Some time ago HSE commissioned a study on the incidence and prevalence of occupational dermatitis among workers in the printing industry in the East Midlands. As a result of the data obtained from self-completed questionnaires it emerged that a considerable number of those responding who stated that they did not have a skin problem actually had dermatitis that the dermatologist considered had occupational causation. If you let me have your e-mail I can let you have an e-mail copy of the report.

Chris

The estimates of under-reporting are included in the 2009/10 HSE Statistics Report for RIDDOR on page 10.

http://www.hse.gov.uk/st...ics/overall/hssh0910.pdf


It states that comparing the reported major and over-3-day injury of the Labour Force Survey rate with the RIDDOR rate , the estimated level of reporting by employers was 57%.


One cannot blame the Health and Safety Executive Board (previously known as the Health and Safety Commission) for not undertaking a root & branch review of RIDDOR forward as there are conflicting set of lobbying from small businesses and the challenge of improving the reporting rates.

Unless we as Safety professional use "smart" KPI's for contractor selection and do not view the RIDDOR data as the key safety criteria, under-reporting is likely to continue.

Secondly, there should be a campaign that for RIDDOR reporting, specifically the over 3 day reporting, it is primarily for data collection and not for enforcement purposes. This may encourage those who fear prosecution just because they reported an over 3-day under-RIDDOR to report.

Also, there should be wider publicity of the HSE/Local Authority Enforcement models so that employers have trust & faith in it and that RIDDOR reporting is only a small part of it.

Some may have other views as they expect the HSE/Local Authorities to investigate all "Major Injuries"