Do I have a right to appeal

[Colin dale]

Basically if I'm on insulin injections I can't operate machines with NWR has anyone ever changed there type 1 to type 2 ? Because that's my only option with out taking it further thank you

 

[AndBreathe]

Basically if I'm on insulin injections I can't operate machines with NWR has anyone ever changed there type 1 to type 2 ? Because that's my only option with out taking it further thank you

Colin, I can't tell if you are Type 1, or Type 2, using insulin, as my answer would vary very significantly, depending on that.

 

[Colin dale]

Type 1 sorry

 

[Copepod]

What did Diabetes UK careline actually tell you? Can you get a union rep to assist you with appeal, or, if there's no other alternative, reassignment to a different role?

 

[Andy HB]

Please be careful what you wish for. This may sound a little bit odd and I hope to whichever God any of us choose to worship that it never actually happens but the day that there is a lorry crash with fatalities which is proven to be caused by a hypoglycaemic driver I am of the personal opinion that it will push the cause of type 1 diabetic drivers back onto horseback. I don't mean to sound harsh or cruel I really don't but the Great British Joe Soap never seems content unless he or she has somewhere to dollop large servings of good home cooked blame

I seem to remember a case recently when this has already happened (and there are probably many more). But this was down to someone who didn't care a jot and didn't bother to test before driving.

But, no, I fundamentally disagree with you. If someone takes care to test themselves before and whilst driving, I see no reason why there should be a problem. Especially if they have good hypo awareness and can demonstrate that they take their condition seriously.

I think there is a similar issue with people with epilepsy. If they have not had a seizure for a certain period of time, then they are allowed to drive. I don't see any difference between that situation and people with type 1 diabetes.

Also, there is something fundamentally inequitable in this case where an insulin dependent type 2 can drive but not a type 1.

 

[Diabeticliberty]

In all fairness I believe that the type of diabetes to be academic. It is the treatment with insulin that organisations get their knickers in a twist about. This is of course if they have all not had another rethink in anticipation of legal challenges prompted by changes in European Law.

 

[Andy HB]

In all fairness I believe that the type of diabetes to be academic. It is the treatment with insulin .....

Which is precisely the point I was making! 🙂

 

[Northerner]

Well, you can drive a train and fly a plane if your insulin-dependant diabetes is well controlled, can't see why you shouldn't be allowed to drive a crane! 🙄

Must say I am thankful that I never actually learned to drive, otherwise getting diagnosed aged 49 would no doubt have made a big change to my life if I had become in some way dependant on the ability, whether in job or personal life. Driving is an odd thing, I think - people can go out after not having driven for 30 years or when they are in their 90s and no-one bats an eyelid. Or when they are 17 and have virtually no experience of the roads and traffic and a sense of invulnerability coupled with a tendency to try and impress their peers.

I hope you can resolve things Colin, or find good alternative employment.

 

[Diabeticliberty]

I seem to remember a case recently when this has already happened (and there are probably many more). But this was down to someone who didn't care a jot and didn't bother to test before driving.

But, no, I fundamentally disagree with you. If someone takes care to test themselves before and whilst driving, I see no reason why there should be a problem. Especially if they have good hypo awareness and can demonstrate that they take their condition seriously.

I think there is a similar issue with people with epilepsy. If they have not had a seizure for a certain period of time, then they are allowed to drive. I don't see any difference between that situation and people with type 1 diabetes.

Also, there is something fundamentally inequitable in this case where an insulin dependent type 2 can drive but not a type 1.

With respect, I test and test a hell of a lot I also have excellent hypo awareness. None of this mattered when I crashed my 4 door car on the M56 into the Armco barrier on the central reservation at the grand speed of 26 mph. Nobody else was hurt and my car was about sixty quid short of being written off. Had I been driving 40 tonnes of concrete or 40 tonnes of silk pyjamas and blissfully ignorantly rolled over a family on their way to Chester Zoo all of the hypo awareness in the world would not not have saved them or possibly me either. I am not trying to be over dramatic for effect but everything we do has consequences and as much as I immensely dislike DVLA they are only trying to mitigate as much as possible against situations.

 

[everydayupsanddowns]

Well, you can drive a train and fly a plane if your insulin-dependant diabetes is well controlled, can't see why you shouldn't be allowed to drive a crane! 🙄

Must say that was my first thought Alan. If you can be a commercial airline pilot and live with T1 then it seems a little severe to be banned entirely from operating a crane. It should all boil down to the individual case, what the person's history, and daily management is like and whether or not they *as an individual* are up to the job - with the assistance of whatever technology would help.

People perform jobs every day of the week while a bit worse for wear... developing a tummy bug... plagued by hayfever... really badly hungover... whatever. These are occasional circustances that undoubtedly affect their fitness to work, but no blanket ban is imposed.

I absolutely agree that we all need to be responsible - and perhaps take the view that there are some jobs or activities we would not choose because of our own circumstances - but these are always individual decisions.

 

[Diabeticliberty]

Must say that was my first thought Alan. If you can be a commercial airline pilot and live with T1 then it seems a little severe to be banned entirely from operating a crane. It should all boil down to the individual case, what the person's history, and daily management is like and whether or not they *as an individual* are up to the job - with the assistance of whatever technology would help.

People perform jobs every day of the week while a bit worse for wear... developing a tummy bug... plagued by hayfever... really badly hungover... whatever. These are occasional circustances that undoubtedly affect their fitness to work, but no blanket ban is imposed.

I absolutely agree that we all need to be responsible - and perhaps take the view that there are some jobs or activities we would not choose because of our own circumstances - but these are always individual decisions.

If you listen to the DVLA pointyheads any condition or medication that affects your ability to drive (including sleep apnoea) should be reported to them and they will whup your proverbial ass. Regarding driving with a hangover if the police breathylise you then you are looking at a probable ban if over the limit which in my view should be reduced to absolute zero and possibly prison. Last year I drove over sixty thousand miles and to be perfectly honest I am that hacked off with driving if I never had to get behind the wheel again it would be an absolute blessing. I hate driving with a burning passion.

 

[trophywench]

Indeed there but for the grace of God in my case too. About 20 years ago or so.

However - both of us are still allowed to drive our cars - me after a 12 month break following the Armco incidents on the M42. (Yep - twice - same as you - thousands of £ of damage to my employers cars - but no injury or third party property involved. Not sure if the motor insurers also had the bills for the Armco LOL)

As far as life in general is concerned - accidents WILL happen - accidentally! - so you can only Risk Assess everything you already know about - from affixing a stair gate where appropriate when there's a toddler in situ, to looking both ways before and whilst you cross a road whatever age you are. Nobody but nobody PLANS to go hypo - so we all take precautions to prevent it.

Daniel (the Tube driver) now has to produce printouts of his BG test results from his meter to Occupational Health regularly, and whilst at work has to maintain a BG of at least 7.

The important thing, surely, when you employ someone to do a job involving 'Risk' is to assess that the precautions they and you take are sufficient to remove as much of the potential Risk as can be reasonably foreseen - whether its the 'slings and hooks' Regulations, the training of the people attaching the things that are to be carried, or the competence of the crane driver ?

If the employer can't assess that competence because he says 'I'm on insulin' - then that is a problem that THEY have to solve and find a solution to, since they cannot, by Law, discriminate in the way which the OP is describing. If they want weekly print outs - well fine - the OP can provide them quite easily - as we all could, should we be required to do so after an incident whilst we are driving our cars. Should he refuse to do this then this is when HE is at fault.

In this case - he is NOT.

 

[Matt Cycle]

If you listen to the DVLA pointyheads any condition or medication that affects your ability to drive (including sleep apnoea) should be reported to them and they will whup your proverbial ass. Regarding driving with a hangover if the police breathylise you then you are looking at a probable ban if over the limit which in my view should be reduced to absolute zero and possibly prison. Last year I drove over sixty thousand miles and to be perfectly honest I am that hacked off with driving if I never had to get behind the wheel again it would be an absolute blessing. I hate driving with a burning passion.

I agree the limit should be reduced but I think a zero limit is unrealistic as if someone has some wine gums, oh alright then not wine gums but say tiramisu or something like it then their blood alcohol level will quite clearly not be zero but the increase in the level will be so small their ability to drive shouldn't be affected. Half the time you probably wouldn't know it was there - steak cooked in red wine etc.

 

[AndBreathe]

Which is precisely the point I was making! 🙂

The reason I asked for clarification on type was Colin asked is anyone had ever changed their T1 to T2.

Unless there was a misdiagnosis of T1, rather than a T2 who hasn't for a million reasons managed to bring their diabetes into line, I would suggest that a T1 will always be a T1, due to the fact that the pancreas doesn't produce insulin, or not materially enough of it. If the OP had been T2, who had progressed onto insulin, then it could have been worth Colin exploring any other options open to him, in terms of getting off insulin. On another forum, I have seen some people achieve this, although not every insulin dependent T2 who wanted to come off insulin.

I agree it is bonkers that the pivotal factor would every be the label, rather than the insulin.

 

[Diabeticliberty]

Indeed there but for the grace of God in my case too. About 20 years ago or so.

However - both of us are still allowed to drive our cars - me after a 12 month break following the Armco incidents on the M42. (Yep - twice - same as you - thousands of £ of damage to my employers cars - but no injury or third party property involved. Not sure if the motor insurers also had the bills for the Armco LOL)

As far as life in general is concerned - accidents WILL happen - accidentally! - so you can only Risk Assess everything you already know about - from affixing a stair gate where appropriate when there's a toddler in situ, to looking both ways before and whilst you cross a road whatever age you are. Nobody but nobody PLANS to go hypo - so we all take precautions to prevent it.

Daniel (the Tube driver) now has to produce printouts of his BG test results from his meter to Occupational Health regularly, and whilst at work has to maintain a BG of at least 7.

The important thing, surely, when you employ someone to do a job involving 'Risk' is to assess that the precautions they and you take are sufficient to remove as much of the potential Risk as can be reasonably foreseen - whether its the 'slings and hooks' Regulations, the training of the people attaching the things that are to be carried, or the competence of the crane driver ?

If the employer can't assess that competence because he says 'I'm on insulin' - then that is a problem that THEY have to solve and find a solution to, since they cannot, by Law, discriminate in the way which the OP is describing. If they want weekly print outs - well fine - the OP can provide them quite easily - as we all could, should we be required to do so after an incident whilst we are driving our cars. Should he refuse to do this then this is when HE is at fault.

In this case - he is NOT.

I am not for one second attempting to apportion blame to Colin for his extremely unfortunate situation. I am only suggesting that the lengths small, well not just small but all business must now go through to mitigate risk would make your head spin like Linda Blair in The Exorcist. I frequently am forced to draft risk assessments and am coming under ever increasing criticism for not including some things that on the face of it seem a little too weird or downright bizarre to include. Larger companies who we, as a company are quite literally cap in hand to for a living have become so paranoid and not without good reason about being sued propped up by pond life parasitic ambulance chasing solicitors that the effect cascades down and everybody at some point foots part of the bill for the cost of this abject silliness. I do not for one second even begin to suggest that employees should be placed in harms way but the lengths that my own company are now forced to go to by some of the power stations and other utility companies are just plain daft. I suspect on a diabetic forum I may be on the wrong side of the greater percentage of opinion but I can actually see things from an employers point of view. It is at times an extremely uncomfortable seat to be sat in and whatever you attempt to do for what you actually believe is in the best interests of all attracts criticism. The other issue is, contrary to what you might read or hear not all employers place profit above the welfare of their own employees. Most are just trying to make a living in extremely adverse trading conditions.

 

[trophywench]

And I'm saying to you that it's most likely because Daniel the Tube driver's employers realised that they WERE discriminating against a disability and therefore likely to be sued, that they had to revisit their previous stance.

For the same reason - I believe the OP's employer could be! (sued - or at least taken to an Employment Tribunal for unfair dismissal !)

Had another thought actually @colin - try ringing ACAS too !

 

[Diabeticliberty]

And I'm saying to you that it's most likely because Daniel the Tube driver's employers realised that they WERE discriminating against a disability and therefore likely to be sued, that they had to revisit their previous stance.

For the same reason - I believe the OP's employer could be! (sued - or at least taken to an Employment Tribunal for unfair dismissal !)

Had another thought actually @colin - try ringing ACAS too !

Let me take this opportunity to wish him the very best of luck. I strongly suspect that he might need all the luck he can muster 🙂

 

[trophywench]

Well unless or until someone challenges them, they'll continue to bury their heads in the sand, won't they?

What was that black lady's name, who decided to sit on the bus in the US?

 

[Ljc]

I wish you luck too.

 

[Northerner]

Well unless or until someone challenges them, they'll continue to bury their heads in the sand, won't they?

What was that black lady's name, who decided to sit on the bus in the US?

Rosa Parks 🙂