Posted By Tommy Cooper Yes we do! Probably one of our good health and safety points!

Posted By Peter Longworth Good question. Of course everybody complies, how could you possibly suggest otherwise.

Posted By AJM I have done and always will do, In fact I recently had the company bring someone in after being off 3 days and paid them for two hours and questioned me as to why i reported it as a RIDDOR. I even had to show them that very statement that you quoted in the original thread. I also had a man once who worked in water injured a hand but had to work on a job he was trained on but a dry area. Once again it was reported because as you quite rightly say. He has to be able to do the full range of his normal duties not part of. I believe that lots of people often have their own interpretation of this but better to be safe than sorry. If you look on the prosecutions website you will see a fine for 8000 pounds for being 6 month overdue. Alan

Posted By Adrian Watson HSE Stats suggest that only 48% of reportable injuries are reported under RIDDOR. See http://www.hse.gov.uk/st...06.pdf?ebul=stats/nov-06 Regards Adrian Watson

Posted By AJM Colin, Just to answer your point this is an excerpt from the RIDDOR site; Over-three-day injury If there is an accident connected with work (including an act of physical violence) and your employee, or a self-employed person working on your premises, suffers an over-three-day injury you must report it to the enforcing authority within ten days. An over-3-day injury is one which is not "major" but results in the injured person being away from work OR unable to do their full range of their normal duties for more than three days. I really don't know how much clearer this last paragraph needs to be for people to accept it. I really don't understand why people look for reasons not to report when we should be looking for reasons to report. I Always report if their is any doubt, and I don't understand people that don't. Alan

Posted By Bill Parkinson Interesting to see that some people still don't seem to understand the over 3 day reporting requirements. Working in the NHS I am trying to raise more awareness of the criteria as some managers still think that if the person is doing some other job it is all right. However, it is clear that they are required to be doing their normal job not "seconded" to another dept. I also am trying to get managers to realise that the "3 days" includes any off duty days, annual leave or week-ends (if they only work during the week). Also if a person self certifies themselves for more than 3 days then this would fall into the criteria Whilst I would say that over 3 day injuries are reported (in 99% of cases) we still struggle to cope with the timescales for reporting to the HSE (or the ICC as we now have to do). Whilst on the subject of RIDDORs recently received a copy of the F2508 which I reported to the ICC asking me whether I wanted to confirm the incident as a RIDDOR. As I submitted a completed F2508 in the first place what a waste of effort asking me to confirm it !!

Posted By mark limon Colin, An inaccuracy in your post was pointed out Please read the HSE leaflet RIDDOR explained and you will see your mistake. Alternatively point us in the direction where your interpretation of the 3 day injury is wrote. Brings to mind a phrase I once heard "when you are in a hole,stop digging" regards,Mark

Posted By mark limon Thankyou David

Posted By Anthony Elsmore Hi All, My interpretation is yes this would be reportable because the engineer can not do the "full" range of duties as normal. Regardless of the fact he is still doing some of his existing workload. Cheers Ant

Posted By DavidW I'd go along with both Ant and AJM. While the guidance has no definitive legal standing and one may be able to argue the point if challenged. What happens if later it turns out to be more serious? While I don't think we should be reporting absolutley everything "just in case", and I know nobody has suggested this, I do believe that if in doubt, report it. DW

Posted By mark limon a rather extreme example Merv.

Posted By Merv Newman It was meant to be. But weren't you asking "where do YOU draw the line ?" Before it gets to "once-a-year" or "once a month" or "once a week" ? I draw it at "normal duties modified as a result of the accident" So the maintenance supervisor, who would normally be expected to out of the office some of the time and in the office the rest of the time, is now restricted to the office. RIDDOR. And no, you can't give them a few days off. Not unless the days off were scheduled before the accident happened. Merv

Posted By Pete48 I still believe that the example I gave is typical of those that will not get reported by many companies including some with professional safety advice. I think that until RIDDOR adopts the concept of "restricted work injury" and starts to collect and collate data on that area separate from the current 3 day injury, then the under reporting is likely to continue with respect to this area. There is, after all, a significant difference in the loss values between the two. My example would currently be placed in the same loss bracket as a MHO injury that could result in weeks off work, total loss to both parties. Just does not feel right to me and many others I suspect. And yes before anyone asks, I would report my example for the reasons that Merv so eloquently outlined.(as usual) If I had left out the hands on bit to make him an office based tech manager, I would not have reported it because there is no restriction just some adaptation of the timing of certain duties, something that every manager does every day to match the changing goalposts. Over to you?