Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
alexmccreadie13  
#1 Posted : 19 December 2014 14:18:51(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
alexmccreadie13

There is no intention of making this a Friday post but it is a bit of a conundrum. A piece of operated plant hired by a site under CPA Model Terms and conditions. This makes the operator a loan servant of the hirer. They slip and break their wrist therefore it must be reported under RIDDOR. Now for the question who reports their employer or the company / person who has hired them and in control of the site. I am saying their employer but I may or may not be right. Thoughts please.
ashleywillson  
#2 Posted : 19 December 2014 14:31:44(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
ashleywillson

I would agree with you. This is from the HSE website about RIDDOR reporting: "An employer or person in control of premises If you are an employer If you are an employer, you must report any work-related deaths, and certain work-related injuries, cases of disease, and near misses involving your employees wherever they are working. If you are in control of premises, If you are in control of premises, you must report any work-related deaths, certain injuries to members of the public and self-employed people on your premises, and dangerous occurrences (some near miss incidents) that occur on your premises." http://www.hse.gov.uk/ri...ould-report.htm#employer From this I read it as the employer reports as he employs the injured person. If it was a member of public then it would be the hirer as the controller.
ashleywillson  
#3 Posted : 19 December 2014 14:32:25(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
ashleywillson

Further to my above, I have assumed he is not self employed...
Stern  
#4 Posted : 19 December 2014 14:52:40(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Stern

We often have this problem as a Principal Contractor where contractors are hurt on our sites. Our stance is that the employer should report under RIDDOR but we occasionally hit resistance with people claiming it's our responsibility as the "person in control of the premises". In this case, i'd stick to our stance and push it back on the guy's employer (ultimately the person who pays his wages).
chris42  
#5 Posted : 19 December 2014 15:16:46(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris42

quote=ashleywillson]I would agree with you. This is from the HSE website about RIDDOR reporting: "An employer or person in control of premises If you are an employer If you are an employer, you must report any work-related deaths, and certain work-related injuries, cases of disease, and near misses involving your employees wherever they are working. If you are in control of premises, If you are in control of premises, you must report any work-related deaths, certain injuries to members of the public and self-employed people on your premises, and dangerous occurrences (some near miss incidents) that occur on your premises." http://www.hse.gov.uk/ri...ould-report.htm#employer From this I read it as the employer reports as he employs the injured person. If it was a member of public then it would be the hirer as the controller.
There have been many discussions on this sort of topic over the years. My own take on this issue is that it is the employer who reports unless the actual activities are directly controlled by the hirer. Ie if you hire a person to help run a part of a widget manufacturing line ( so they don't come in with a particular skill) you train them to operate some part of the production line they become your responsibility including reporting injuries associated with their work. In this instance you have employed a skilled person, So the question would then be did they hurt themselves by performing that skill or was it just down to site conditions. This makes it the person who was in controls responsibility. Just my take, which I'm sure others will disagree with. Chris
chris42  
#6 Posted : 19 December 2014 15:19:56(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris42

Sorry no edit Last but one line should be :- This makes it the responsibility of the person in control.
alexmccreadie13  
#7 Posted : 19 December 2014 16:42:37(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
alexmccreadie13

Chris and everyone else I am in complete agreement then bring in the CPA Model Terms and Conditions and it leaves us with another minefield. I completely understand all of the points raised I think at times they should allow simpletons like me to write the regs life would be so much simpler. Thanks for the posts Alex
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.