Posted By Kirsty Davies2 ????? Neither - because that will be classified as an accident. LOL

Posted By graeme12345 first off, can it happen again?

Posted By Andrew Lochlyn Ure Dinesh The answer to your question depends on how your company procedures define the various categories of incident. From your query I sense that you may not be working in the UK and therefore any answers based on UK legal requirements may not be helpful (neither, for that matter, would any answer attempting to belittle the orginal query, Kirsty). As far as my own company is concerned - a large onshore oil and gas operator in the Middle East - the incident you refer to would not be classified as a First Aid Case, as no First Aid treatment was given. It would however be treated as High Potential Near Miss, with the level of significance and follow-up depending on how it would be ranked on our risk matrix. It would then be subject to a full investigation with the results entered into our Incident Tracking database until close-out. Regards Andrew

Posted By Martin Brown I would report as an accident as an electric shock was experienced, therefore what action is required to prevent a re occurrence. What Is A Near Miss and what is a Hazard? If for the purpose of this process, we agree that an Accident is an unplanned event which results in, either; injury, illness, damage, or pollution, then; A Near Miss is an unplanned event which did not result in any of these outcomes, but could have but for luck or coincidence. E.g. an item falls from the mezzanine into a walkway when there was no-one present. A Hazard is something with potential to cause harm which when not adequately controlled becomes a significant risk. E.g. Exposed electric cabling >contact with electricity!

Posted By Bob Shillabeer In my workplace an accident is an occurrence that resuklts in harm or injury, a near miss is something that in slightly different circumstances could have resulted in harm or injury. So if someone has an electric shock and no injury it would still be reportable and fully investigated as the cause is more important than the outcome and gthe only way to prevent injury at work is to close out the causes rather than react to the accident.

Posted By David Matthew Dinesh, You say an employee received an electric shock which I've got a feeling could be reportable under RIDDOR - can't check as I'm on holiday and my copy is in the office (so some of us sad people do respond after 5 - reference to the ahem discussion there). I thnk the wording is electrocution and I have to say I don't know where an electric shock become s electrocution. Having said that I might be wrong. regards, David

Posted By Andrew Lochlyn Ure Dinesh Lots of helpful responses for you now. Perhaps you could come back to us and tell us how you intend to proceed. Could you also confirm as to whether you are in the UK? As I said in my previous contribution, my own feeling is that you are not - and David, if that is the case the advice in regard to RIDDOR may not be applicable. Regards Andrew

Posted By Lilian McCartney electrocution used to be death but I notice now the dictionary says to kill or injure by electricity. I wonder if it is one of these words which has changed its meaning due to common use? Merry Christmas all, just going now for hols Lilian

Posted By Graham Bullough Lilian makes a valid comment about the word "electrocution" which has long meant "to kill or execute by electric shock". The snag is that there seems to be no convenient word to describe an event in which someone receives an electric shock but isn't killed by it. This might explain why some people have mis-applied the word. If sufficient numbers of people now do so, it may explain why some dictionaries now describe it as including non-fatal electric shocks. Can anyone suggest a new word for such shocks? Perhaps something to think about during spells of boredom over the imminent festivities! Mention of electrocution reminds me that during my time with HSE I investigated on a Tuesday the electrocution of a factory employee whose aluminium ladder came in contact with an overhead power line running alongside and near the factory. Two days later I got a phone call from the Police to say that a singer had been electrocuted while using a microphone in a local theatre. Great, I thought, two electrocutions in one week! "What's the name of the deceased?" I asked. The policeman replied "Oh, he's not dead - he just twitched and stopped singing for a short while, and after that he was okay." Phew I thought. I vaguely recall that the cause of the shock was a loose wire inside the plug on the power lead for the amplifier system. As the system was owned by and moved about with the peripatetic singer and his band, the plug and flex were especially vulnerable to damage. Following the incident the singer readily agreed to buy a portable RCD unit and ensure that the lead and plug of the amplifier received regularly checks. He might well have considered replacing the earthed metal-clad microphone with a double insulated one if obtainable. No matter how we classify and record electro-shock incidents, they should always be taken seriously. The next occurrence could well be an electrocution. Remember the one at the "Fatty Arbuckles" outlet (as mentioned in another current thread about PAT testing) where nobody did anything about previous shocks. To echo advice from other responders, everybody at any workplace using mains electricity should be left in no doubt that any appliance or installation which gives an electric shock must be promptly taken out of use for checking and repair by a competent person or effective disposal. People should also be made aware of what to do if they become aware of someone receiving an electric shock i.e. how to isolate the power safely and avoid putting themselves at risk in their instinctive reaction to help the affected person.

Posted By jervis Was it an electric shock of equipment or static i.e when walking on carpets and you touch some thing you get a shock from that if it was the first i would be looking at the equipment!