We operate an open book policy so accidents can be recorded at any time HOWEVER we do make a strict note of when the accident was brought to the companies attention against the alleged incident date and the injured parties stated reason for not having reported the matter in a timely manner.

Our employee induction, hand book and the induction given to all visitors / contractors to site requires all incidents to be recorded immediately, or at the first available practical opportunity thereafter.

Prior to investigation the employee is reminded that falsification of company records is considered Gross Misconduct which may result in summary dismissal.

A six month lag in reporting would trigger HR involvement for failing to report in line with company procedures - any sick note / maternity leave covering this length of time would have seen communication between employee and company.

You should stipulate within your policy and procedures as to when any incident / accident occurs the reporting procedures. Ideally they should be when they occur to allow a full investigation into the causes. It would be nigh on impossible to fully investigate the causes and hence leave you open for spurious claims for alleged injury.As Roundtuit says, the person wishing to report the accident should be disciplined as failing to report the alleged incident and possibly supervisors etc if time off was involved etc etc

When I worked for organisations with an excellent and robust Safety Management System (ICI, DuPont) they would NEVER accept an accident which was not reported on the day. The ONLY exception was if someone was taken away by ambulance before they could complete the accident book! As has been stated, set the rules, stick to them. I have always been tough on this otherwise you can be open to spurious claims.................

If the claim is spurious deal with it accordingly. Having arbitrary time limits does not make you any more or less open to spurious claims.

Whether DuPont's safety management system is 'excellent' is obviously a matter for debate - it has certainly been accused (on occasion) of being robust to the point of being destructive (there are claims that it basically always boils down to 'blame the worker').

As Lisa suggests, I'm far from convinced that a company is on secure legal ground if it refuses to accept an accident report, and as a matter of fact the company does not set the rules - to a large extent the rules are set by the legislative regime where the company operates. Even, I think, DuPont does not get to choose for itself the law.

Personally, I don't see any problem allowing any employee to make any report about any alleged incident at any time. If they don't get round to it until six months later I don't see the problem with noting that in the records, and possibly pointing out to the employee the legal requirement to report as soon as practicable.

Letting them write it in an accident book does not in any way suggest the company agrees with everything written. I fail to see what possible good anyone thinks can arise from refusing to let an employee put a report in the book - do you think "I tried to report it but the company wouldn't let me" will play better in court than "I didn't tell the company about it until six months later"?

I very much doubt that an employer can prohibit injured persons from making entries to the "Accident Book" that is required under the Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1979 as amended unless they are made on the same day. If they do that, it is most likely to be a breach of the regulations. It is a different matter when it comes to an organisations other internal reporting systems.

I have many years ago put this legal query to the Govt Dept and the response was that there is no statutory limit, but as mentioned, if the injured party reports late, the employer, who is required to make observations (after undertaking investigation) can make the appropriate ones! At this point in time, I do not have the time to research the DWP website where there may be authoritative guidance for their staff regarding the same!

I worked for ICI from 1989-1999 and I can assure you that the way I have described it was correct.........this was in the Petrochemicals division BTW. Throwing this back - why would anyone not report an injury at the time or within a couple of days? I stick to my guns, if it is not reported as soon as is practicable, I would reject it. I have know people have sports injuries or similar then try to say that it was an accident that happened in the past at works that they forgot to report at the time............ Also yes I concede that DuPont may have put pressure on people especially contractors which might discourage reporting. However, their EXCELLENT accident rate can't all be down to this, can it?

Several major disaster accident investigation reports have identified that the Oil & Gas upstream & Downstream sectors concentrate excessively of personal safety, overlooking proces safety that results in the disasters. A very low Total Recordable Incident Rate is not indicator of the state of overall safety--as disasters related to BP, and others, including Dow has indicated.

http://www.csb.gov/dupon...toxic-chemical-releases/


However, kudos to DuPont for commercialising their innovative safety initiatives. It is a pity that they themslves do not live by it!


Even if you do not allow an entry in the accident book, an employee can claim industrial injury benefit ( which is the primary purpose of the accident book) by filling in the relavant form and providing the evidence or the lack of it.

Thinking "out of the box" - how long before the ambulance chasers sue the body individual as a late reporter based upon the argument that the individuals timely report could have resulted in corrective actions preventing our clients subsequent "loss, pain & suffering".... or am I dreaming and just identifying another opportunity for TV advertisement and anonymous pre-recorded mobile phone calls.

On a personal note regarding "report on the day" I remember as a very young Personnel Officer (before the days of Human Resources re-branding) being confronted by an employees widow demanding on the day of his funeral to record in the BI510 his departure as "unfit for work" some two weeks previous as a consequence of a heart attack from which he died the same evening.

Are we now really working for such hard hearted employers to say "... the company policy is"? How does this fit with our moral and ethical duty to the employee who leaves work in an ambulance, never to return?