HELP

Quick question - I have an employee who had an injury back in September - he claims to have hurt his knee, he had no time off and only reported the incident 6 days later.

He has now taken time off on the sick which he is attributing to the original injury, he did not take anytime off following the incident and has worked for 3 weeks up till a 2 week holiday, following the holiday he has gone off sick

Is this reportqable to Riddor ? and if so why ?

Originally Posted by: Invictus

No it is not, and the reason is that how can he attribute to the accident he could of done anything since then. I would not report it and I would explain why if the need arose.

Why did I answer I promised I wouldn't answer anymore RIDDOR questions. Make a note of the date and time he went off.

School boy error Invictus. ;)

By definition, it appears he was able to perform his routine work for three weeks minimum after the event....at least two weeks after he reported the accident at all.  

It's not impossible for it to be related but unless you feel he is the most stoic of employees or have reasonable medical evidence in his favour, I'd be in the likely non reportable camp.

Admittedly, I work in a sector (Healthcare) where there's not really a downside to reporting but....

We apply the following criteria:

- does the injured person claim it's work-related? (self-cert, return to work interview etc.)

- is there an incident report?

If the answers are 'Yes' and it's affected them for more than 7 days consecutively, it's reportable. There's no "7 days around the date of the incident" clause.

Let's face it, the main priority is to investigate and make the situation safe/establish there's no current hazard. 

I would record the alleged incident and state that it could not be confirmed not denigned that the injury actually occurred at the specified time and not RIDDOR it.

I would then recommend that he is advised of his short comings over reporting the incident late.  He could have done anything whilst he was on holiday.

Absolutley NOT reporatble. Please think before posting....really........

Originally Posted by: olufsen1

Absolutley NOT reporatble. Please think before posting....really........

Why, he’s asking colleagues advice? There is nothing wrong with that... Perhaps you should think before posting...really....

The key point here is. was the injury 'arising from work'. If your employee was carrying something work-related that may have contributed to the slip, or had maybe faulty work provided boots, or was hurrying because of work pressure, or any other factor 'arising from work' then it would be reportable. If they hurt their ankle because the pavement was faulty, or they just mis-stepped, then it wouldn't be reportable.

I guess the key thing to consider is, was there anything about the organising of the task which contributed to the injury? If so report, if not, don't,

John

Hi Allan,

That's not strictly correct; the wording in the regs is as in my post 'arising out of or in connection with work'. Just becaause they were engaged in work related duties doesn't mean the injury arose out of work; the cause could well be unrelated to work, in which case it would not be reportable. The ACOP (and HSE's website) make it pretty clear that arising out of or in connection with work, while quite broad, does mean that the injury has to be connected with the way the work is organised, with the equipment supplied, or with the layout or state of the premises. In the case of outdoor work on a public highway the state of the workplace is not relevant, so we have to look at organisation of the work or the equipment supplied. Being at work is not enough for an incident to be reportable,

John

Edited by user 15 December 2016 16:48:53(UTC)  | Reason: Typos

Originally Posted by: Allan Jones

It's a good question, but the red flag is flying already.

Why didn't they report it immediately? They have a duty of care to themself (reg7 HASAWA) and should have reported it. A failure to report could have resulted in an injury to others - obviously an investigation would highlight if this is the case or not.

You should thoroughly investigate this and obtain as many witness statements as possible to establish the facts in order to ascertain whether there is a need to report it or not. If a work related injury occurs but fails to meet reporting criteria of RIDDOR at the time of the event but at a later date is aggrevated in a non work situation which results in an period of absence does not suddenly make the initial accident reportable under RIDDOR.

How are you going to investigate it if they are walking down a pavement somewhere, how are you going to get witnesses, the person doesn't have to report it under S7.

How much time do you think people have, look at the post office is it their responsiblity to complete an inspection of all routes to ensure that there are no trip hazards?

As said if he was carrying something maybe, if he is just walking down the street because he has dropped something off and walking back to work and tripas over a loose slab or something i would say no as it is not something that the company have created.

Tenuous link to a workplace 'incident', wasn't reported correctly, I take it your staff are aware of and you have a reporting policy/ process

I wouldn't report this

Originally Posted by: Invictus

Originally Posted by: Allan Jones

It's a good question, but the red flag is flying already.

Why didn't they report it immediately? They have a duty of care to themself (reg7 HASAWA) and should have reported it. A failure to report could have resulted in an injury to others - obviously an investigation would highlight if this is the case or not.

You should thoroughly investigate this and obtain as many witness statements as possible to establish the facts in order to ascertain whether there is a need to report it or not. If a work related injury occurs but fails to meet reporting criteria of RIDDOR at the time of the event but at a later date is aggrevated in a non work situation which results in an period of absence does not suddenly make the initial accident reportable under RIDDOR.

How are you going to investigate it if they are walking down a pavement somewhere, how are you going to get witnesses, the person doesn't have to report it under S7.

How much time do you think people have, look at the post office is it their responsiblity to complete an inspection of all routes to ensure that there are no trip hazards?

As said if he was carrying something maybe, if he is just walking down the street because he has dropped something off and walking back to work and tripas over a loose slab or something i would say no as it is not something that the company have created.

Apologies I didnt make my response clear.....my post here was in reply to the original post at the top of this discussion and not the one about somebody injuring there ankle on the pavement.

Why didn't they report it immediately? They have a duty of care to themself (reg7 HASAWA) and should have reported it. A failure to report could have resulted in an injury to others - obviously an investigation would highlight if this is the case or not.

This was meant to be for the (IP) to report the incident internally to the their employer to prevent a similar event occuring to another employee, not for them to report to RIDDOR.

Reading my post I realise that I have confused myself!!!

I do love bogus inury claims! I once had a letter from a solicitor regarding an injury of an agency worker who had worked for us some months prior. Needless to say, neither us nor the principal contractor had any reocrd of an accident on the date.

Apparently he had managed to get some glass imbedded in his knee whilst removing windows which had resulted in him being unable to work for several months. 15 minutes of investigation unearthed the following:

1) He WAS on site on the day of the alleged injury, but there was no window removal undertaken until 3 weeks later.

2) He'd managed to work for us for a further 2 weeks after the date of the alledged injury (a long time with a serious debilatating injury!)

3) He had an open facebook profile

4) He had been working for his mate's courier company since he'd left us.

5) He'd crashed a van shortly after startinging there.

Never felt so smug in all my life!