PPEs. Shoes protecting the metatarsals (instep, basically) are an exception to the exception.
The employer doesn’t even have to pay for the steel-toed shoes which might warm the bean-counters’ hearts but lawsuit-savvy employers go through the employee reimbursement plan you outlined in the OP.
There may also have been a recent ISO 13485 Microbiology Audit - those can produce some interesting nonconformities around PPE, pest control, etc. Your employer may be going for a specific ISO classification for a controlled environment, which has certain requirements around how FM is reduced.
Speaking as someone who has implemented a lot of “stupid changes” that people grumbled about, I can tell you there was definitely a reason. They may not have properly assessed all of the user needs when developing a solution, however.
If the options presented to you aren’t enough, I recommend checking out the Ask A Manager blog on how to bring up an issue as a group, which will give you more weight. See if you can find out why the edict came down for only those options, and tailor an argument to fit. Workers’ Comp claims are always a good argument from a cost standpoint. For added fun, offer to join the team to find a better solution that meets everyone’s needs - people love it when you can spin a complaint into a desire to help improve.
For several years, I worked at a place that gave us a $100 credit each year at a local safety footwear outlet. Since safety footwear is generally pretty rugged, one pair would easily last several years. It was actually a challenge to spend the credit after a few years. I still have several pair in my closet, including a pair of black penny-loafers with steel toes. They look a bit clumsy, but I’ve worn them to weddings.
We have a similar program. An annual $100 voucher for shoes from the local place. The local vendor also has a mobile store in the back of a cargo truck which parks for the day once a year in our parking lot. The $100 covers most of the basic shoe models and if you want something nicer you just pay the difference.
:eek:
