Legality Of Making Employees Do Cv Testing

[bednobs]

Hi, I am wfh at the moment but my usual place of work is a big site with thousands if staff. Currently the dictat is if you can work from home you should. There are people that can't wfh. Anyway with restrictions easing, there are some rumblings about asking employees to do lfts if they are coming on site. I feel very strongly that your employer should not be able to compel you to do (atm no compulsion but in the future, who knows?) Can they retrospectively impose this condition? Although this is law is be interested I personal opinions too

[lankeela]

Why would you not want to know if you were positive and therefore liable to pass it on to others you come into contact with?

[Jackdaw33]

It would help to know what lfts is.

[Buenchico]

From Acas:
https://www.acas.org.uk/working-safely-coronavirus/testing-staff-for-coronavirus

However everyone should be using lateral flow testing at the moment anyway. It's the socially responsible thing to do. I'm not working but I still perform home lateral flow tests twice a week, so that I know that I'm unlikely to infect others when I venture out.

[brainiac]

lfts ?

[Mamyalynne]

Most of my family are doing regular lateral flow tests regularly as they are either at school/college or working and mixing with others.

It does give a sense of security.

[calmck]

Portugal. My daughter is back working as a yoga teacher at a 5+ star hotel here and the hotel is testing and paying for these every 15 days. Especially now the hotel is open and receiving clients from the UK!

[Canary42]

I don't understand what you mean by impose retrospectively - how can they make you carry out a task in the past if you didn't at the time ?

[Peter Pedant]

just calm down

Disease X is prevalent and employers say that it is in the public health interest to test. An employee appeals to the court on the grounds that their human rights at work are being eroded

I cant see a court saying - oh yes yes this is a most egregrious ( v bad) failing on the part of the employer - workers must be allowed to attend work and infect people and have nothing done

I just done see a court would

Is an employer allowed to instigae and enforce a change in contract after it has been struck - no in general

Does this come under that ?- no in general. Covid wasnt thought of when you signed a contract AND is a known public health hazard

I think you are overblowing an important change

[Peter Pedant]

// you mean by impose retrospectively//

emplloyment contract says A,B,C
and the employer inserts X and enforces is ( finger wagging and sayng you must do X !)

X here is lat flow testing twice a week as recommended by all govt depts

I think the courts will say horses for courses - - desperate diseases require desperate remedies
esp if the beaks are saying you have to stuff your head in a paper bag before you cross the threshold of a court

[bednobs]

Thanks. I am coming from the perspective that because of the nature of the work I do I already have to give up a lot of freedoms to maintain security clearance and I don't really want to be forced into doing something else if it's not needed. The position on people doing lfts seems to be quite woolly- I have a primary aged child and when tests became available the school were saying you can do them if you want, however more recently there seems to be a presumption that they ARE being done by everyone

[Peter Pedant]

I regard this as mainly health care and not employment

and suppose there is disease A which is detected more or less by regular temp taking. and someone comes into Hospital with A ( having infected a few others) and says - "Ah yes, they say take the temp, but I thought much better and knew it wasnt enforceable, so I didnt ! and now look what has happened !"

I think I might throw the furniture around - but that is me