Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Bill Morrison
Having attended a South Downs Branch seminar yesterday on Occupational Road Risk, one interesting comment from an IOSH Representative was that a great deal of discussions are taking place on RIDDOR, and that it could be a possibilty that RIDDOR reporting would be scrapped, as in their words currently RIDDOR focuses attention on those doing it correctly and reporting. It does nothing to tackle the huge under reporting that currently goes on?
Comments?
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Descarte
Under reporting of riddor?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By J Knight
Any thought about what might replace it? Or os it just that some of the provisions might go; e.g. the over three daY rule? I can't see anybody wanting to scrap the requirement to tell HSE if somebody is killed or lying in a broken heap on the shop floor.
Under-reporting increases as the severity decreases - discuss. After all, it's fairly easy for most people to realise that they should tell somebody if there's a death, but over three day injuries?
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Helen Horton
Am I imagining it but wasn't there talk before the 1995 re-launch of the existing regs of shifting the recording/reporting point from the employer to hospital A&E depts? They gather all the necessary information and already have to pass some of it to the DWP and National Statistics Office. This would capture all injuries needing hospital treatment and would not rely on the employer holding their hand up. What the NHS would make of this I don't know - probably wouldn't be a popular move and is probably why they didn't do it in the 1990's.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Brian Hagyard
I had heard that RIDDOR was under consideration too. From the number of RIDDOR threads on this forum is that a bad thing? Clearly Health and Safety professionals, including the enforces often disagree about what is and what is not reportable. It’s hard enough to get a true figure for the number of injuries people suffer at work and as for occupational disease its neigh on impossible. It’s only those companies that understand RIDDOR that actually report and I have heard companies complain that they encourage enforcement against themselves, while bad companies that don’t report too often get away with it unless HSE/LA find out through a complaint. With the current emphasis on “joined up working” and “working together” I doubt that RIDDOR will just be abandoned. As with all the recent changes there will be a period of consultation that we can all take part in. Anyone got any good ideas?
Brian.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Murgatroyd
They're going to do away with "it" because of the bad companies that under-report ?
This is the same government executive agency that is stopping inspections because it can't afford to do them anymore ?
So, to add to the "bad" companies that under report there will be the "good" companies that no longer report either ?
If you put this together with the increasing difficulty in obtaining injury or invalidity benefit you start to smell an increasingly large rat.
I could give you several instances by "good" companies of workers being shipped to hospital with broken bones, by car, and being given days off with pay and told not to tell the hospital where "it" happened.
In fact, I very much doubt if there IS any difference between "good" and "bad" companies in the field of just not bothering to report anything, ever !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Hilary Charlton
I'm torn on this one - if we have a RIDDOR accident then, of course, we report it and suffer the consequences as you do. However, what about all the people who don't report and will probably never get found out - it does seem to be a system that punishes the good and ignores the bad.
Hilary
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Rob Yuill
I have experienced many occasions when the decision whether to report or not is borderline and requires an accurate understanding of the ACOP. After all isn't that the role of the professional?
In the past to clarify finer points, a call to a local HSE Inspector would result in a discussion out of which the decision would be resolved. Nowadays however an attempt to follow the same path usually results in the answer "report it anyway and we'll (HSE) decide if it's a RIDDOR".
How can this be? For starters try:
1. The HSE are short of Inspectors familiar with the regs / ACOP,
2. There is a general mis-trust of anyone who contacts them,
3. There has been a shift of policy to collect more data.
I favour number 3, as I recently got an almost identical answer from Inspectors in the North West and South West over the same enquiry; oh I forget the same answer from the enquiry line.
Now here's a thought. Under the Data Protection Act personal data must be accurate and required for a specific purpose. If the report is retained and it's not a RIDDOR are the HSE in breach as the 2508 does include personal data?
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.