Rank: Super forum user 
|
|
 2 users thanked safetyamateur for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
In general, Covid 19 is a public
health issue and the Department of Health & Social Care (DHSC), working
closely with Public Health England (PHE) and the devolved administrations, is
the lead Government department for the UK response.
In a work situation, it will be
very difficult, if not impossible, for employers to establish whether or not
any infection in an individual was contracted as a result of their work.
Therefore, diagnosed cases of Covid 19 are not reportable under RIDDOR unless a
very clear work related link is established.
In some very limited
circumstances, where an individual has either been exposed to or contracted
Covid 19 as a direct result of their work, those instances could become
reportable under RIDDOR either as a Dangerous Occurrence (under Regulation 7
and Schedule 2, paragraph 10) or as a disease attribute to an occupational
exposure to a biological agent (under Regulation 9 (b)).
For an incident to be reportable
as a Dangerous Occurrence, the incident must result (or could have resulted) in
the release or escape of the hazard group 3 Covid 19 virus. An example
could include a phial known to contain the Covid 19 virus being smashed in a
laboratory, leading to people being exposed.
For an incident to be reportable
as an occupational exposure to a biological agent, the diagnosis of Covid 19
must be directly attributed to an occupational exposure. Such instances
could include, for example, frontline health and social care workers (e.g.
ambulance personnel, GPs, social care providers, hospital staff etc) who have
been involved in providing care/ treatment to known cases of Covid 19, who subsequently
develop the disease and this is reliably attributed to their work and verified
by a registered medical practitioner’s statement.
HSE do not anticipate receiving
many cases of RIDDOR reportable incidents, as such cases will not be easy to
identify, and are anticipated to be rare, especially as prevalence of Covid 19
increases in the general population.
|
2 users thanked SBH for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Thanks, SBH. Which HSE page did that come from? I can't see a link from that news page.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
This was from correspondence direct to a member of the group I am a member of.
Cheers
SBH
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
OK. Looks like HSE see it differently to your group member.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Originally Posted by: SBH  This was from correspondence direct to a member of the group I am a member of.
Cheers
SBH
Hi, that is very interesting and makes sense, what is the scource of that communication if you don't mind me asking please? The very interesting bit is the detail that states 'this is reliably attributed to their work and verified by a registered medical practitioner’s statement' So by that ... I guess the medical practioner is going to have to look at the circumstances and provide a statement that the person has not got it from any other exposure i.e. called in the supermarket, petrol station, family member etc ... I can only see huge difficulty pinning this down even for frontline workers? I guess its by probablity but which medical practioner is going to want to provide a statement on that? Edited by user 06 April 2020 14:15:07(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I have in the past been involved with these sorts of scenarios and the HSE were clear that they wanted confirmation from a medical expert that the illness was the result of work based exposure eg someone working in a lab developing TB
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
To me the wording in the guidance is quite clear "If something happens at work which results in (or could result in) the release or escape of coronavirus you must report this as a dangerous occurrence" not really much you can miss construe from this statement its mostly a scenario going to happen where there is collection or processing the virus, not a construction site, super market manufacturing plant, power station, logistics warehouse, chemical processing plant etc
"....was likely exposed because of their work..." So to me this would be people who are exposed to the virus because of thier work, i.e. HCW's on a Covid 19 ward, it's there in the example given. and again not likley on a construction site, super market manufacturing plant, power station, logistics warehouse, chemical processing plant etc
Not really sure how this differs from the guidance in #2. It's a public health issue. One scenario I can think outside of this would also be offshore outbreak on a rig or vessel however, the actual work they would be doing would not be the cause of their exposure unless the infected person was a medic in which case they would be more likley to be exposed due to treatment of other infected crew. Edited by user 07 April 2020 07:48:51(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
1 user thanked fairlieg for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
First-aiders in any industry spring to mind but the Dangerous Occurrence could be an awful lot of things. I think they want to continue the mysteries of RIDDOR.
|
1 user thanked safetyamateur for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Yes, the myteries of RIDDOR persist, but if we look at the L5 COSHH ACOP page 11 paragraph 18:
The general duties of COSHH apply to incidental exposure to, and deliberate
work with, biological agents. However, COSHH does not cover a situation where,
for example, one employee catches a respiratory infection from another. This is
because regulation 2(2) specifies that COSHH only applies in those circumstances
where risks of exposure are work related, and not those where they have no direct
connection with the work being done.
as ever, hard hat at the ready...
|
1 user thanked RVThompson for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
In my experience the HSE are only concerned if there is evidence that the infection is directly linked to work activities and there is something that they can investigate. So when someone working in lab working with TB develops the symptoms of TB it is reported to the HSE under RIDDOR but they don’t come over as there is no evidence that the TB is directly a result of any lab based exposure. If someone drops a flask containing a microbiological culture in CL3 lab they turned up within the week to investigate our systems and to decide if we did the right thing. They are not interested in maybes and possibilities. If it is a community based infection, they have no intetrest what so ever.
|
2 users thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
OK, I must be thick or something, as I do not understand. As for the comment about 'the wording is quite clear' (about 4 posts up) - no it is definately not clear in the slightest. So let's say a Site Manager on one of the Construction sites around Britain, has so far been able to keep workers working because as we all know, contruction workers appear to be immune for Covid-19.
So one or several workers gets the first symptoms of covid-19, because the management of the construction sites have done nothing to assist social distancing - even if they could on some sites.
Does the Site Manager need to fill out the RIDDOR report?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
No. Because they do not work with the virus. So they have not contracted it because of their work, but because it is prevalent in the population.
|
2 users thanked Kate for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
With the construction example, they could just have likely got it in the community unless the virus has a known preference for transmitting on construction sites. HSE give an example, HCW becomes infected because they treat Covid 19 Infected patients it is more likely they got the infection because of their work. I.E. their work puts them at risk of exposure and that has not been effectively controlled to prevent them becoming infected (Regulation 7 COSHH Regs). They could have got infected hunting down pasta in a supermarket however, given the direct exposure at their workplace it is reasonable to assume that was the likely place of infection because the work they do puts them at risk. If we all started reporting to the HSE every time someone who worked for us got or was suspected of getting Covid 19 (because not every case will be tested) what would that actually achieve what will be done with the data, who would come and investigate each instance. We are sitting at 55.5K confirmed cases and unknown number of unconfirmed. A significant proportion of the cases are people who are in employment (unemployment was sitting at 3.8% before this started)
|
2 users thanked fairlieg for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
As I have said based on my experience the HSE even if it is a lab based situation are not interested unless there is some evidence that the infection is acquired through work. Without there is nothing for them it investigate. Someone working on building site and catching Covid-19 from a fellow worker is not in their sights and does not need to be reported under RIDDOR.
|
1 user thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
|
1 user thanked Kim Hedges for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Pantomime season - oh no you don't RIDDOR reporting of COVID-19You must only make a report under RIDDOR (The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 2013) when: - an unintended incident at work has led to someone’s possible or actual exposure to coronavirus. This must be reported as a dangerous occurrence.
- a worker has been diagnosed as having COVID 19 and there is reasonable evidence that it was caused by exposure at work. This must be reported as a case of disease.
- a worker dies as a result of occupational exposure to coronavirus.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Pantomime season - oh no you don't RIDDOR reporting of COVID-19You must only make a report under RIDDOR (The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 2013) when: - an unintended incident at work has led to someone’s possible or actual exposure to coronavirus. This must be reported as a dangerous occurrence.
- a worker has been diagnosed as having COVID 19 and there is reasonable evidence that it was caused by exposure at work. This must be reported as a case of disease.
- a worker dies as a result of occupational exposure to coronavirus.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Having read through pages and pages of rights and wrong of is it or isn't it reportable I’ve concluded I still do not know. Many of my colleagues and peers believe that workers who are classed as frontline and develop the virus should be a reportable RIDDOR event. The HSE give guidance on this as an example of a nurse tending to patients in the wards who may be exposed.
Equally other frontline staff, or the forgotten people who work in food factories, packaging and logistic are in my opinion exposed somewhat through their job roles directly or indirectly.
I completely understand the difficultly in proving where the infection came from in these kinds of frontline workers where it is not as obvious as an NHS worker.
It’s an unprecedented time for us all, and we are all learning as we go. The HSE are busy working with other departments but I do feel the interpretation is clearly open to debate and as with any lawyer chasing a fast buck for their clients, they love that interpretation exists.
What issue does it cause if it is reported and the HSE deemed it is not an issue, other than a waste of time(debatable). We eon't be closed down for putting employees 1st.
|
1 user thanked ballyclover for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
IMHO the HSE guidance is pretty clear
Viral lab worker = YES dangerous occurence / death NHS employee on the Covid/ITU ward or transporting Covid patients = YES disease / death Undertakers/post mortem examiners = YES disease / death Bio-disposal operative servicing any of the above = YES disease / death EVERYONE else = NO
|
10 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
IMHO the HSE guidance is pretty clear
Viral lab worker = YES dangerous occurence / death NHS employee on the Covid/ITU ward or transporting Covid patients = YES disease / death Undertakers/post mortem examiners = YES disease / death Bio-disposal operative servicing any of the above = YES disease / death EVERYONE else = NO
|
10 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I am in agreament with Roundtuit on this one , but i would add 1 additional category,
Private care sector staff (Residential/Nursing Homes) where they are careing for infected people.
Similar to NHS i belive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Another group who might fall into thie catagory at Local authority workers who are dealing with people being made homeless & rough sleepers. We are poliching our guidelines as I write,but the reality is many of these people are desperate/confused/ unpredictable and maintaining safe distances, hand washing, signs and notices etc may not be enough if someone decides to get up close and personal or worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Consider the situation where a nurse develops COVID19 infection. They were working in a COVID19 ward, but wearing all the correct PPE and following approved working practice. Unless it can be shown that the PPE or working practice was deficient such that there is undisputed evidence that it was at that point that the exposure and resultant infection occurred could one state with any certainty that it was work related and not as a result of some exposure on the way to or from work? With COVID-19 one might be exposed on several occasions until eventually the body responds. As we don't yet know for certain how significant the exposure must be for the infection to develop (and this might vary from person to person) could we state with any certainty which exposure was the trigger? Would a medical practitioner be prepared to provide a diagnosis confirming it was indubitally caused by work exposure?
I encounter similar situations where I am investigating a suspected occupational irritant contact dermatitis. Chronic dermatitis is virtually always the result of small amounts of damage from repeated skin contact with irritant chemicals, the consequence of these remaining asymptomatic until the skin finally succumbs and the dermatitis becomes visible.There can be a significant period before this happens (weeks, months, years) depending upon a range of conditions. Since the exposures will be to many different irritants both at work and away from work and since we cannot define quantitatively the effect of each exposure how does one determine whether the dermatitis is occupational, or rather, to what extent is it occupational? In many such cases for a medical practitioner to define it as occupational and therefore RIDDOR reportable is simply not possible. So for me, unless it is absolutely clear that it was a specific occasion where exposure to COVID-19 occurred that resulted in the infection how could I state with certainty that it was work related?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Chris - as you say because of the widespread nature of the virun we will never know for "Certain" where the exposure was. But thats not what the HSE are saying. They are saying where the exposure was "Likle" to be due to know work place risk - hence the categories they have given mainly those working with KNOWN covid 19 cases.
Nic - for the same reasion i would not include the category of worker that you include (and i have collegues who do this work so i share your concerns) but we dont know for certain that those people have Covid 19 when we are dealing with them so again the link is tenuouse.
But yet agian these are just my interpritation of the guidance and regulations - the only time a judgment would every be made would be in a court - dont you just love H&S and RIDDOR in particular.
|
1 user thanked HSSnail for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
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.