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
cjr  
#1 Posted : 05 November 2019 14:01:40(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
cjr

Hello, need some help with this one.

We had had an employee off for 4 weeks following a heart attack he had at home, during the 4 weeks he contacted the company due to only getting SSP and he was not happy about it.

Suddently 3 days after his return date (4 weeks and 5 days after the heart attack) he has put in an accident via the accident book dating back to 1 day before his heart attack, on the accident form he states this lead to a heart attack.

Now this is the first we have heard about the "accidnet" and its conveinient that this has only came up nearly 5 weeks after the intial abesnce and is still wanting payment.

I will be comleting an investigation tomorrow with the emplyee on the accident reported like i would normally do, however my qustion is, would this be deemed as a RIDDOR now?

Thank You 

jwk  
#2 Posted : 05 November 2019 14:39:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jwk

OK, so do your investigation and following that, once you've got  bit more knowledge than his say so, you might decide that the accident did 'cause' the heart attacke, if so ring the RIDDOR contact centre and ask them if you should report.

Me, I think on the face of it that the causality looks a bit thin, not quite sure how a relatively small accident can cause a heart attack: serious trauma can, but that would itself be fairly obvious and would have been noted on the day. But then again, I'm not a medic.

For now, no report, clear up some of your questions, determine the facts and then report if you think the facts warrant it. I know there are time limits but nobody really gets penalised for missing them, and they do depend on making a link between an accident at work and time off (in this case). right now you can't make that link with any confidence,

John

Edited by user 05 November 2019 14:40:39(UTC)  | Reason: Too much coffee

thanks 1 user thanked jwk for this useful post.
SJP on 07/11/2019(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#3 Posted : 05 November 2019 14:49:23(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

That is a pretty big jump heart attack directly attributable to a work accident.

Granted if they are not at work it is hard to report but waiting additional days after return?

Do your investigation, ask them why it was late in being reported and remind them that falsification of a company record could be construed as gross misconduct as well as potential fraud (by example what does the sick/fit note say? would they like to be stood opposite the doctor in court?).

If they still want to persist with their claim document everything and make a late over seven day RIDDOR explaining that you have only just been made aware.

Zyggy  
#4 Posted : 05 November 2019 15:01:30(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Zyggy

Some excellent advice already given, but I would take it a step further. If you have access to Occupational Health advice, then I would suggest that your employee be referred to them. With the employee's permission, they can gain access to the necessary medical reports pertaining to the heart attack & then give you advice on the likelihood or otherwise of there being a causal link with the alleged accident. If it turns out to be all above board then you can be seen as acting as a responsible employer & if not....
cjr  
#5 Posted : 05 November 2019 15:08:09(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
cjr

Thanks for the advice!

Glad to see i am on the same page as you all.

My concern was with the reporting timescale and did not want to put the company into a bad position by not reporting straight away.

Will see what comes from the investigation and go from there!

Thank You

chris.packham  
#6 Posted : 05 November 2019 15:39:21(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris.packham

Attributing the heart attack as a result of an incident is something that in my view requires medical expertise. How will you decide whether there is a valid link? Do you have the medical expertise to do this? The fact that the individual claims this is his opinion, not a valid medical diagnosis. So referral to occupational health or the production of a formal diagnosis by the individual from a medical practitioner stating that the heart attack was as a result of some other factor associated with work is surely a precondition for consideration of the claim.

CptBeaky  
#7 Posted : 06 November 2019 10:04:38(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
CptBeaky

I am intrigued as to what workplace "accident" could have been the cause of this heart attack.

A Kurdziel  
#8 Posted : 06 November 2019 12:03:24(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

Originally Posted by: CptBeaky Go to Quoted Post

I am intrigued as to what workplace "accident" could have been the cause of this heart attack.

an accident while manufacturing amyl nitrate? That would be exposure to a hazardous substance

  
thanks 1 user thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
CptBeaky on 07/11/2019(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#9 Posted : 06 November 2019 14:25:59(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Badly maintained boiler or other gas burning appliance leading to hypoxia through Carbon Monoxide posioning

thanks 1 user thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
CptBeaky on 07/11/2019(UTC)
chris.packham  
#10 Posted : 06 November 2019 15:30:55(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris.packham

Yes, both examples possible. But would you be confident enough to provide a diagnosis of occupational causation, perhaps under oath at a post mortem? I would still wish for a proper diagnosis by a medical practitioner.

thanks 2 users thanked chris.packham for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 06/11/2019(UTC), SJP on 07/11/2019(UTC)
John Carver  
#11 Posted : 06 November 2019 21:53:07(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
John Carver

I agree with earlier comments - if this were my case I would now be referring the employee to the company occupational health service provider in order a detailed report could be provided (with the consent of the person involved). The later point would undoubtedly not be an issue given the allegation made.

I would not pass comment or make reports to the HSE until the time is appropriate. It needs to be remembered in respect of lost time, the RIDDOR report will only need to be made if the event is ‘out of or in connection with work’ there must be an identifiable external event and the work activity itself must have significantly contributed to the said accident.

Edited by user 06 November 2019 21:55:46(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

thanks 1 user thanked John Carver for this useful post.
SJP on 07/11/2019(UTC)
stevedm  
#12 Posted : 07 November 2019 12:41:50(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stevedm

CO is a chemical asphyxiant and Amyl Nitrate is a vasodilator...both don't necessarily equal cardiac arrest...

yes your heart will stop but as a result of loss of oxygen to the system...I have only known one Amyl Nitrate death in 25 years and that was because he suffocated as he was suspended, his airway was shut off.....

cardiac arrest - simply put is about the failure of the pump...

still isn't riddor in the circumstances the OP stated.

jwk  
#13 Posted : 07 November 2019 16:18:41(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jwk

Originally Posted by: chris.packham Go to Quoted Post

Attributing the heart attack as a result of an incident is something that in my view requires medical expertise. How will you decide whether there is a valid link? Do you have the medical expertise to do this? The fact that the individual claims this is his opinion, not a valid medical diagnosis. So referral to occupational health or the production of a formal diagnosis by the individual from a medical practitioner stating that the heart attack was as a result of some other factor associated with work is surely a precondition for consideration of the claim.

Absolutely agree Chris, a serious medical opinion is something that needs to be obtained during the investigation,

John

A Kurdziel  
#14 Posted : 08 November 2019 10:00:51(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

Had an employee die from cardiac arrest, in one of our offices once.  I had to explain to senior managers this was not a RIDDOR and that they should look at support for the other employees in that office  as, at least some were clearly traumatised by the experience.

P Barrett  
#15 Posted : 16 November 2019 08:02:26(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
P Barrett

Please don't confuse a cardiac arrest with a heart attack.

A cardiac arrest is where the heart fails to pump sufficient blood to maintain life and can have a number of causes, one of which is a Myocardial Infarction, also known as a heart attack where there is obstruction of blood supply to heart muscle.

The usual cause of an MI is a blood clot which can occur due to a number of predisposing factors.

I would hold back on any reporting until you have a medical report giving information on the cause of the MI.

If it can be attributed to development of a blood clot due to injury, then the question needs asking where, when and how did the injury occur. Then you have the other factor to take into account - does the claimant smoke? Any recent long haul flights? etc.etc.

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.