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
Kim Hedges  
#1 Posted : 10 January 2013 16:19:05(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kim Hedges

I attended a branch meeting today 10/01/13 in Bristol and was told of some possible forthcoming changes to RIDDOR (Reporting Injuries Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations).

Last year the UK Government changed the reporting period of incidents to 7 days (it was previously 3 days). It now appears that a further 3 changes may be made:

(1) Removing the reporting of Occupational Diseases.

(2) Removing the reporting of Injuries to the public.

(3) Removing the reporting of dangerous occurrences outside high risk sectors.

So my observation are, (1) the HSE (Health and Safety Executive) looses both statistical information and public health awareness of trends and outbreaks of such diseases like Mesothelioma (asbestos cancer),
(currently there are 13000 registrations yearly), Legionella, Hepatitis.
How will government agencies react quickly enough without this information?

Injuries to the public (2) are rare and when they do occur the Police tend to get involved fairly quickly, so I can just about understand HSE not needing this report from the parties involved - so will the Police inform the HSE and CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) for a prosecution?

Reporting dangerous occurrences outside high risk sectors (3), so the HSE doesn't get involved and the parties involved get away without an investigation to stop it from happening again?

Initially it sounds short sighted to me, what do you think?
redken  
#2 Posted : 10 January 2013 16:25:16(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
redken

jwk  
#3 Posted : 10 January 2013 16:50:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jwk

I work in an industry that's regarded as low risk (I guess); Healthcare. Collapse or failure of the lifting parts of any hoist or lift is a specified dangerous occurrence. Hoist mishaps kill and seriously injure people in the Health & Social care sector with lamentable frequency, OK, it's often user error (due to lack of training and supervision etc etc) rather than mechanical failure, but still, I don't like the idea that we won't have to report this to HSE. Sure, we report to MHRA, but there's no penalty if we don't, and I would imagine many independent small social care providers wouldn't know who MHRA were if they turned up and started partying in their garden,

John
DP  
#4 Posted : 10 January 2013 16:54:49(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
DP

Injuries to the public (2) are rare and when they do occur the Police tend to get involved fairly quickly, so I can just about understand HSE not needing this report from the parties involved - so will the Police inform the HSE and CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) for a prosecution?

Kim - injuries to the public are not as rare as you may think - retail is a by a country mile the biggest industry in the UK - many 1000's of injuries occur every year that meet the reporting criteria currently set in L73. The vast majority of reportable incidents which occur on retail premises are attributed to MOTP.

Extremely rarely do the police get involved in these type of incidents - if never.

I can assure you that many Local Authorities up and down the UK are not happy with this removal as it will limit even further their opportunity to enforce in the retail sector.
Jane Blunt  
#5 Posted : 10 January 2013 16:58:33(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Jane Blunt

The Education sector is another that has a high proportion of RIDDORs to members of the public, since pupils/students are not employees.
jwk  
#6 Posted : 10 January 2013 17:04:09(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jwk

Agree wholeheartedly with DP, Retail does injure MOTP, we certainly have. Healthcare also injures MOTP in a RIDDOR sense, and although, once again, we have to report to CQC if those MOTP are patients/service users, CQC probably isn't going to do much beyond taking a star or two off us (they're talking about bringing star ratings back) like they did in 2008 when we killed somebody with bedrails,

John
Ron Hunter  
#7 Posted : 10 January 2013 23:43:28(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

I think it a fair bet that every proposal in that CD redken references will come into effect - perhaps as early as this April.
Kim Hedges  
#8 Posted : 11 January 2013 11:29:31(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kim Hedges

Interesting comments, thank you. I didn't know that about members of the public and shops (despite growing up in a Mum and Dad shop).

It sounds to me that RIDDOR (as an intelligence tool to the HSE) and to a certain extent the HSE is having powers removed by stealth.

It appears that the government wants to remove state 'interference' as they see it, but the concept of the HSE is in fact a de-regist (spelling is wrong - meaning as a whole) regime, a bit like the health service.

Yes, the HSE may have it's faults, but this tampering with the law just seems wrong.

There are allegedly 3000 other pieces of law that need attention, leave RIDDOR to the end.
Kim Hedges  
#9 Posted : 11 January 2013 11:33:46(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kim Hedges

REDKEN - thanks for the link, I just read it again and noticed this:

This consultation began on 2 August 2012 and ended on 28 October 2012

Yesterdays branch meeting was the first I'd heard of it, despite lurking on the forums everyday.
Ron Hunter  
#10 Posted : 11 January 2013 23:48:17(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

Kim Hedges wrote:
REDKEN - thanks for the link, I just read it again and noticed this:

This consultation began on 2 August 2012 and ended on 28 October 2012

Yesterdays branch meeting was the first I'd heard of it, despite lurking on the forums everyday.


You can sign up for email alerts from the HSE informing about upcoming /current consultations.
Colin Atkinson  
#11 Posted : 12 January 2013 10:17:46(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Colin Atkinson

RIDDOR along with much other legislation, it takes so long for people to become familiar with rules that by the time they are clear they are changed. The regulations are an important tool to encourage consistency in reporting, especially for less scrupulous managers. As for disregarding Occ. Health issues, this decreases the already low priority on the 'health' element of health and safety.
John J  
#12 Posted : 12 January 2013 11:13:29(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
John J

If anything the focus should increase in the occupational ill health/disease. Considering the burden this places on the health service it's a clear example of this and, previous Governments, lack of holistic thinking.



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.