Posted By David J Jones Would welcome your thoughts. Person had a fall at a weekend in his own time and suffered a "minor" back injury of the strain/sprain/twist variety. During work early in the week following his fall, in his car he turned to hang his jacket on the hook behind is seat. His back went into spasm (his description not mine) causing total, but thankfully temporary, paralysis. This happened over a week ago since when he has been off work. He is now off work for at least a further two weeks which may extend depending upon his progress or lack thereof. I think this is not reportable as the primary cause of his injury was not work related. What do you think good people? David

Posted By Clarke Kent the 2nd The incident happened at work, and i guess they went in an ambulance from work. I would say report it....the HSE arent going to investigate someone pulling there back whilst hanging a jacket on a hook anyway.

Posted By Jimmy R I have a chronic back injury and take every precaution at work not to aggravate it. If I do injure myself further am I not to report it also?

Posted By I McDonald "Made worse by a work activity"? Hanging a coat up? You can report it, I would not in this case (I would put an explanation note on the investigation report though - future claim, etc). If you are reporting going through RIDDOR ICC state "alleged" due to the history. It will then appear on the 2508. Helps when bracing for a claim in the future. Ian

Posted By Jimmy R "Made worse by work activity" - moving a concrete block and causing a lower back sprain resulting in 5 days off work?

Posted By Jason911 I am sorry, no offense, but you guys must have far too much time on your hands if you really are going to analyze this to death. Superman is right, just report the Bl**dy thing! The HSE are hardly going to hold you accountable are they? Jay

Posted By Kenneth Patrick In the USA you can ask OSHA these type of questions. They then publish the answers on their website and include in FAQs. The answer becomes the definitive ruling. Would we welcome this or would it just spoil the fun of endless debate?

Posted By Edward Shyer Not reportable, Injury not caused in connection with a work activity. "made worse by not being careful"?

Posted By I McDonald Jay had if you read the whole thread and not just part of it, I have already stated "I would not report". Hanging a coat up I would not class as a work activity never mind a significant risk however; others seem to feel it is on a par with handling concrete blocks!!!! The post relating to RA, etc, is being sarcastic. I work in the engineering construction industry and to just report because the HSE will not visit just does not cut it. David is justified in seeking clarification on the reporting issue as some customers (right or wrong), use RIDDOR events as a KPI during pre-qual. Reporting what is clearly a non work related event could be the difference between a company winning or losing a contract. The difference between employees having a job or a P45. Ian

Posted By I McDonald Jay construction news late 2006 had an article identifying a major rail contractor (won't name due to AUG's) had been suspended from future tenders for a six month period until they reduced their AIFR. Their AIFR is lower than many of the major construction companies!!!!! Right or wrong it is used as a KPI and DOES make the difference between work and a P45. As a mater of interest, what sector do you work in? Ian PS If it is reportable it gets reported - this case NOT reportable

Posted By I McDonald Jay it was not "Non Reporting" that resulted in the suspension. The companies All Injury Frequency Rate (AIFR), was higher than their competitors. That is why the suspension was imposed. Who do you campaign too? These days in construction, some pre-quals do not get passed first base if AIFR's are too high. Some more informed customers will invite contractors to discuss why their AIRF is high and some may actually listen - not all. Hopefully some other construction H&S Professionals will pick up on this and comment. It may then become clear why reporting because the HSE wont visit JUST DOES NOT CUT IT in some industries! Ian

Posted By Steve B Devils Advocate (and I know each of us will interpret things differently. It is estimated that 4.7 million working days (full-day equivalent) were lost in 2003/04 through musculoskeletal disorders mainly affecting the upper limbs or neck that were caused or "made worse by work". On average, each person suffering took an estimated 18.3 days off in that 12 month period. It has been said earlier, do you have a reporting system? did he report his injury prior to the injury becoming worse? was his work reassessed if he did report? alot of assumptions are being made by us all. I dont believe it is the hanging up of a coat that is the problem, the fact is it became worse whilst he was at work, and if he was to try and claim I am sure his solicitors would argue this point. whether he would win or not? well thats not for me to say but I am sure if he did not report it in the first place an element of contributory negligence would be possible. RIDDOR or not? it has also been said above what harm could it do are inspectors really going to pay a visit (I doubt it very much). Loss of contracts? I work in the construction industry and yes we do pre-tender and check health and safety performance of all companies we intend to employ, but we also allow the companies to reply to our questions as I like to consider myself to be a pragmatic and realist safety practitioner I know that some RIDDOR reports +3 day'ers are like this one. My Interpretation Regards SteveB

Posted By David J Jones Many thanks to all of you for your responses, suggestions and observations. The I.P. had informed his Area Manager on the Monday and worked from home that day to give his back a chance to "rest". The coat was not PPE but his suit jacket, he is required to drive and that activity is firmly under our Management of Road Risk. We do not use reportable accidents/incidents as KPI's other than to improve our internal H & S performance, and no, Ian, we have never before had an incident of this nature! (Come to think of it, I've never heard of this type of incident before). I have already recorded this incident along with the relevant e-mails and, eventually, the completed Accident Report. Regards David