According to Dave Charnock, HSE policy lead for the revisions to RIDDOR, we are back to an over 3-day reporting window for RIDDOR

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pr...icity&cr=01-Oct-2013

More proof-reading needed methinks

As an occupational skin disease dermatitis is reportable.

I find it interesting that the HSE has still not recognised that some occupational skin diseases are not considered medically as dermatitis. The new version of RIDDOR mentions latex allergy, which is a type I urticarial response, in the list of occupational skin diseases that should be reported, even though contact urticaria (which is what latex allergy is) is not medically considered to be dermatitis.

“Occupational dermatitis
Dermatitis is reportable when associated with work-related exposure to any chemical or biological irritant or sensitising agent. In particular, this includes any chemical with the warning ’may cause sensitisation by skin contact’, or ’irritating to the skin’. Epoxy resins, latex, rubber chemicals, soaps and cleaners, metalworking fluids, cement, wet work, enzymes and wood can all cause dermatitis. Corrosive and irritating chemicals also lead to dermatitis. Construction work, health service work, rubber making, printing, paint spraying, agriculture, horticulture, electroplating, cleaning, catering, hairdressing and florists are all associated with dermatitis.
Dermatitis can be caused by exposure to a range of common agents found outside the workplace. If there is good evidence that the condition has been caused solely by such exposure rather than by exposure to an agent at work, it is not reportable.

So is contact urticaria reportable?
Chris

There are plenty of changes in RIDDOR 2013 most of which have been summarised by Barbour for SHP and e-mailed to many of us. However I think that many people have missed some important changes the text is below. I have used " " to highlight.

For example the famous back twinge is addressed.


What is “an accident”?
In relation to RIDDOR, an accident is a "discrete, identifiable", unintended incident which causes physical injury. This specifically includes acts of non-consensual violence to people at work.
Injuries themselves, eg “feeling a sharp twinge,” are not accidents. There must be an identifiable event, external to the body which causes the injury, eg being struck by a falling object. Cumulative exposures to hazards which eventually cause injury (eg repetitive lifting) are not classed as “accidents” under RIDDOR.
What is meant by “work-related”?
RIDDOR only requires accidents to be reported if they arise out of or in connection with work. "The fact that an accident occurs at work premises does not, of itself, mean that the accident is work-related" -there must be some indication that the work activity contributed to the circumstances of the accident. An accident should be considered as “work-related” if any of the following factors played a significant role:
• the way the work was carried out;

• any machinery, other plant, substances or equipment used for the work; or

• the condition of the site or premises where the accident happened.

I see the note from Frank who is very familiar and experienced in relation to confined spaces issues. I agree with him that this will probably lead to confusion. I advise that an Enclosed Space also has to reasonably foreseeably have one of the 5 associated specified risks in order to become a Confined Space.

Limited CS regulations extract below.
“confined space” means any place, including any chamber, tank, vat, silo, pit, trench, pipe, sewer, flue, well or other similar space in which, by virtue of its enclosed nature, there arises a reasonably foreseeable specified risk;

“specified risk” means a risk of—
(a)
serious injury to any person at work arising from a fire or explosion;
(b)
without prejudice to (a)—
(i)
the loss of consciousness of any person at work arising from an increase in body temperature;
(ii)
the loss of consciousness or asphyxiation of any person at work arising from gas, fume, vapour or the lack of oxygen;
(c)
the drowning of any person at work arising from an increase in the level of a liquid; or
(d)
the asphyxiation of any person at work arising from a free flowing solid or the inability to reach a respirable environment due to entrapment by a free flowing solid;

“free flowing solid” means any substance consisting of solid particles and which is of, or is capable of being in, a flowing or running consistency, and includes flour, grain, sugar, sand or other similar material;

I agree that it is not a clear as it might be. However, my interpretation of David's comment is that although reports only need to be made for 7 day incident, any injury resulting in more than 3 days absence will need to be recorded as such (and I presume available to a HMI on demand).

I hope this helps.

DJ

I've just had to Google "murgatroyd" as it was getting to me.

The answer

Snagglepuss

Other search engines are available