Rank: Super forum user 
|
I am hoping this is a simple question with a simple answer, though the HSE website doesn't make it clear. We have a operative who working around a sewer has become ill and upon visiting the Hospital they have treated him for suspected Leptospirosis. Those who have been in the water industry for a long time are certain it is RIDDOR reportable. I cannot seem to find anything conclusive on this, so would please like some clarity - possible with a pointer as to where to find this information, if so.
We expect to hear from the hospital regarding his blood cultures any day now and I want to be sure I am reporting if I need to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user 
|
Regulation 9 of the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR) requires employers and self-employed workers to report: - any disease caused by an occupational exposure to a biological agent
As weils disease is a biological agent i would say yes.
|
 1 user thanked leeoneill for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hi Watson What the key part of RIDDOR says is: Exposure to carcinogens, mutagens and biological agents
9. Where, in relation to a person at work, the responsible person receives a diagnosis of—
(a) any cancer attributed to an occupational exposure to a known human carcinogen or mutagen (including ionising radiation); or
(b) any disease attributed to an occupational exposure to a biological agent, the responsible person must follow the reporting procedure, subject to regulations 14 and 15.
So, it sounds as if you meet the criterion of "in relation to a person at work", but I am not convinced that your "responsible person" has received a DIAGNOSIS - a word that is a defined term in RIDDOR. Treatment for SUSPECTED leptospirosis is not the same as a medical practitioner signing a piece of paper saying that the victim HAS the disease. My professional position would be to report partly on the basis that an organisation can never be prosecuted for reporting something that turns out to be not reportable, whereas non-reporting of reportable incidents can be the subject of enforcement action. UNLESS you have pretty solid evidence that the person came by this disease from exposure outside their work, which is unlikely if you know they are working in and near sewerage.
|
1 user thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I had similar experience some years ago: an employee, who working on a wildlife project, showed symptoms of TB. The hospital decided to treat her for TB but did not give us that definitive diagnosis. So we did not know if a) it was TB and if b) it was caused by her work with wildlife. She had been abroad and that was a possible source. We contacted the HSE and they said unless it is a definitive diagnosis, do not report it under RIDDOR. We carried all sorts of tests but we were unable to prove a definitive diagnosis of active (as opposed to historic) TB. We also brought in a medical consultant to look at what we had collected and he agreed that although the person probably had had TB, in the past, it was probably not work related. So there was no RIDDOR but we say, a RIDDOR is not an admission of liability or fault so you have nothing to lose by reporting it.
|
2 users thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Thanks for the replies.
peter - I wanted to be ahead of the curve. At the moment it is suspected, but as my post states we are awaiting confirmation. Noted that should we not receive this we dont necessarily have a duty to report. As a contractor working for a tier 1 and their client I need to be sure I am reporting only what is necessary, as these things have a knock-on effect. My gut feeling is that HSE would be more interested in knowing about this if this was contracted in a hospital, care, school, leisure centre, et,c. type setting rather than a rising main of a waste water system, where this disease is likely to reside and no public or vulnerable people are unknowingly likely to come into contact with it. Not saying that would make a difference to whether to report or not, just getting a sense of viewpoint the other side of the fence. Although, to give more context to me initial post, I thought that I had seen somewhere that a biological agent was only reportable if it was classified in hazard group 3 or 4 in the APL of Biological Agents https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/misc208.pdf However, although from the category headings this would make sense both Legionella and Leptosira fall into Hazard Group 2 - hence the conflict. I cannot find this so perhaps I misread, or just dreamed it up!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Morning WatsonD I think that much of the problem is that HSE would actually prefer to get less reports. Strained resources and reports means inputting data and other tasks for HSE staff to do, whether or not an incident is very rarely marked for investigation. Part of HSE's public rationale would be that they get much of their data from sources other than RIDDOR reports which are recognised as being extremely unreliable due to UNDERreporting. PLUS, of course, the vast majority of occupational ill health falls outside the scope of RIDDOR. RIDDOR and predeeessors such as Factories Act 1961 Section 82 has only ever included within scope a limited number of types of health condition where it is relatively easy to be confident that the outcome has an occupational cause and where that outcome can be diagnosed relatively quickly. However, there was a time when HSE would definitely have been interested in cases of leptospirosis amongst those working with sewerage and there used to be an HSE pocket leaflet for such people with a picture of a rat on the front. In RIDDOR 1985 uksi_19852023_en.pdf the list of reportable diseases included Leptospirosis where contracted by those "Handling animals, or work in places which are or may be infested by rats". I've done lots of work in the water industry both "clean" and "dirty" and the sector would generally be fairly clear on its position on the reportability of leptospirosis. I fully understand why supply chains like to keep their numbers down, but any Tier 1 Contractor who were to "fail" a potential subbie on the basis of a single report of leptospirosis is probably a Contractor you should be avoiding working for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Thanks Peter For the record neither the tier 1 or the client have intimated in any way they dont want this reported. And all communication is working on the asumption we will - once diagnosis confirms - be reporting this. However, as I was unable to put my hand on a clear list of specified biological agents, I just questioned myself that I may be missing something.
A fools errand of trying to confirm something doesnt exist, by not being able to find any evidence to prove it does.
|
1 user thanked WatsonD for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
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.