In looking on the HSE website and for examples for member of the public, it seems to imply that if the MOP faints and is taken to hospital - this is not reported. Extract: 'A person fainted and as a precaution they were taken to hospital. No. The injury must result from an accident that arises out of or is connected to the work. This is not usually the case where people have been taken ill.' Do you report if an injury occurs as a result of the MOP fainting i.e hit their head and/or taken to hospital? Also, do you report if a member of the public receives a injury but does not fall under the major injuries. I have received conflicting guidance. Any advice would much be appreciated.

Premises is a leisure facility. MOPs faint whilst using the facility. Common cause is lack of food/water, existing medical condition, over doing it or pushing themselves too far. Steam rooms being the prime 'fainting' area. Is this 'work' ? To my mind no physical work activity has caused the fainting i.e fumes from glueing wood, wearing of PPE resulting in excess heat. I have classed fainting as an 'unwell' and not an accident. Am I right?

Jacque Your interpretation of failing is correct, in my opinion this will not be classed as a reportable accident. Regards David T

May I take this one step further. Fainting is not reportable. Is the result of fainting reportable i.e. MOP hits heads, cuts head or/and loses consciousness or/and goes to hospital becomes reportable? In maths terms, to be reportable requires 2 trues e.g work and injury?

Thank you to Bilbo, JohnId, David T, canopener and PH2. I really appreciate your guidance. One day you read RIDDOR as 2 specifies, that fainting is not work related and then another day .... and a chance remark from someone causes a nagging doubt. Again thanks.

Watcher, with respect I suggest that you read the Riddor Regulations. Only major injuries listed in Schedule 1 must be reported. Additionally, Schedule 1 item 1 requires notification of "Any fracture other than to the fingers, thumbs or toes." PH2

PHS - members of the public are treated differently. A visit to hospital as a result of something related to the work is enough: "Injuries to members of the public or people not at work where they are taken from the scene of an accident to hospital for treatment. "

Some people are on the right track, some definitely aren’t and I think Sam gives the best summary at #14. # 7. “In maths terms, to be reportable requires 2 trues e.g work and injury?” I disagree; there are 3 conditions to be met. 1. Injury. 2. ‘Work’. 3. Taken DIRECTLY to hospital (by whatever means) #8. “it requires two specifics: Work related AND Schedule 1 (RIDDOR) Major Injury.” #11. “with respect I suggest that you read the Riddor Regulations. Only major injuries listed in Schedule 1 must be reported.”. Oh dear! At the risk of being a grumpy bear, read away by all means (could I suggest L73 pages 20/21 and paras 39-40 and 49-51). The list of defined Major Injuries under Schedule 1 is NOT part of or the ONLY reporting requirements for a person ‘not at work’. The table on pages 20/21 of L73 give you a very simple précis of the reporting requirements. MAJOR injuries ARE reportable in respect of EMPLOYEES and the SELF EMPLOYED. INJURIES (whatever the injury) are reportable in respect of persons NOT at work (if the other criteria are met.)

Yes, and 'with repsect' I am well aware that the reporting requirements for a person not at work 3(1)(c) differs for a person not at work BUT who is in but in hospital reg 3(1)(d). Hence the 2 statements in the précis/table on pages 20/21 are separated by the use of brackets. i.e. the Major injuries test ONLY applies to those people not at work who are injured in HOSPITAL (do read the 2 regs quoted above). 1. The example being discussed does not involve a person in hospital (as far as I can tell it’s a leisure facility) therefore the major injuries test does not apply 2. That most injuries to people not at work don’t actually occur in a hospital ergo the major injuries test does not apply I would suggest that as most of us don’t work in hospitals, the general assertion that the test is about major injuries is IMVHO misleading and for the most part incorrect (unless the injury occurred in hospital)

....and SamJen1973 sums it up best