You are fuming over the audit finding that you do not conduct annual medicals for all your staff. You are considering how to broach the subject with the MD and Finance guy. Think about the risks and make sure you know the facts from a legal perspective too.
Pre-employment medicals for food handlers?
In our FAQ section we touched on this issue but it’s not as simple as a yea or no.
The answer is yes and no.
As far as the Department of Health is concerned: NO
In accordance with the view of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Safety, the Department accepts that it is not easy to maintain medical control over food handlers due to a rapid turnover which makes it difficult to keep track of them.
Medical examinations are costly and do not guarantee the detection of more than a small proportion of carriers of pathogenic organisms. Screening for pathogens in stool specimens from food handlers is not cost-beneficial and is not recommended, and the identification of a carrier is not likely to make a significant contribution to the control of food borne diseases. Infection may also occur after the examinations. Routine medical examinations of food handlers may lead to a false sense of safety which can cause negligence with regard to general hygienic practices and personal hygiene.
A much more effective preventative measure, the education of food handlers in hygienic practices, is often also neglected. For these reasons the Department considers pre-employment and routine medical examinations of food handlers as not being cost-effective and unreliable in the prevention of food borne disease and recommends that it should therefore not be required by health authorities. Regular monitoring and surveillance by health authorities and management of the food handling process are, however, crucial elements in the prevention of food borne diseases. The pre-employment medical cannot be the only method used.
BUT, as far as the Department of Labour is concerned: YES
The Occupational Health and Safety Act 85 of 1993 apply to everyone in South Africa in industry. All employers in South Africa have a duty to provide and maintain a working environment free of risk to the health and safety of employees. Performing occupational medicals on all staff is not explicitly required by law however one must consider the steps necessary to ensure these legal requirements below.
Section 8 (1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act mentioned above set the following requirement
“General duties of employers to their employees
(1) Every employer shall provide and maintain, as far as is reasonably practicable, a working environment that is safe and without risk to the health of his employees”.
Section 9 of the Act set the following requirement:
“General duties of employers and self-employed persons to persons other than their employees
(1) Every employer shall conduct his undertaking in such a manner as to ensure, as far as is reasonably practicable, that persons other than those in his employment who may be directly affected by his activities are not thereby exposed to hazards to their health or safety”.
The only effective way of ensuring that the employee or subcontractors are not affected is to measure – especially if hazards exist in the workplace. And this is where pre-employment, medical surveillance and exit medicals come in. This assessment gives the employee the before, during and after picture of the medical state of the employee. They therefore provide the evidence in the case of liability claims.
Only a registered Occupational Medical Practitioner with the Health Professions Council may conduct such medicals. This a requirement in terms of Section 17 of the Health Professions Act 56 of 1974. It would be advisable to consult with the occupational health practitioner to advice on the frequency of the medicals, who can advise once they are made aware of the hazards the employee is exposed to. This has traditionally been annually but this may not be necessary in all cases.
Be aware though
Section 7, of the Employment Equity Act states:
Employers may not force workers or job applicants to undergo a medical test unless –
The law permits or order it; such as Regulation 55e of the Meat Safety Act, red meat regulations
o (e) a HMP for medical fitness of workers in terms of which – (i) records of initial medical certification that workers are fit to work with meat and edible products, prior to employment, must be available; or
o it is acceptable because of –
o medical facts;
o employment conditions;
o social policy;
o the fair distribution of benefits; or
o job requirements.
Testing workers for HIV/AIDS is illegal unless the Labour Court orders it. Also not that an employer cannot refuse to hire an applicant who does not submit to a test unless it can show that the test is necessary in the circumstances.
References: http://www.labour.gov.za/DOL/legislation/acts/basic-guides/basic-guide-to-medical-and-psychometric-testing
