If shoes are classified as PPE, does that mean the employer pays for them?
By David Miller
When did shoes become personal protective equipment? In a very real sense, shoes have been protecting us from hazards since we took our first baby steps. Soccer shoes, hiking boots, athletic shoes, snowmobile boots, and even pumps or wingtips are all specialized at least in part to protect us from injury within the environment for which they are designed.
Because we have been donning this form of PPE since we have been toddlers, we do not automatically think of shoes and boots as PPE in the same context as work gloves or a respirator.
Yet, that is exactly what must be done to comply with OSHA regulations and to ensure the safety of employees. Proper foot protection is considered mandatory PPE in environments where safety issues exist. Your written risk assessment should catalog these issues for each category of worker, and you must prescribe the necessary equipment needed to reasonably protect against these risks. If your risk assessment determines special equipment should be worn—protective toes or puncture proof insoles, for example—you may be required to furnish these things to your employees at the company’s expense.
The OSHA Directive
An employer’s legal obligation to pay for footwear is full of nuances. When does a shoe transition from being just a shoe (the responsibility of the worker) to becoming safety equipment furnished by the employer? The OSHA regulation 29 CFR 1910.132 (h)(2) (with my emphasis added) sets the parameters as follows: “The employer is not required to pay for non-specialty safety-toe protective footwear (including steel-toe shoes or steel-toe boots) and non-specialty prescription safety eyewear, provided that the employer permits such items to be worn off the jobsite.”
This is a remarkably murky statement, even for OSHA. It makes a distinction between “non-specialty” and “specialty” protective footwear, and in the same breath it mystifyingly declares that steel-toed shoes and boots belong in the “non-specialty” category. So employers are supposed to draw the line … where, exactly?
Keeping in mind that you are not likely to be as fascinated with all the specific citations of government documents that exist on the subject as I am, I will just share with you the short list of items that I have found to be specifically listed in the record to show the sort of things considered “specialty” footwear. These are:
- Metatarsal protection
- Special boots for longshoremen working logs
- Shoe covers—toe caps and metatarsal guards
- Rubber boots with steel toes (emphasis mine)
Perhaps I am not the only one who finds it difficult to follow the logic of these specialty/non-specialty designations. It leaves me powerless to guess which column to assign safety features not specifically named. How about slip-resistant soles? Waterproof uppers?
I put the question to Dave Degenhardt, director of sales and operations for Lehigh Safety Shoes, one of the leading managed safety footwear program providers. He agreed that the directive creates enough uncertainty to make many employers want to err on the side of caution when it comes to furnishing footwear to employees.
The Stipend Solution
A popular solution to the question of who pays for safety footwear is the footwear allowance. This is where the employer subsidizes an employee’s work footwear, but gives the employee the freedom to choose the footwear they wear as long as it meets the minimum requirements specified by the employer’s hazard assessment. “We have over 10,000 employers participating in our managed program, including many waste industry companies,” Degenhardt said.
The concept is a win-win for everyone involved. The employer sets the allowance, which typically is equivalent to what it would cost to buy a basic pair of shoes or boots appropriate to the employee’s tasks. This enables companies to comply with even the strictest interpretation of the OSHA regulation while limiting their expenses to the stipend amount per each employee.
Employees can use the money to buy a basic pair, or if they desire a more expensive pair, they can use their own money to pay the difference. If they want to use their work boots for hunting or other off-duty activities, they may feel free to do so, knowing that they will have to pay for the next pair out of their own pocket if they get worn out ahead of schedule.
Degenhardt said companies typically choose an allowance of $100 or $150 per employee, which resets every 12 months.
Managed Buying Programs
There are a handful of safety footwear companies who offer managed buying programs. Some will bring a van to your place of business and personally fit your employees with work boots. Some offer a variety of brands while others will exclusively sell one brand of safety footwear. Others have adopted a Zappos.com-style model using the benefits offered by the Internet to expand selection and customize the buying experience to the needs of the employer. Red Wing Shoes’ safety program uses a variety of methods including on-location trucks where needed, but also taking advantage of their network of brick-and-mortar stores across the country.
It has been said that employers on the whole do a better job managing safety equipment than the end user. End users are more likely to choose inappropriate PPE and continue to use it long after it should be replaced if they are the ones responsible for paying for it. When it comes to footwear, however, employees who have the freedom to choose their preferred brand of footwear and have the opportunity to pay extra to get just the pair they want are probably going to be happier—and safer—than those whose choice of footwear is limited.
David Miller is the Waste Industry Manager for HUB Industrial Supply (Lake City, FL). He is a Certified Safety Professional and works with managers to effectively implement and manage PPE and MRO programs in the waste industry. He may be reached at [email protected]. HUB Industrial Supply is an Applied MSSSM company.