Posted By Heather Aston
I would say not. This is not an "accident" as such. Stress is not a reportable disease (yet!) and anyway how could you be sure it was entirely work-related anyway?

To extend the question. An employee develops a form of WRULD over a period of time (NOT from a specific incident) that is not one of the defined reportable diseases. He eventually goes off work - do you report it?

Second example - An employee hurts his back lifting - again not from a specific incident but over s shift or two. He works quite happily for two weeks after reporting the problem, then goes off with a back problem that he says is related to the incident - do you report this one?

These are both real examples.

Heather

Posted By Neil Pearson
RIDDOR is such a nightmare. Someone's nicked my guide, so I'll be re-ordering it as soon as I finish typing this, but from memory -

(a) Stress is not a reportable disease.

(b) Some WRULDS are reportable (after clinical diagnosis): tenosinvitis is I think, as is tennis elbow. I seem to remember carpal tunnel syndrome listed? Someone with the full guidance to hand can check.

(c) The back problem is an injury and could be reportable due to the over-3-day rule, despite the delay in its onset.

Posted By Lorna Morris
Further to my previous reply & before you all throw your hands up in horror, we report it as an over 3 day incident. I am aware that stress is not a reportable disease.

Posted By Neil Pearson
Sorry I misunderstood Heather, just trying to help. My own answer is that I would report a clinically diagnosed reportable disease, and I would not report anything else unless it was an injury or a dangerous occurrence. I would report the back problem as an injury if it triggered the 3-day rule or some other trigger for reporting.

At some undefined point a long-term or slowly-developing back problem could be viewed as an illness rather than an injury, and I might not consider reporting it as an injury. I can't say exactly where the cut-off is, and I'd be interested to see other people's views on this. I tend to deal with such things case-by-case in co-operation with occ health people.

Posted By Heather Aston
Neil

I would do pretty much exactly the same as you've said. However we're fortunate in having an OH dept to help us out here - so are you presumably from what you've said?

In my experience (from what my OH dept tells me) there are a worrying number of GPs who put "tenosynovitis" (apparently this can be fairly readily specifically diagnosed) on a certificate when actually it's nothing of the kind. Conversely there are those who put "wrist pain", when actually it's teno....

We don't generally report WRULD cases unles and until we've had a specific diagnosis by our OH dept. I knwo that's not strictly what the law says, but in the early days I ended up reporting WRULD cases that ultimately turned out not to be reportable, by going on the GP's say so alone.

The condition that develops slowly over a period of time - be it back problem or RSI - is a very difficult one and I'd be prepared to bet it leads to considerable under reporting since most people don't consider that an accident has occurred.

Heather

Posted By Heather Aston
Neil

Yes I agree with your interpretation. My problem is when a diagnosis of one of the WRULD reportable diseases comes from a particular local GP who I know isn't the most accurate - I don't report to HSE until I have it confirmed by our OH Dept.

Don't tell HSE! (usually only takes a day or two mind so they probably wouldn't be bothered)

Heather

Posted By Neil Pearson
Heather, I think your policy is very sensible. Mind you I would say that as it's the same as mine! I don't believe any HSE Inspector would complain. You're getting a second opinion from someone at least as competent and whose input you know is consistent. It shows proactive management and doesn't suggest you're hiding anything. I've always been quite open about this sort of thing without anyone complaining so far.

Posted By Eric Burt
According to the HSE, their definition of stress is " the adverse reaction...." etc etc

If HSE classed stress as an injury, then they would call it an injury and not "an adverse reaction".

RIDDOR does not mention reporting "adverse reactions" therefore there is no need to report it.

HSE can't have it all ways - if they want us to report stress, then call it "an inury" and include it under RIDDOR.

This whole topic is a can of worms though, because as a previous contributor mentioned - how does the employer know if it is work-related (especially as most employers don't ask on their sickness absence forms if the ill-health was work related).

Maybe an ACoP from HSE may help to clarify.

Eric