Metropol

Now I'm around three quarters on the way to finding my way back into the world of work. But first I needed to gave and have a medical and obviously pass this to be given a firm offer of employment. I don't know the result yet as I have to wait for my wee wee to be checked for anything naughty. That was bizarre in itself as the doctor went down this massive check list to ensure it was all above board including a step which I can only describe as being like Deal or No Deal where she opened the drawer and asked me to pick my "weapon of choice" and then she ripped the seal off. Sadly £250,000 was not contained within.

ANYWAY, the real point of this post is to highlight to you a problem that two of the tests highlighted to me. I had to look through what looked like a souped up zoetrope and read letters, as opposed to the standard cover one eye and read the letters off the board. Well the first test that foxed me was one designed to test my depth of field and therefore perception. I looked at rows of shapes and at least one of the shapes was supposed to leap out at me. They didn't, they all looked completely flat and she seemed very perplexed by the fact I couldn't see it. I could never do magic eyes either, maybe that's why.

I've since done my research on the internet to find that other people have a problem with this test, mostly people that, like me, have "lazy eye". It doesn't affect me at all and I have perfect peripheral vision but the convergence bit tends to be a problem. Oh well. Apparently you can "teach" yourself with some exercises to try and improve your vision. I'm not sure how true this is, but I'm just a bit concerned the eye test I had a week and half ago didn't highlight any massive problems like this.

Secondly, I'm short sighted and need glasses to see into the distance. I don't wear them that often as I can see fine, it's just reading signs and driving where I tend to need them. So imagine my surprise when looking through the same bizarre machine that she tells me I have poor reading vision. Well I don't, but sadly the results of the tests through this contraption are the ones that are recorded.

I'm obviously now worried these issues could count against me getting a job, and I'm now thinking that the depth of field problem is something that needs looking into further. Weird.

I can't believe you posted that *essay* and omitted the one detail we were all waiting to hear... did the doctor get out the rubber gloves and the lubricant?

And I could never do magic eye things either.

all new Phil wrote:I can't believe you posted that *essay* and omitted the one detail we were all waiting to hear... did the doctor get out the rubber gloves and the lubricant?

And I could never do magic eye things either.

No, I was asked to cough though.

I have a similar 'problem' with those sort of sight tests, but my optician explained that I simply have a 'dominant eye' and that it's very common (approximately 30% of the population to some degree). He said it shouldn't really affect my perception of distance but I've always used it as an excuse as to why I'm so crap at tennis!

It does explain why those red/green '3D glasses' have always done absolutely nothing for me other than colour the entire view one or the other.

That all seems rather extreem for a recruitment process; are you joining the armed forces or something similar? I believe that in the US they now test for drug use as a matter of course for many jobs, but I thought that sort of thing was still rare in the UK.

The most I've ever had to complete is the odd health questionnaire where you're asked to confirm that you're not an axe-wielding psychopath; although I'd hardly tell them if I was: it would ruin the surprise, surely!

Isonstine wrote:I'm obviously now worried these issues could count against me getting a job, and I'm now thinking that the depth of field problem is something that needs looking into further. Weird.

No, you shouldn't have any problems with the job. At *worst*, poor vision for reading VDUs etc would mean your prospective employer may have to contribute to the cost of corrective glasses. It won't be a deal breaker either way.

As thorough as the medical may have been, there's only a few "indicators" prospective employers are concerned about - and even then it would be very difficult to discriminate because of them.

Might have been worth asking the person if your vision issue was worth a follow-up check - but if its not causing you any difficulty in day to day life then perhaps try to keep it in mind for the next trip to the doctor you have.

Most of all stop worrying. Its a terrible waste of energy.

Any employer would be lucky to get you.

Gavin Scott wrote:

Isonstine wrote:I'm obviously now worried these issues could count against me getting a job, and I'm now thinking that the depth of field problem is something that needs looking into further. Weird.

No, you shouldn't have any problems with the job. At *worst*, poor vision for reading VDUs etc would mean your prospective employer may have to contribute to the cost of corrective glasses. It won't be a deal breaker either way.

As thorough as the medical may have been, there's only a few "indicators" prospective employers are concerned about - and even then it would be very difficult to discriminate because of them.

Might have been worth asking the person if your vision issue was worth a follow-up check - but if its not causing you any difficulty in day to day life then perhaps try to keep it in mind for the next trip to the doctor you have.

Most of all stop worrying. Its a terrible waste of energy.

Any employer would be lucky to get you.

As ever Gavin, your words create a serene feeling in my mind.

I don't have any problem with my sight when it comes to read, the doctor did acknowledge that I may not have got on with the equipment and she could obviously tell I had good vision for reading when she tested manually with some text gradually getting as far away as needed.

I've since done a bit of research, and as you mention it does seem very unlikely to fail a medical on these types of grounds. Many people will pass but if they're in safety critical positions they may not be allowed to work alone. I however am not working in such a position so I'd imagine things would be fine.

I've booked in another eye test whilst I can get them for free (!) and will have a chat with my optician to see if there's anything major to get concerned about, but my all round vision is fine so I certainly don't have anything to worry about.

Oh, and I've applied to work for a train company, but I'm only working in an office so nothing major involving my lack of perception . Apparently the medical is routine and is designed to make sure you're not an alcoholic or druggie. Oh and most importantly, to check that you're not going to keel over in a month's time and have the family's lawyers on the phone.

It sounds like the standard railway medical to make sure you can see a red signal at three-and-a-half miles, or whatever the requirement is.

Like you say, routine, but they'll be less interested in some parts of it for office workers. Perhaps you ought not to apply for promotion to Eurostar driver too soon after starting, though.

Nick Harvey wrote:It sounds like the standard railway medical to make sure you can see a red signal at three-and-a-half miles, or whatever the requirement is.

Like you say, routine, but they'll be less interested in some parts of it for office workers. Perhaps you ought not to apply for promotion to Eurostar driver too soon after starting, though.

And when I get to that medical, I'll simply reply "What red light?"

Thinking about it, seeing the red light ahead is easy for Eurostar drivers, isn't it?

It's bloody huge; and caused by a burning lorry transporter in the tunnel ahead!

(Poor taste? Never heard of the concept!)