Posted By Jonathan Breeze
Does anyone out there have a copy of a Accident Reporting Procedure, preferably in flowchart form that I can take a look at while I modify ours?

Our current procedure is a tad verbose (10 pages) & has 5 forms to fill in (depending on who has had the injury, what their relationship is to our company & who else needs to know).

As a consequence the current potential for failure in the system is immense & I'm looking for ways to cut the ...beaurocracy.

Please feel free to correct me if you feel I'm wrong, but I'm currently working on the theory that if a form is good enough for the regulatory authorities (e.g. BI510 & F2508) then why transfer the details to another form that is not a legal requirement.

Thanks for your help.

Jon

Posted By Sean Fraser
This relates back to the recent discussions on accident "classification", including potential loss incidents, which I encourage you to view if you haven't already done so.

One form, with one procedure allowing for appropriate options depending on the nature of incident determined by a competent authority, would mean one method can be consistently promoted. Multiple forms and complicated formal procedures will confuse, discourage and ultimately be misleading regarding the actual situation. Apply the KISS principle at all times - Keep It Simple Stupid.

The problem with the statutory format of BI510, including the new soon-to-be-compulsory version, is that it only records the incident and applies mainly where an injury resulted. It doesn't include potential loss incidents (commonly referred to as "near-miss") and it doesn't promote investigation into cause, identification of preventive measures or record actions taken as a consequence. Therefore, I would encourage use of a separate in-house system (bespoke or pre-formatted) that will effectively record these. A good reporting system will allow for statistical compilation and analysis as well. Note that there is no mandatory requirement for the official book, as long as the system employed meets the requirements it is designed for. You could even cut it down to one all encompassing system but beware of the Data Protection Act and the need for certain details to remain confidential, the reason why BI510 was recently revised.

As long as the key principles are being addressed, along with a simple record system in place to demonstrate it is followed and provide effective reviews, you are covered. This is another example of where the pursuit of the system can overshadow the original intent and detract from it.

But the upshot is that you are only required to record accidents at present - you are not legally required to investigate and learn from them. So all you actually need to meet the minimum legal requirement is to hold the statutory book or an acceptable equivelent. Then again, if we were only seeking to meet the minimum requirement we wouldn't be in this profession, would we?

Our organisation keeps the book at each location and we have a computerised system to record incidents and suggestions - use of the book must always include an entry in the system so it can be investigated and actioned, but it doesn't follow the other way round unless an injury occured. This neatly separates the confidential information from the "publically" available entry - what happened and more importantly, what we are going to do to prevent it happening again.