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
Baron  
#1 Posted : 26 November 2018 15:23:05(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Baron

Hi

I'd value some input from IOSH peers. We have a situation where an employee has twisted their ankle 'falling' off a higher that normal step edge (around 200mm). It transpires that the injury will require >7 days to recover and that the IP has formally indicated that they have a pre-existing medical condition that has excerbated the injury and the recovery time. The IP was egressing a place of work. The step was a actaully a step down from the external exit area.

Thoughts on reportable or not. My view is it is not a RIDDOR.

Thanks

Barry

Connor35037  
#2 Posted : 26 November 2018 16:37:16(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Connor35037

Based on the info. provided, it doesn't sound like a RIDDOR.

That suggests the cause of the accident was "human error"?

safeandshiny  
#3 Posted : 26 November 2018 16:42:34(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
safeandshiny

Related post on here that may help http://forum.iosh.co.uk/...ack-injury--pre-existing
Baron  
#4 Posted : 26 November 2018 17:05:13(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Baron

Originally Posted by: safeandshiny Go to Quoted Post
Related post on here that may help http://forum.iosh.co.uk/...ack-injury--pre-existing [I think there does have to be questions around knowledge of the pre-existing, but is stepping off a slightly high concrete step and straining your ankle reportable following confirmation of a >7 day recovery time? I'm not so sure...]

O'Donnell54548  
#5 Posted : 27 November 2018 07:26:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
O'Donnell54548

Unable to carry out their normal duties for 7 consecutive days or more, in my opinion RIDDOR reportable (cause 'human error' has no relevance).

thanks 2 users thanked O'Donnell54548 for this useful post.
webstar on 27/11/2018(UTC), A Kurdziel on 27/11/2018(UTC)
Chris Broadbent  
#6 Posted : 27 November 2018 07:52:50(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Chris Broadbent

If you're not argueing an actual "accident" took place (which it doesn't seem you are) the IP's work activity caused an accident taking more than seven days to recover from; that's a RIDDOR reportable.

No harm in reporting it if you're unsure, the important thing is you investigate and learn from the incident (if there's anything to learn!) 

thanks 1 user thanked Chris Broadbent for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 27/11/2018(UTC)
fairlieg  
#7 Posted : 27 November 2018 10:32:15(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
fairlieg

Based on the information you posted and the guidance on the HSE website I would say it is not reportable.  you need to determine what work activity she was carrying out.  Walking out of a building is not a work activity.  Walking out of building carrying a box of files because you need to take them from one place to another may well be............

http://www.hse.gov.uk/riddor/key-definitions.htm 

"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"
Kate  
#8 Posted : 27 November 2018 12:17:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

The higher than normal step edge sounds like a case of the condition of the premises playing a significant role ...

fairlieg  
#9 Posted : 27 November 2018 14:10:38(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
fairlieg

Originally Posted by: Kate Go to Quoted Post

The higher than normal step edge sounds like a case of the condition of the premises playing a significant role ...

Depends if it is a step on a gangway/walkway or a stair case.  For stair case max rise is 180mm for a gangway 190mm domestic premises 200mm or 220mm depending on the pitch of the stairway.  "Around 200mm" does not seem significant nor unusual.  There are however, a few more ifs and buts in there which also depend on when the site was built or refurbished and which building regulations were relevant at that time

Baron  
#10 Posted : 27 November 2018 18:39:09(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Baron

Originally Posted by: fairlieg Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Kate Go to Quoted Post

The higher than normal step edge sounds like a case of the condition of the premises playing a significant role ...

Depends if it is a step on a gangway/walkway or a stair case.  For stair case max rise is 180mm for a gangway 190mm domestic premises 200mm or 220mm depending on the pitch of the stairway.  "Around 200mm" does not seem significant nor unusual.  There are however, a few more ifs and buts in there which also depend on when the site was built or refurbished and which building regulations were relevant at that time

The step is a 200mm step in good condition. The IP experienced weakness/pain before he stepped. The step just happened to be there, part of the route to the car park, it wasn’t directly contributory. The IP carried on walking after the pain, which included stepping and walking on tarmac, both of which exacerbated the original issue, caused by the underlying 'injury', which was not reported or known to the company. I can't see how the HSE would be interested in this under RIDDOR. Some comms about reporting underlying medical conditions, but we need to be careful about that too...

I might call the HSE even though I am convinced its a non-starter]

Kate  
#11 Posted : 28 November 2018 13:06:24(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

As the step wasn't contributory and the cause was a pre-existing condition, I agree it's not a RIDDOR.

Connor35037  
#12 Posted : 28 November 2018 16:50:19(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Connor35037

It's entirely relevant if you're trying to ascertain a key point-was the accident work-related or not?

Originally Posted by: O'Donnell54548 Go to Quoted Post

Unable to carry out their normal duties for 7 consecutive days or more, in my opinion RIDDOR reportable (cause 'human error' has no relevance).

MaxL  
#13 Posted : 29 November 2018 08:44:15(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
MaxL

I had similar where an employee injured his back, however he had a pre existing back injury. I was unsure to report as it was a RIDDOR reportable injury. I contacted HSE and was informed that if the injury was the result of a pre existing condition, it would not be reportable under Riddor.

PIKEMAN  
#14 Posted : 29 November 2018 11:19:51(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
PIKEMAN

I agree not reportable due to pre existing injury. There is another important point. In addition to resisting pressure NOT to report under RIDDOR, NEVER report to be "on the safe side". RIDDOR reportables are often used as metrics to bench mark internally or externally. If you are a professional, ONLY REPORT IF YOU ARE CERTAIN.

Edited by user 29 November 2018 11:20:25(UTC)  | Reason: Typo

Kate  
#15 Posted : 29 November 2018 12:26:50(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

Human error can, and does, occur in both work-related and non-work-related contexts.  Indeed, human error is very often cited as a cause of work-related accidents.  

So human error being the cause is no indication of whether or not it was work-related.

Users browsing this topic
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.