Rank: Forum user 
|
What do you reckon - is this a work-related accident reportable under RIDDOR? We have an employee who slipped on a steep grass embankment and broke his wrist - he will also be taking over 7 days off from his normal work duties. He was working at the time as he inspects the area as it relates to a reservoir we own - he is looking for visual or physical signs of leakage or other issues such as overgrown vegetation. The condition of the premises/ground in terms of defects, holes is good, no issues. The embankment is steep but is essentially a part of the natural environment. Does the steepness of the embankment alone in term of its 'design' suggest that this is work-related and therefore RIDDOR reportable?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
This is one of those RIDDOR questions which shows why both the Regulations and perhaps more so HSE guidance need to be clearer. In my view this is a work-related accident. If you have a half decent risk assessment, the potential slip will have been identified. Remember that whether an accident is reportable or not has nothing to do with liability. You could take all reasonably practicable precautions and the accident can still happen. Just because the victim might be an ICE Panel Engineer doesn't mean they are not human! HSE might well prefer that you do NOT report this. Better for the national statistics, when international benchmarking happens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
The injured party has sustained injuries whilst undertaking duties in relation to their job. It is their job to inspect that resevioir and the embankment is part of that. It can be assumed that the IP would not have walked there had it not been for the sole purpose of conducting their job. Therefore, this is a work related injury. As the IP has broken a bone which is not a digit, it is reportable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
It sounds as if the way the work is organised is for them to walk on a steep grassy embankment for this task and that the injury arose from doing this. In theory (although perhaps not in practice) there might be alternative ways of doing things that didn't require walking on a steep grassy embankment so it's not just a random or inevitable encounter with something in the natural environment but is a consequence of the way the work is done.
I can't see it not being RIDDOR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Following Kate's point if the rules for inspecting reservoirs are anything like those for structures on highways, I can't see how this person could do the job without being on the grassy embankment - not only for access but to do the job. With an arguable exception when the maximum possible capacity of the reservoir is less than 10,000 or 25,000 cubic metres, with the number depending on which bit of the UK the reservoir is today. In due course, the threshold will be down to 10,000 throughout the UK. However, if attempting to take advantage of a threshold set in the Reservoirs Act 1930 as amended in about 2012, there would still be issues in demonstrating the safety of the reservoir if the embankment was omitted from regular inspections.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
We are getting off the point now -
But it's at least conceivable that inspections could be carried out remotely using a drone or other technology.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.