What is your policy on Nerf Guns being used at work?

Following on from Peter's comments, I do wonder what would happen in one of these companies if someone decided to use, for example, an elastic band firing a bit of cardboard. But twangs someone in the eye. Are they disciplined? But not the person who uses one of these Nerf Guns and hits someone in the eye?

Following on from Peter's comments, I do wonder what would happen in one of these companies if someone decided to use, for example, an elastic band firing a bit of cardboard. But twangs someone in the eye. Are they disciplined? But not the person who uses one of these Nerf Guns and hits someone in the eye?

Ultimately, if the majority of staff want their work environment to be "playtime and fun" then why not? Especially if it aligns with the values and ethos of the organisation.

However, the nature and limits of the "fun" needs to be suitably scoped in order to ensure that the employer's H&S obligations are fully met, and that those who don't want to participate are not adversely affected.

Let's not forget that injuries arising from horseplay/fun are still injuries that an employer is expected to take all reasonable steps to prevent - informing people of the risks and not inervening to avoid accidents is still an offense (for example, providing safety glasses, but not taking appropriate action when people do not use them).

Personally I would not want to work in this type of environment, but if it "works" for like minded souls, then so be it.

"....If it works for like minded souls...."?

What if someone desperately wants to join the company where such "horseplay" is permitted but is given the choice of submitting to it or not furthering their career? (Since many of the instigation "fun" workplaces focus in IT, for instance and their other choices may be limited).

Would we feel the same way if we demanded a woman permit the telling of sexist jokes "for fun"? ...Or a minority colleague submit to the prejudices and occasional abuse of the majority "fo lighten the atmosphere"?

As someone who has participated in (and organised) "Awaydays", treasure-hunts, "jungle-training" (climbing rope ladders up "trees", walking along suspended ropes and stuff) and has enjoyed every (o.k., ....most...) minutes of them, I nevertheless balk at the deliberate flouting of basic H&S principles here. Has no-one ever heard of the Principle of Prevention? If not then can I suggest a quick glance at:

 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/3242/regulation/4/made and http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/3242/schedule/1/made

This is not H&S "overkill" this is basic duty of care. We know nerf guns can cause injuries, just as throwing sponges or flicking elastic bands can. We also know that bullies who wish to pick on and intimidate those who they would make their victims will use these "games" as an excuse to maliciously irritate and oppress. We additionally know  that under almost every workplace desk lies an overloaded multi-plug board and a grandma's knitting of IT and other cabling, so when a "target" laughingly jerks out of the way, knocks over their tea/coffee/water/larger (this is a "fun" workplace after all; why not add a drink or two to the mix?) and it floods off their desk into the varied electrical circuitry, trips the officer circuit-breaker crashing every programme and piece of unsaved work and maybe shorts out the server-feeds for good measure, who is going to be responsible for that "fun"?

Yes, workplaces can be fun and should be fun; but this is not fun, it is irresponsibility: Short sighted and predictably dangerous.

P

I suspect we'll disagree Peter - many people will deselect themselves as candidates for jobs because they do not identify with a company's values. These values and behaviours are part and parcel of what working in that company means - provided the activities in questions are suitably under control then that's OK for me.

The fundamental issue is how you keep it "under control" and I think you and I both agree on the importance of this apect.

No, we don't actually disagree Ray. My position is that such workplaces should not exist, since they are (by definition) unlawful! A company's values must remain moderated by law (hence my examples of other "cultures" that applicants could be asked to tolerate). The fact that nerf-guns (etc.) may seen fun does not alter the real (and I'm afraid undeniable) fact that the employer is allowing their employees to assult each other. The fact they agree to be assaulted makes everyone happy.........Up to the point where someone gets hurt (or some serious damage is done) at which point the employer is in the dock and both the employee and criminal law are chucking rocks at them.

....and they have no-where to hide.

The point being that a candidate for employment may share the corporate values up to the point where they (the candidate) recognise that they are being put "at risk" (as they are) by unlawful behavious, and conditions of employment. At that point they should simply not have to make a chocice!