Politely decline their request. Continue to discuss at the safety committee as you will be doing already (with a union on site).
They are only entitled as one of their 'functions' to examine the scene of RIDDOR events - not everything.
Of course you can do over and above this but it isn't access all areas season.

Get a copy of the 1977 Safety Reps Regs

Yes and there is also another 'function':

to investigate potential hazards and dangerous occurrences at the workplace (whether or not they are drawn to his attention by the employees he represents) and to examine the causes of accidents at the workplace.

Beyond the specifics of any one incident, your system should allow for the production of "anonymised" reports of all accident trends and data. H&S Reps should be involved in that broader discussion of accident trends and stats. as a matter of course.

In the guidance attached to SRSC Reg (6) in L143* (para 63), it states:

‘Health and safety representatives, when performing their functions, particularly formal inspections of the workplace and examinations following over-three-day injuries, notifiable accidents, dangerous occurrences or notifiable diseases, have rights under the Regulations to inspect and take copies of documents relevant to the workplace or to the employees they represent which the employer is required to keep in accordance with the 1974 Act and other relevant statutory provisions.’

Apparently the HSE think Safety Reps have some rights.

The employer is legally required to provide such ‘facilities and assistance’ the Safety Rep requires in discharging their functions. ie provide reports of notifiable incidents or copies.

In relation to Reg 7 (employer’s duty to provide information to Safety Reps) the Approved Code of Practice states that the information to be provided to the Safety Rep (note the word ‘provide’ as opposed to Safety Reps begging for the information) includes:

‘information which the employer keeps relating to the occurrence of any accident, dangerous occurrence or notifiable industrial disease and any statistical records relating to such accidents, dangerous occurrences or cases of notifiable industrial disease;’

I’ll repeat ‘information which the employer keeps relating to the occurrence of any accident’ just in case viewers have not read the Safety Reps Regs 1977. This information is additional to any generalized statistical information, establishing trends, for example.

Exceptions to this include:

‘any information relating specifically to an individual, unless he has consented to its being disclosed;
or

any information the disclosure of which would, for reasons other than its effect on health, safety or welfare at work, cause substantial injury to the employer’s undertaking or, where the information was supplied to him by some other person, to the undertaking of that other person; or

any information obtained by the employer for the purpose of bringing, prosecuting or defending any legal proceedings.’

It seems reasonable to suggest that if an individual has not consented to the release of personal information the records should delete the respective information and ‘redacted’ copies are then made available to Safety Reps. Where individuals have given their permission – presumably in writing – it seems reasonable to provide it unedited.

While access to a system may be restricted the information needs to be provided.

*Consulting workers on health and safety: Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977 (as amended) and Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 (as amended): Approved Codes of Practice and guidance: HSE L143 published 2012.

Cheers.

Nigel

You missed the important bit Nigel - 'in order for them to fulfil their function'.

They have rights to fulfil their function - not legal obligations in the sense we are used to talking about.

In order for them to fulfil their function they need to know RIDDOR stuff only in relation to accidents, diseases and dangerous occurrences.

I say again, there is no reason why you would not wish to discuss all accidents at the regular safety committee but you do NOT have to mess about giving copies of everything.

As with everything there is a minimum and maximum you could choose to do dependant on what's in place already, what's agreed and other union/management working relationships.

Safety committee attendance (with a good agenda that covers what you'd expect to see including accidents since last meeting and remedial actions) workplace inspection no less than quarterly should be sufficient in most cases to keep everyone happy(ish).

quote=JohnMurray][whisper]
Nigel. You are supposed to give reasons or excuses why any union reps can be refused any and all information. [/whisper]

damelcfc

HSE L143: 'Health and safety representatives, when performing their functions, particularly formal inspections of the workplace and examinations following over-three-day injuries, notifiable accidents, dangerous occurrences or notifiable diseases, have rights under the Regulations to inspect and take copies of documents relevant to the workplace or to the employees they represent which the employer is required to keep in accordance with the 1974 Act and other relevant statutory provisions.’

The HSE appear to be stating that the Safety Reps 'have rights under the Regulations to inspect and take copies of documents relevant to the workplace or to the employees they represent which the employer is required to keep in accordance with the 1974 Act and other relevant statutory provisions.' - particularly 'following over-three-day injuries, notifiable accidents, dangerous occurrences or notifiable diseases'!!

Being provided with copies of accident reports under RIDDOR are just one of these 'rights'. The employer has an obligation to assist the Safety Rep by providing them. This is not a question of whether they are 'legal obligations in the sense we are used to talking about'. It is a requirement.

And if three months after an accident - at a safety committee for example - Safety Reps are first informed of an accident, how are they supposed to investigate it? Another 'right' they have. The investigation should take place as soon as practical after the incident.

No wonder the HSE estimate that 60% of employees are not consulted - but should be - by their employers 'on health and safety matters that affect them'!! A situation that is illegal, of course.

John

I note the point. In passing I understand that the Government Back-to-work scheme has been brought into question as the High Court found in favour of a graduate who won her claim that forcing her to work unpaid in Poundland was in breach of 'laws banning slavery and forced labour'.

Workers - an organisation's greatest asset!!

Cheers.

Nigel

Some Union Claims Solicitors have been known to pay for Accident Details from Accident books, but I'm sure this isn't the case and they are just concerned and want to make sure that all appropriate actions have been taken to prevent any re-occurrence....

Nigel.

Lets agree to disagree.
I would hate to work in the workplace you describe which sounds like its from the 70's.
I'll look after HSE concerns at my employers premises.

Quite why she didn't get a part time job in retail (which would pay more than JSA) and slightly reduce her voluntary hours (which I don’t believe would have a massive impact of her gaining experience) I cannot fathom.

Of course you do have to give information regarding the accident, so they can be involved in an investigation. We always invite ours to attend investigations but they never do. I find that once you involve them they either become disarmed or they start working with you to assist in the safety of all on site.

Actually Nigel, I think you would be better received if you could quote chapter and verse for NOT involving either union safety reps OR employees, in any and all aspects of either health, safety or welfare.
Working in the small to ineffective employment sector it often (if not always) seems to be the case that unions, and their safety reps, are as well received as a case of smallpox at a school (in many cases the disease would be preferred).
After all, it's only their lives.
Now, what is the state of play in the accidents and industrial diseases nowadays ?

Lovely debate.

Returning to the original posting: What sort of output does the database produce, that it cannot be anonymised? Ours produces an excel spread sheet and it’s just a case of removing the column with the injured parties name.
Of course everybody knows the name of the injured party, but we do not mention it in any open documentation, eg minutes of committee meetings or incident stats passed onto the TUS.

The workplaces you describe John in my experience don't have a Union as there are just not enough employees to make it worth their while. I can't make the link between the accidents you describe and Unions/this thread? Are you suggesting that Unions would have made a difference?

In MY experience being a member of a Union is good for collective bargaining when its time for a pay review, giving you a claim form should you nick your thumb and getting you off the hook (somehow) when you by rights should be down the road - that's what members pay their money for!

This is MY experience as I say (others have differing views as posted above) from 20 Years in Manufacturing at sites with 3500, 550 and 700 employees in Motor Industry and food.

NigelB, don't disagree with you one bit, I started as a safety rep myself at 16, and continued throughout as a rep for different unions. I now work for a company and I have tried to ensure good union representation, to the point of ensuring that they can access training. I was surprised when I started here because when I mentioned the brown book to the reps they didn't have a clue what I was talking about, they even made a complaint that I was a bully for trying to get them to train and take safety seriously and it wasn't because of management as they supported the idea.