Rank: Forum user 
|
I was investigating an accident whereby a Temporary Worker (Zero hours contract) had slipped on a wet surface and fell rather heavily. The IP didn't want to lose any hours and wanted to remain in work but he was convinced to go the walk in centre which he did He was not called in for work the following day because there was no work for him to do. There is work for him on Monday and he said that he'll be in work. Could this loop hole be exploited by unscrupulous employer, to save on LTA stats?
If a person on a zero hours contract hurt themselves and couldn't come into work the next day and the employer decided there was no work for them to do so they avoid reporting an LTA ? food for thought
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
RIDDOR reporting of 7 day accidents deals with this very scenario by making the criteria based on non-availability for normal work rather than simple absence. It also means that when calculating the 7 days you include weekends and holidays. Unscrupulous employers (they actually exist!) will just not report accidents and warn their staff not to mention the fact that they were injured at work. I have heard of employers arranging for taxis to take seriously injured people to hospital rather than an ambulance so as to avoid awkward questions.
|
 3 users thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
There are lots of ways of fudjing the figures. For example, if there is no work available for the person the next day then there is no lost time and arguably not a LTA. So yes, if you are recording LTA's these don't lend themselves to zero contracted hours.
We have to be clear between LTA and RIDDOR reportable accidents these are often quite different.
|
1 user thanked toe for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Mersey Those with duties to report and/or record accidents and other events have found ways of getting round the requirements (across the globe) ever since the first such duties were put in place. Sometimes, it's by finding loopholes, sometimes it's by covering up the evidence, and sometimes it's a case of simply ignoring the law, knowing that it's unlikely that the duty holder will be caught, and even if they are, the consequences are unlikely to be severe. Last HSE research I saw was in the days before the RIDDOR rules were loosened. Estimated underreporting of reportable accidents to employees about 50%, to the self-employed in excess of 90% - that's UNDERREPORTING not reporting! Which is why in the U.K. it makes more sense to follow the statistics collated from the Labour Force Survey than RIDDOR.
|
3 users thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Originally Posted by: Mersey  I was investigating an accident whereby a Temporary Worker (Zero hours contract) had slipped on a wet surface and fell rather heavily. The IP didn't want to lose any hours and wanted to remain in work but he was convinced to go the walk in centre which he did He was not called in for work the following day because there was no work for him to do. There is work for him on Monday and he said that he'll be in work. Could this loop hole be exploited by unscrupulous employer, to save on LTA stats?
If a person on a zero hours contract hurt themselves and couldn't come into work the next day and the employer decided there was no work for them to do so they avoid reporting an LTA ? food for thought
Pretty routine in the construction industry, in my experience the best the IP can hope for, is for the contractor to retain him, assigned to light duties, frequently though they ask they supply agency to send in someone else.
Anecdotally would suggest a significant percentage of the industry (Including clients & agencies) behave in this manner.
|
1 user thanked jmaclaughlin for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I should imagine that the requirements for over 7 day injuries within RIDDOR are the same as for everyone else. That is, if the injury means that they would be unavailable for work (or unable to carry out their normal duties) for over 7 days then it is reportable. The suggestion that the host employer may not have any more work for them is immaterial, in the same way that not having any 'light duties' for a full time employee is not.
It would be interesting in such a scenario to see what would happen if the injured person were to make a compensation claim for their injury, and their solicitor were to ask for a copy of the RIDDOR report?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: A Kurdziel RIDDOR reporting of 7 day accidents deals with this very scenario by making the criteria based on non-availability for normal work rather than simple absence. It also means that when calculating the 7 days you include weekends and holidays. Unscrupulous employers (they actually exist!) will just not report accidents and warn their staff not to mention the fact that they were injured at work. I have heard of employers arranging for taxis to take seriously injured people to hospital rather than an ambulance so as to avoid awkward questions.
In my case, I was dropped-off at the A&E from a works van, after a 100KG beam dropped onto my hand.
The hand was xrayed, and apart from soft-tissue injury, I also had fractured finger.
The back to work, with the relevent discharge and injury report.
At the follow-up fracture clinic, the doctor told me they had had a letter from the company stating it may have been a deliberate injury (they let me read it too).
Needless to say, workplace management relations were a bit strained for the rest of my period there. Especially as I insisted they RIDDOR it, and it went into the accident book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.