Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

I have a nut allergy and colleague eating nuts in office.

466 replies

Yewdontknowme · 28/10/2023 02:29

I’ve been working with this company since June. It’s with a small company with two open plan rooms in the same building. There is no HR department just the owners and the general manager and supervisors. One room is nut free as myself and an intern are severely allergic, the other room is ok for nuts. We never have to go into the other office. We are allocated space based on what we do within the company and wfh isn’t an option. For the past few months everything has been great.

A supervisor has returned to our office this past fortnight after maternity leave. It seems she is really popular among the other women in the office. She has ignored all the signs and warnings and has been eating nuts at her workstation, which is making me wheeze and my throat and mouth are itching until I get away home. I’m working dosed up on piriton and with fingers crossed I don’t need to use my epipen.

Our manager is a bit of a coward so has been trying to deal with this woman calmly including offering her a space in the other room but she’s refusing to swap rooms as she wants to be with her friends and likes the bigger workspace she has. She is claiming it’s discriminating against her as a returning mother and a vegetarian and so she will continue to eat what she wants, as in her words “they’re not eating the nuts themselves so they’ll be ok”. For what it’s worth I too am a vegetarian. She also told us to get epipens. Myself and the intern can’t go into the other room as the work in there is totally different to what we do. We need the facilities in this space. Our manager has told us we need to sort it out among ourselves.

I appreciate this is a management problem but what am I supposed to do in the meantime? I’m still on probation and this woman is a long standing staff member. It took me a long time to find this job after redundancy in lockdown and I’m terrified I’ll be laid off after my probationary period runs out because of the drama this causes. I can start looking for another job but I fear it will take me over a year again.

AIBU to expect the manager to deal with this woman instead of having to sort out a ‘compromise’ myself?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 08:31

Freshstart78….”you would call for someone who had an itchy throat”???? It’s no wonder the ambulance service is under so much strain. Of course you need to call 999 if the patient is suffering from anaphylaxis, but a simple itchy throat does not indicate anaphylaxis, you need more symptoms than that

There is usually more than one of these:

To call an ambulance for someone who simply has an itchy throat wastes resources and removes them from someone who may be suffering a life threatening incident such as a stroke or a heart attack. As a trained first aider (which you should be at work) you should know when to call an ambulance and that isn’t it

Your Skin, Pruritus, and Itching

WebMD explains the link between pruritus, or itchiness, and other medical conditions.

https://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/skin-conditions-pruritus

Jacesmum1977 · 30/10/2023 08:32

Hi OP.

This woman is a knob!!!
She can go to prison if you die from anaphylaxis. Sounds dramatic but it’s the truth but it’s not your job to tell her that.
The management need to be management and step up here to protect you, spineless idiots. Please tell them it is their job to sort this out, not ‘sort it out between you’ because that’s not going to help you.
Good luck and if nothing changes, call ACAS. xx

cultureplanet · 30/10/2023 08:34

Rosscameasdoody · 30/10/2023 07:35

You obviously don’t get it, so I’ll stop trying now.

Show quote history

I don’t get your point

but I get it

pam290358 · 30/10/2023 08:36

Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 08:19

So you have to take piriton at work, big deal! How many people have to work dosed up on piriton throughout the summer months because they suffer with hay fever. No one is forcing you to eat nuts, no one is exposing you to “nut dust” let’s face it nuts don’t create dust. Non ingestion allergic reactions to nuts doesn’t really happen, certainly not enough to cause anaphylaxis. https://www.wsh.nhs.uk/CMS-Documents/Patient-leaflets/PaediatricDepartment/6438-1-Nut-allergy.pdf

it sounds to me like to are being overly sensitive, of course you must be careful not to ingest nuts, but that does not extend to a nut free zone around you.

You’ve just contradicted yourself in one paragraph - well done. You acknowledge that the OP has to take Piriton at work - because there are nuts present - yet in your next breath you say non-ingestion allergies don’t happen. Newsflash. Hayfever doesn’t kill you. Nut allergies do. Taking medication constantly reduces its effectiveness and Piriton wasn’t meant to be taken continuously because some arsehole doesn’t care about your allergy. Way to call the OP a liar without actually calling her a liar. Utterly ignorant and offensive post.

cultureplanet · 30/10/2023 08:36

pam290358 · 30/10/2023 07:18

Several similar suggestions upthread. All of them batshit. If the OP were ‘collapse’ an ambulance would be called and paramedics would know it was fake. What do you think would happen then ?

Show quote history

@pam290358 i read this poster’s insane suggestion, I went to respond and then I thought “what is the point? I imagine someone like this seriously struggles In life

Rosscameasdoody · 30/10/2023 08:38

cultureplanet · 30/10/2023 08:34

I don’t get your point

but I get it

Show quote history

I’ve made my point several times. As have other posters you’ve engaged and argued with. If your comprehension skills aren’t up to it, that’s not my problem.

Brutalass · 30/10/2023 08:41

I absolutely concur with everything said above.

I employed a young woman with a nut allergy and the first thing I did was a Training session for all staff on Nut Allergy, First Aid and Epipens and how to administer. Nuts were banned from being consumed within the building and everything was put in place to ensure that this member of staff was kept safe and well.

I'm so sorry that your Manager and colleagues are not taking your allergy seriously.

I would personally approach your Manager once more and then suggest that you wfh until things change. Otherwise your health and potentially your life are at risk.

Good luck

cultureplanet · 30/10/2023 08:45

Rosscameasdoody · 30/10/2023 08:38

I’ve made my point several times. As have other posters you’ve engaged and argued with. If your comprehension skills aren’t up to it, that’s not my problem.

Show quote history

Again. I don’t get your point

No biggie 🤷‍♀️

pam290358 · 30/10/2023 08:48

Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 08:31

Freshstart78….”you would call for someone who had an itchy throat”???? It’s no wonder the ambulance service is under so much strain. Of course you need to call 999 if the patient is suffering from anaphylaxis, but a simple itchy throat does not indicate anaphylaxis, you need more symptoms than that

There is usually more than one of these:

To call an ambulance for someone who simply has an itchy throat wastes resources and removes them from someone who may be suffering a life threatening incident such as a stroke or a heart attack. As a trained first aider (which you should be at work) you should know when to call an ambulance and that isn’t it

Perhaps if you stopped googling in an effort to seem knowledgeable and engaged with some of the posters commenting from actual experience you would learn something useful. The company I worked for had a policy of 999 as soon as a colleague with a severe allergy showed any sign of discomfort. Why ? Because the timescale between the first signs of an allergic reaction and life threatening symptoms was often only a minute or two. Do you have a specific reason for trying to minimise these issues ?

Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 08:53

I didn’t acknowledge that the OP “had to take piriton” I acknowledged that she “felt she had to take piriton” medical opinion is that non ingestion anaphylaxis doesn’t happen as per the attachment I posted. A total ban on nuts and nut products from the vicinity of the allergy sufferer is an over reaction. Whilst there has been one case where a nut allergy was defined as a disability under the EA, it was in respect of a chef and in particular circumstances, I’m not convinced the tribunals would follow it through to airborne transmissions in an office environment, particularly where NHS advice is that not ingestion anaphylaxis isn’t a thing

Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 08:55

They had that policy to minimise the risk of liability attaching in case they got it wrong, but in the real world a simple itchy throat does not mean anaphylaxis. PS there are many other sources of knowledge than google, but it can be useful for providing references

pam290358 · 30/10/2023 08:57

Anothercomment · 30/10/2023 08:30

You are between a rock and a hard place. You could enforce disability discrimination leglislation in that your health condition combined with your work environment is reducing you ability to carry out your role. BUT then does the environment become so toxic you’d rather leave anyway. Good that you have an Allie otherwise it would feel very isolating. Are there some nuts that you can tolerate better ? Is that a point of midpoint compromise to see if she will moderate ?

Disability legislation has already been enforced - the employer has made ‘reasonable adjustment’ by making the office nut free. One employee is disregarding it. The employer - specifically op’s manager - now needs to grow a backbone and police it. If the atmosphere becomes so toxic that it forces the op to leave, she would have a case for constructive dismissal.

HeBeaverandSheBeaver · 30/10/2023 08:59

There's always a few idiots in life and on these threads that think they know better.

My dd has a nut allergy and tho not so severe it's still a worry for her and I feel for you op.

Go higher than your manager if you need too.

God know why this women is
Popular

She sounds like a bullying school playground type to me.

pam290358 · 30/10/2023 09:00

Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 08:53

I didn’t acknowledge that the OP “had to take piriton” I acknowledged that she “felt she had to take piriton” medical opinion is that non ingestion anaphylaxis doesn’t happen as per the attachment I posted. A total ban on nuts and nut products from the vicinity of the allergy sufferer is an over reaction. Whilst there has been one case where a nut allergy was defined as a disability under the EA, it was in respect of a chef and in particular circumstances, I’m not convinced the tribunals would follow it through to airborne transmissions in an office environment, particularly where NHS advice is that not ingestion anaphylaxis isn’t a thing

Nope. The opening line of your post reads So you have to take piriton at work, big deal!

Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 09:09

If you’re going to dissect my language skills then fair enough, however in context the point I was making is very clear. NHS advice is that non ingestion anaphylaxis doesn't happen at the very worst it may cause some discomfort (read the attachment I posted), hence likening it to hayfever. The OP carries an Epipen and society has an obligation not to put her at unreasonable risk. However that does not extend to creating a vacuum around her. In the case of the Chef who had to work with nuts, then of course reasonable adjustments had to be made, but unless we are talking about an extreme case of hypersensitivity (boy in the bubble type thing) then what we are looking at here is an over reaction

Bookloverjay · 30/10/2023 09:35

Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 09:09

If you’re going to dissect my language skills then fair enough, however in context the point I was making is very clear. NHS advice is that non ingestion anaphylaxis doesn't happen at the very worst it may cause some discomfort (read the attachment I posted), hence likening it to hayfever. The OP carries an Epipen and society has an obligation not to put her at unreasonable risk. However that does not extend to creating a vacuum around her. In the case of the Chef who had to work with nuts, then of course reasonable adjustments had to be made, but unless we are talking about an extreme case of hypersensitivity (boy in the bubble type thing) then what we are looking at here is an over reaction

So you are saying that non ingestion anaphylaxis doesn't happen?

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10888965/amp/Girl-14-nut-allergy-nearly-died-aboard-flight-passenger-ate-peanuts-despite-warning.html

Girl, 14, with nut allergy nearly died on flight after man ate peanuts

EXCLUSIVE: Joanna Jones, 39, was flying to London from Antigua when her 14-year-old daughter Poppy suffered a severe reaction to someone else eating nuts during the nightmare eight-hour flight.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10888965/amp/Girl-14-nut-allergy-nearly-died-aboard-flight-passenger-ate-peanuts-despite-warning.html

DotAndCarryOne2 · 30/10/2023 09:37

Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 08:53

I didn’t acknowledge that the OP “had to take piriton” I acknowledged that she “felt she had to take piriton” medical opinion is that non ingestion anaphylaxis doesn’t happen as per the attachment I posted. A total ban on nuts and nut products from the vicinity of the allergy sufferer is an over reaction. Whilst there has been one case where a nut allergy was defined as a disability under the EA, it was in respect of a chef and in particular circumstances, I’m not convinced the tribunals would follow it through to airborne transmissions in an office environment, particularly where NHS advice is that not ingestion anaphylaxis isn’t a thing

You are incorrect in saying that only one case of a nut allergy has been defined as a disability under the Equality Act 2010. It’s more accurate to say that only one case has been defined as such at tribunal. Wheeldon v Marstons PLC was the case you refer to and covered a specific circumstance. The definition of disability under the Act is that the condition is sufficient to have a significant impact on daily life - the sufferer doesn’t need a formal diagnosis even. They just have to show that their condition meets this definition. And if the OP were to need to go to tribunal and could show evidence that the presence of nuts in the working environment was enough to cause the kind of discomfort she describes, and require her to take medication she wouldn’t otherwise need, then the tribunal would have to consider and rule accordingly. That’s how case law is made.

pam290358 · 30/10/2023 09:53

Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 09:09

If you’re going to dissect my language skills then fair enough, however in context the point I was making is very clear. NHS advice is that non ingestion anaphylaxis doesn't happen at the very worst it may cause some discomfort (read the attachment I posted), hence likening it to hayfever. The OP carries an Epipen and society has an obligation not to put her at unreasonable risk. However that does not extend to creating a vacuum around her. In the case of the Chef who had to work with nuts, then of course reasonable adjustments had to be made, but unless we are talking about an extreme case of hypersensitivity (boy in the bubble type thing) then what we are looking at here is an over reaction

Likening it to hay fever suits your narrative because hay fever isn’t covered under the EA unless it exacerbates another condition. You are missing the point. In the workplace the employer has to make a reasonable adjustment if the condition meets the definition under the EA.

If, as stated the OP was affected by way of physical symptoms and anxiety by the presence of nuts in close proximity, enough to warrant taking medication that otherwise wouldn’t be required, and clearly affecting the ability to work, then I would argue that she meets the EA definition of disabled. The reasonable adjustment had already been made - the office was nut free with signage to that effect. One employee threw a spanner in the works because of an attitude of disbelief much like your own. If the employer continues to do nothing then employment tribunal looks a likely outcome. In which case there may or may not be additional supporting case law for the circumstances.

pollymere · 30/10/2023 10:03

I'd explain to the manager that you will expect to go home on full pay every time nuts are eaten in the office. Say your happy to have an Occupational Health Assessment for yourself and the Intern. This Supervisor is endangering the lives of colleagues. I'd mention things like Duty of Care.

I worked in an office where the Aircon kept breaking down. As I was pregnant with other health issues, if the temperature got over a certain amount it was deemed unsafe so I was sent home on full pay (later we figured out work I could do from home).

Gcsunnyside23 · 30/10/2023 10:06

What an asshole that woman is. And anyone defending her right to eat nuts is an asshole too, ffs she's not a toddler. If you're that desperate to eats nuts that you can't leave a room to do it and wash your hands as it might cause severe harm or even discomfort to someone then you're an absolute asshole of the highest order. People defending it or saying it's not airborne etc are all the same sort or entitled bullys who think the world revolves around them. I bet that woman isn't as well liked as op thinks and if I did work with her or like her and this occurred I would not be friends with her any longer.

Andrea87 · 30/10/2023 10:36

She is either extremely inconsiderate or ignorant or both.

Ask her to breathe through a straw for a while (peg on nose ) so she realises what a effort it is when the air tubes constrict . Explain that this could / will happen to you with a nut allergy (although I don’t know if these are your symptoms) and see if she can now understand the discomfort and danger you face when she eats nuts.
Some people need educating!
I hope it gets resolved quickly for you.

Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 10:37

So you are one of the selfish idiots who will call an ambulance to make a point and waste the resources of the ambulance service who could have been attending to someone who really was seriously ill. There are far too many people in this country who call for an ambulance when they are not needed, oh dear I’ve cut my finger, oh dear I’ve bumped my head, oh dear I’ve got a temperature. For Gods sake, ambulances are for life threatening emergencies only

JoanOfAllTrades · 30/10/2023 10:49

Adam1630 · 30/10/2023 08:53

I didn’t acknowledge that the OP “had to take piriton” I acknowledged that she “felt she had to take piriton” medical opinion is that non ingestion anaphylaxis doesn’t happen as per the attachment I posted. A total ban on nuts and nut products from the vicinity of the allergy sufferer is an over reaction. Whilst there has been one case where a nut allergy was defined as a disability under the EA, it was in respect of a chef and in particular circumstances, I’m not convinced the tribunals would follow it through to airborne transmissions in an office environment, particularly where NHS advice is that not ingestion anaphylaxis isn’t a thing

So why do schools ban nut products if one child has an allergy? If it’s all bunkum?

That doesn’t make sense does it?

And why do some people die from nut allergies if it’s all bunkum?

https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/uk-hospital-admissions-for-food-induced-anaphylaxis-triple-over-20-year-period-but-death-rate-falls/

And the BMJ (a real medical journal) says that whilst the death rate has fallen, people do actually die! Not to mention the cost to the NHS because people are deniers!

UK hospital admissions for food-induced anaphylaxis triple over 20 year period but death rate falls | BMJ

Cow’s milk is the most common cause of fatal anaphylaxis amongst school children, warn researchers The rate of hospital admissions in the UK due to a serious allergic reaction (anaphylaxis) caused by food has more than tripled over a 20-year period. De...

https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/uk-hospital-admissions-for-food-induced-anaphylaxis-triple-over-20-year-period-but-death-rate-falls/

Superscientist · 30/10/2023 10:52

Make sure you have a risk assessment in place. I last had an anaphylaxis is 2010 and my work place wanted to put one place. I don't have the risk of accidental exposure so I'm ok
Sort out legislation and in what order to use it
Keep a diary
Sort out your CV

This company would rather you endangered your health rather than have a difficult conversations I would be starting to put the feelers out for other employment. I know it is hard as you are during your probation period. I quit 3 weeks into a job after being unemployed after a period of time. I was denied first aid for a chemical burn because I was a woman and the first aider was a man. It was at the same time as I was having the allergic reactions of unknown causes and I would have been working nights. I couldn't trust them with my health so I had to go

Freshstart78 · 30/10/2023 11:00

pam290358 · 30/10/2023 08:48

Perhaps if you stopped googling in an effort to seem knowledgeable and engaged with some of the posters commenting from actual experience you would learn something useful. The company I worked for had a policy of 999 as soon as a colleague with a severe allergy showed any sign of discomfort. Why ? Because the timescale between the first signs of an allergic reaction and life threatening symptoms was often only a minute or two. Do you have a specific reason for trying to minimise these issues ?

Edited
Show quote history

Thanks @pam290358 appears we are on the right page. And 999 decide for themselves whether they are coming so as long as OP or anyone else doesn’t lie then I don’t see the issue ringing 999 as soon as someone presents with potential allergy anaphalixs

Swipe left for the next trending thread