Changes to the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992 (PPER)

HSE is consulting on changes to the PPER 1992. We encourage you to draw the attention of your stakeholders and other interested parties to this consultation launching on Monday 19 July 2021 and running for 4 weeks.

The consultation can be accessed via HSE Consultation Hub from this date.

The aim of the consultation is to understand the impact on stakeholders and businesses of extending the scope of the employers’ duties under the PPER to workers and not only employees.

Why is the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) making changes to the regulations?

In November 2020, a judgment was handed down in the judicial review action in the High Court brought by the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB) against the Secretaries of State for Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) and the Department for Work and Pension (DWP), which decided that the government had failed to properly transpose Article 8(4) and 8(5) of EU Directive 89/391/EEC  (“the Framework Directive”) and Article 3 of EU Directive 89/656/EEC  of 30 November 1989 (“the Personal Protective Equipment Directive”) into UK law.

The Framework Directive sets out the minimum standards for health and safety through a series of general principles, and the Personal Protective Equipment Directive (“PPE Directive”) sets out the minimum health and safety requirements for the use of personal protective equipment in the workplace for workers.

The UK implemented the PPE Directive through the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992  (“PPER”) which places duties on employers to their ‘employees’ in regard to PPE. The High Court found that the PPE Directive required these duties to be extended to ‘limb (b) workers’ and not only ‘employees’. Therefore, HSE is making amendments to the PPER in order to align with the court’s judgment.

What does this mean?

Employers will have a duty to provide limb (b) workers with the same health and safety protections in respect of PPE as they do currently for employees.

Options on how to achieve the extension of the provisions to workers in the legislation will not be presented during the consultation as the key legislative changes are being made to align with the court decision.

For any enquiries, please contact



Nottinghamshire care home fined over attack on resident.

The owners of a care home have been fined £140,000 for failing to protect a resident from an attack.
Nottingham Magistrates’ Court heard the victim suffered a serious head injury in 2017, at Bowbridge Court in Newark, Nottinghamshire, when attacked by another resident who had Alzheimer’s.
The CQC, prosecuting, said concerns prior to the attack had not been addressed.
Owners Ideal Care homes were fined and ordered to pay £14,361 costs.

Read More BBC

NHS Trust fined following failures to manage environmental risks.

Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust (EPUFT) has been fined for failing to manage environmental risks within its mental health inpatient wards. .
Court heard that, between 25 Oct. 2004 & 31 Mar. 2015, the Trust failed to effectively manage recognised risks from potential fixed ligature points in its inpatient wards, resulting in mental health patients being exposed to unacceptable & avoidable risk at a time when they were most vulnerable.
Tragically eleven inpatients died during this time-frame whose deaths involved access to fixed ligature points.
The Trust was fined £1,500,000 & to pay costs of £ 86222.23
More Here

Two care provider companies fined and a manager cautioned after employee stabbed

Two care provider companies fined and a manager cautioned after employee stabbed.

A care agency that supports people with mental health issues, its manager and a care home have been fined after an employee was stabbed by one of its residents. Whilst the employee was unaccompanied, the resident crossed the kitchen and stabbed the employee in the right side of her neck.
Options for Supported Living Ltd of St Nicholas House, Old Church Yard, Liverpool, pleaded guilty and was fined £31,000 and to pay £10,000 towards costs.

Fulwood Care Ltd of Ampthill Road, Aigburth, Liverpool pleaded guilty & was fined £14,000 & pay £10,000 towards costs.

More details


CQC raises alarm over ‘do not resuscitate’ orders during pandemic.

CQC raises alarm over ‘do not resuscitate’ orders during pandemic.

Regulator finds disturbing inconsistencies, including order   being applied to everyone over 80 with dementia in one residence
A report published by the CQC found disturbing variations in people’s experiences of do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions during the pandemic.


PPE failings at care home posed infection risk,

PPE failings at care home posed infection risk, CQC says.

Care home residents and staff were put at risk of infection   because personal protective equipment (PPE) was used wrongly, a health watchdog has said.
Croft House, in Ossett, near Wakefield, has been put in   special measures after being deemed “inadequate” by the CQC inspectors.
The home was “not well-led”, according to inspectors who
visited last Countrywide Care Homes, which runs the site, said  improvements had been made since the inspection.
Details             and                      BBC               


CQC whistleblowing up more than half in care settings

CQC whistle blowing up more than half in care settings.

A legal and regulatory specialist in health and social care has warned that with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) reporting a marked rise in whistleblowers, care providers need to be well-prepared.

Speaking on the topic during a recent Access All Areas webinar, Neil Grant, partner at Gordons Partnership LLP, pointed to CQC data highlighting that whistle blowing had increased by more than 50 per cent to 6,972 in the year up to September 2020.

During the pandemic, the CQC has changed the way it operates with routine inspections stopped and the focus shifting to supportive conversations with care providers and managers.