Rank: Forum user 
|
Scenario; Person goes off work with an injury allegedly sustained 2 weeks earlier. They continued to work during this time (physical job). Alleging a dislocated shoulder. The injury was not reported at the time but only after becoming lost time.
The question here is would you report under RIDDOR or not. I'm minded to do it but just wondered what you guys would do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi Blue, You'll need to establish if it was a work related incident that caused the injury. The detail you give leads me to believe the question you should be asking is 'how do we improve our reporting system'? If in doubt, report it under RIDDOR. It is not an admission of guilt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Report it; it’s not an admission of guilt just a record that something happened. Did something similar a few years back-. Employee falls over while working in farmland and takes a few days off to self medicate. He returned to work but admitted he was a bit sore. Three months later they go to their GP who tells them(apparently) that they have a displaced hip and that the fall was a “contributing factor”. They take several months off and end up having surgery. I reported it as a RIDDOR explaining the 3 months plus delay between the injury and the report. No consequences from that. When he got better, he put in a claim, of course!
|
 1 user thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hi Blue One of those ones where part of the answer lies in the culture of the organisation. If it is focused on its reactive metrics and dislikes having to add ONE to the numbers, then find every excuse NOT to report. If it wants to be seen as a caring employer then in my view to report is the sensible way forward, not least as it means that it is much more likely that the circumstances will be investigated and, if there are any lessons, for those lessons to be learnt. Plenty of reasons for someone to "soldier on" and sometimes the result is that an injury is exacerbated. As has been said putting in a RIDDOR report is NOT an admission of any wrongdoing and means nothing when it comes to any "claim" that may or may not follow. Nowt wrong with saying on the RIDDOR report that you might not be certain that it actually WAS reportable. As I used to say as an HSE Inspector "You can't be prosecuted for reporting something that WASN'T reportable. You can be prosecuted if you don't report something that turns out WAS reportable".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
As I used to say as an HSE Inspector "You can't be prosecuted for reporting something that WASN'T reportable. You can be prosecuted if you don't report something that turns out WAS reportable".
Although I agree with what Peter states here, it seems to me that this phrase is an over used one banded around within the H&S profession / on IOSH courses. How many cases of non-reporting RIDDOR have actually resulted in prosecution in the last 5 / 10 years?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: peter gotch 
Originally Posted by: Evans38004 As I used to say as an HSE Inspector "You can't be prosecuted for reporting something that WASN'T reportable. You can be prosecuted if you don't report something that turns out WAS reportable".
How many cases of non-reporting RIDDOR have actually resulted in prosecution in the last 5 / 10 years?
Our favorite subject RIDDOR - about time they re-wrote the regulations, agree with everything that has been said by posters above.
As another ex inspector i concur with Peter about RIDDOR not being about guilt - but the HSE guidance has certainly blurred the boundaries - due to the govenment wanting to reduce accident numbers. 6 years now since i switched. from gamekeeper to poacher but had a RIDDOR landed on my desk with 2 weeks between injury and start of sickness I would have been looking very closely to see if the absence and the injury. You may have got a phone call to clarify so i could mark it up as none reportable
How many people have been prosecuted for not reporting a RIDDOR - not looked but im guessing Zero! Highly unlikely the enforcers would bother as time to get a small fine would be so low - HSE would probably stick you with a fee for intervention now - reminding you of need to report. Even if the injury was such that a prosecution arose as the fines are based on ability to pay not sure i would have even added it as an extra offence - possibly as an aggravating feature on Friskies schedule.
One of the last cases i was involved in was a 4.2 Million fine (it was a fatlity) which we could potential have
added late reporting as an offence - but could not see the point.
Edited by user 26 September 2023 08:46:23(UTC)
| Reason: not clear i was quote 2 posts
|
2 users thanked HSSnail for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Going against the grain here but if he had an injury and continued to work for two weeks, before going off then the causal chain has been broken. Anything could have happened in the intervening time to exacerbate the injury, which up till then was not sufficient to require time off, so I wouldn't report personally. Nothing to do with culture, just don't see it is a RIDDOR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.