Hi all, Due to the nature of our work - we have a field force of walkers travelling on public footpaths, customers properties i.e. paths/drives etc. by foot. If one of our employee slips whilst on a public footpath or customers drive way and is off work for over 7 days - would this be RIDDOR reportable? The environment is out of our control and they aren't actually carrying out the work activity at the time of the incident, it is the travelling time between jobs. Any opinions on this would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks Racer - Looking at the RIDDOR definitions this states that the work activity itself must contribute to the accident the fact it happened on work time does not mean it is work related. Thoughts please RIDDOR only requires you to report accidents if they happen ‘out of or in connection with work’. The fact that there is an accident at work premises does not, in itself, mean that the accident is work-related – the work activity itself must contribute to the accident. An accident is ‘work-related’ if any of the following played a significant role: the way the work was carried out any machinery, plant, substances or equipment used for the work or the condition of the site or premises where the accident happened

Collette, just to muddy the waters a bit. Are they paid for the travel time between jobs? Are they where they are in connection with work - would they be there if it was not for or in connection with work? If part of their role involves walking between sites is this not 'work'? Stu

Hi Collette, Interesting question :0) I think the answer is: "it all depends" (a typical consultancy answer!) Assume, for sake of argument, that their work was erecting signposts for an estate agent and they were walking from one house to another when they fell. That is clearly "travelling" and not "work related activity" even though they were being paid at the time. So I would argue that this incident would not be reportable. If, however, they were walking up a customer's drive to erect a sign and they fell then the incident is SIGNIFICANTLY associated with the work related activity of putting up signs - so it would be reportable. In all of the above, of course, I'm assuming that all the other criteria such as over-7 days have been met before a report is submitted :0) I think the key element to consider is that the work activity must have made a SIGNIFICANT contribution to the accident.

Hi Colette, I think each case would turn on whether the work activity played a significant part in the accident mechanism. If they fell over the client's doorstep on arrival then it's probably not reportable; if they trip and fall when carrying materials into the client's premises then probably it is reportable because there's a direct - and strong - link between the accident mechanism and the work activity. Just a comment in passing - and I'm sure you've already taken care of this :0) - but if this is "a massive problem" as you suggest then have your risk assessments been reviewed and your safe systems of work updated to try and cover this issue?

In my opinion it would be reportable. I work in a company that has meter readers who travel by van + walk around the countryside / villages / towns etc. If they fall/ twist their ankle & are away from work - When people ask these type of questions re RIDDOR, I look at nth degree. If the individual was killed / died because of the accident / incident - would you report that to the HSE under RIDDOR, if yes, then the 7day case is also reportable, if No, then not reportable. Are police officers / postpeople (?!?) on foot patrol exempt, if they trip & fall?

What is meant by ‘work-related’? RIDDOR only requires you to report accidents if they happen ‘out of or in connection with work’. The fact that there is an accident at work premises does not, in itself, mean that the accident is work-related – the work activity itself must contribute to the accident. An accident is ‘work-related’ if any of the following played a significant role: the way the work was carried out any machinery, plant, substances or equipment used for the work or the condition of the site or premises where the accident happened The above is copied of HSE web page Work activity involves walking from A to B so I would say yes it must be reportable, so the fact we have so many different opinions I would contact the HSE for clarity, may be the system/regulations needs updating ?? I read the above to be bit contradictive What I would add going by what you have written, you have covered the issue as far as reasonable practicable. Which may be take you onto another topic are all incident avoidable ?? will you ever remove human error ??

Stuie, I feel I score strongly on ethical behaviour (at least my psychometrics suggest so!), but to ask “what are we hiding?” is, I feel, missing some of the point. I’m sure you know this, but for those who don’t: RIDDOR reports are one of the often purely statistical criteria that many businesses are measured on, both in procuring new work and maintaining existing contracts. In tendering for new work, if our RIDDOR incident rate is above whatever “x” the client decides, then that will put our tender submissions at a disadvantage at best, and exclude them at worst. In these situations, there is rarely an opportunity to “explain” the individual incidents (if that is, indeed, possible). Additionally, one large contract we have specifies the “reportable incident rate” above which we put our continued employment at risk. It’s brutal and it’s wrong to my mind but, and this is the crux, it’s there in black and white, we’ve signed up to it, we have no option. Having said all that, RIDDOR plays no direct part in how we manage our H&S. We prefer to act on Lost Time incidents (LTis) as the 7-day cut-off feels like it’s just a line someone has drawn in the sand: it’s possible to have lots of LTis without having a single RIDDOR. So when: there may be 200 jobs at risk (as in my case) if I get it wrong; when the legislation is so open to interpretation that even in here, as professionals, we can’t provide a definitive answer; then it’s no wonder that, without hiding anything or being evasive, some people hesitate to report and certainly don’t report “just in case”. Heck, the evaders aren’t posting on here, for heaven’s sake, they’re out there injuring people and ignoring that particular regulation. Absolute fact. So, while always reporting when I need to, I’d rather have the discussion with the HSE about why I’d interpreted the wooly regs wrong than have the discussion with the DWP about what time I have to sign on next week (and have to imagine that discussion being had by 200 or so former colleagues). (and, by the way, our LTi rate is currently zero, so this is not an excuse for poor statistics on our part!) Was that a rant? Then it’s over. Brian. ;-)