Rank: New forum user 
|
Appreciate your thoughts on this one. One of our drivers strained their back whilst driving (further invstigation confirmed this was done by turning the steering wheel) There were no other factors contributing to the incident, no sudden braking, road condition good etc, the journey was approx 3 miles. The driver looks like being absent for more than 3 days (will confirm tomorrow) Is this reportable.
RIDDOR Regulation 3(2) only applies to injuries resulting from accidents to people who are at work and to injuries which are not reportable under regulation 3(1)
Is the above an accident, (please dont quote the definition of an accident). The injury occured at work however, I would argue that work activities did not cause the injury.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I'd suggest that your going to be reporting it. It may be worth investigating if the IP had any contributing ill health but it would be difficult it's not at work and not work related.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Thanks John j, dont really understand your last sentence. Any other views out there ??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Neither do I on reading it again! I was suggesting that there may be contributory factors that may explain why there was an injury i.e. the IP has a pre-existing medical condition which was not work related but merely surfaced at work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
A driver turning a steering wheel (presumably power assisted) under normal circumstance cannot sustain a strained back surely.
Not Reportable.
Interview him and find the truth of the matter.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
TTTWTW - in case you don't know IP means Injured Person (stop the abbreviations people!!)
As far as I am concerned there is no way you can injure your back solely by turning a steering wheel, I suspect that a long term back problem manifested itself with that minor act (akin to the picking a pen off the floor and putting your back out). However, if he is off work for over 3 days and was at work doing a work activity then technically it is reportable. There is no way it would ever be investigated by the authorities though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Agree. I'd report as > 3 day absence; if driving at work , then it's work related.
Predisposing factors are revealed by investigation - not the initial report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Murty18829 wrote:Agree. I'd report as > 3 day absence; if driving at work , then it's work related.
Predisposing factors are revealed by investigation - not the initial report. Afraid I would have to slightly disagree with the somewhat black and white take of you there Murty regarding that it is work related. However I do agree with you that investigation for predisposing factors is required. I would advise you use your 10 days if you can to investigate thoroughly. If there are any significant predisposing factors revealed then I wouldn't report it. We had something similar when a worker came in and sat down at the start of her shift and her back locked up. The emergency services were called to attend as she couldn't move and was in a great deal of pain. Ultimately she had more than 3 days off work but the investigation revealed she had a injured her back the previous night (I won't go into details how but she was very open and honest about it - a little too open - have to admit i blushed!!). In my opinion that is not reportable - yes it occurred at work while sitting at work but was it work related? I'd say no. It is a non-work related condition (that she freely admitted happened outside of work - important!)that manifested itself while at work. Shades of gray exist in this area and deciding on what route to take based on those shades is to me where we earn (some) of our corn. Providing you adhere to the spirit of what RIDDOR is trying to achieve and don't feel you have professionally compromised yourself then you just have to call it as you see it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I would have thought that if an injury was sustained whilst the person was doing a work activity ie driving, then it is a work-related injury regardless of the cause, how unlikely it was or where the injury occurred.
If the same person had been involved in a minor road incident and suffered whiplash would that be a different scenario - I don't think so?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
RayRapp wrote:I would have thought that if an injury was sustained whilst the person was doing a work activity ie driving, then it is a work-related injury regardless of the cause, how unlikely it was or where the injury occurred. It is not as black and white as that RayRapp. See RIDDOR guidance point 31 which stipulates that 'arising out of or in connection with work' has a very wide meaning. You need to take into account 3 factors when deciding (NOTE: Inference that a decision on the events has to be taken - NOT happened at work therefore automatically RIDDOR) if the accident arose 'out of or in connection to work'. Quote: - Ray Rapp 'If the same person had been involved in a minor road incident and suffered whiplash would that be a different scenario - I don't think so? Quote:
Actually Ray we have had this scenario and the HSE attended the scene and declared the accident to be a Road Traffic Accident and not work related. Handed investigation over to the police for criminal prosecution under the Road Traffic Act of the third party member of public who crashed into our chap.
You just can't say happened at work - therefore RIDDOR - It ain't that black and white!!
Otherwise you get the chap who twists his ankle playing football at the weekend - comes into work and claims he tripped on a kerb and goes off for >3 days (It's happened!!!). You need to investigate to find out if there are any outside factors contributing to the claimed injury. If there aren't any, then fine, report it - I certainly am not against reporting under RIDDOR. However be sensible, if one or two colleagues are saying he was telling them he did it at the weekend/saw him do and are prepared to give a statement then you need to decide if the injury 'arose out of or in connection with WORK'. Not just he was at work, or he was on work premises therefore it is must be RIDDOR.
I'm not usually one for quoting rule and reg - but just in case you want to see the bit I'm referring to and to save you trawling through the guidance I have inserted it below.
Cheers,
Harps
Regulation 2(2)(c): ‘Arising out of or in connection with work’
30 This key phrase is also used in regulation 3. Understanding its meaning and scope is vital in helping to decide if an accident (including, in certain situations, acts of violence) or dangerous occurrence must be reported.
31 ‘Arising out of or in connection with work’ has a very wide meaning and regulation 2(2)(c) does not give a complete definition. It sets out three key factors which are covered by the phrase and must be taken into account when deciding if an accident arose ‘out of or in connection with work’. These are reproduced below together with explanations and practical examples to show the areas they cover.
The key factors are:
(a) ‘The manner of conducting an undertaking’.
This refers to the way in which any work activity is being carried out for the purposes of an undertaking, including how it is organised, supervised or performed by an employer or any of their employees, or by a self-employed person, for example boxes spread across a walkway cause someone trying to get around them to be injured
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
RayRapp wrote:I would have thought that if an injury was sustained whilst the person was doing a work activity ie driving, then it is a work-related injury regardless of the cause, how unlikely it was or where the injury occurred.
If the same person had been involved in a minor road incident and suffered whiplash would that be a different scenario - I don't think so? RTA's aren't reportable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
harpa wrote:Murty18829 wrote: I would advise you use your 10 days if you can to investigate thoroughly. If there are any significant predisposing factors revealed then I wouldn't report it. No no no no no.....you can't say that if someone already has a back problem that it's not reportable. In this case the work activity (turning the steering wheel of a work related vehicle) was the factor that resulted in injury - just because they may have had an exisiting injury is irrelevant. The HSE are well aware that back injuries are usually caused by long term issues at both home and work. Thats isn't the point. In this case there could have been a mechancial failing in the steering wheel that caused undue strain in turning it. I would suggest that power steering is avaialble on most vehicles. Regardless, RIDDOR is not about incident liability. You don't investigate and then decided whether to report or not. You report AND investigate. It is then up to the HSE as to whether they also want to investigate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Clairel - I refer you to my previous post and the wording in the RIDDOR guidance "30 This key phrase is also used in regulation 3. Understanding its meaning and scope is vital in helping to DECIDE if an accident (including, in certain situations, acts of violence) or dangerous occurrence must be reported."
The inference is that a decision is to be made. You state 'You don't investigate and then decided whether to report or not. You report AND investigate.' I'm sorry Clairel but I'm afraid I can't agree with you (and to be fair I agree with the vast majority of your input onto this forum). Blanket statements like 'You report & investigate' are as bad as blanket policies. It is not one approach suits all scenarios becuase shades of gray do exist and to me that is what the guidance is getting at when it talks about 'Deciding if an accident......must be reported'.
Like I've said I'm all for reporting (and have many times argued with senior mangers who haven't wanted to when it is obviously is reportable under RIDDOR) but there are times when it is not clear and initial investigation helps you to decide if it is reportable.
Think on this :Does the HSE really want a RIDDOR report about a woman who got a bit carried away the night before with hubby and put her back out(see my first post)? In your argument the activity of sitting on a chair at work means it is a work related injury and should be reported...really?? ...is that the information RIDDOR is trying to capture? Is that the kind of information that makes up the HSE statistics on work related injuries? Because if it is, it is seriously worrying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Harpa,
We're not talking about your lady who put her back out the night before (which obviously is not reportable) we are talking about a man who claims that he put his back out whilst turning the steering wheel of a work vehicle whilst invloved in a work activity.
I have not said that there should be a blanket policy of report everything. Only RIDDOR reportable incidents should be reported and then it is a blanket policy, it is not about liability it is about reporting work related (including claimed work related) injuries. If someone is claiming it is a work injury when it is not then the HSE will uncover that and that person may be held liable for claiming false injury. Indeed your own investigation may also reveal that. Nevertheless you report on the basis of what information you are given at the time and the trurth is often revealed later.
And if someone's work chair caused them a back injury that resulted in them being off work then yes that is reportable too. Poor seating is a known cause of back injury. As I said if that is what they are claiming then the duty is too report.
This subject has been discussed many times and even if you know someone to be lying about an incident the duty is to report based on the information that they have given.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
harpa, if you insist on quoting me then please read my post correctly first. I did not comment or infer that the injury was a RIDDOR - rather that is was a work-related injury.
'arising out of or in connection with work' has a very wide meaning...indeed it does.
Claire, I am also aware that RTAs are not reportable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Thanks for all the responses, as usual a lot of differing opinions. Investigation is ongoing...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Sorry to extend this further, but the exclusion from reporting given by Reg 10 0f RIDDOR is not just limited to RTAs...
Reg 10 excludes any injury "arising out of the movement of a vehicle on a road" [unless it falls within one of the specific sub-categories listed in that regulation]. This injury, if it did occur from steering a moving vehicle on a road, would not come under one of the sub-categories and would not therefore be reportable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.