The HSE has published details of planned changes to RIDDOR 1995, which aim to clarify and simplify the injury-reporting requirements for businesses.
With the updated RIDDOR regime due to be implemented this October, subject to Parliamentary approval, the HSE has issued the draft guidance to allow businesses time to familiarise themselves with the changes.
The main changes will simplify the reporting requirements in the following areas:
There will not be any significant changes to the reporting requirements for:
The changes will require fewer incidents to be reported overall and it is estimated that they will result in a net benefit to business of £5.9 million over a ten-year period.
The changes follow a recommendation in the Löfstedt report, and a subsequent consultation, which closed in October last year. The original proposals were more far-reaching, with plans to end employers’ obligations to report occupational-health absences due to lead poisoning and various disabling lung and skin diseases, as well as the removal of the duty to report non-fatal accidents of non-workers and many dangerous occurrences.
A number of stakeholders criticised these proposals, which persuaded the HSE to revise its plans but, according to construction union UCATT, the updated proposals still represent a “downgrading in safety reporting”.
The union highlights a number of injuries that will no longer need to be reported automatically, including:
The draft guidance emphasises that while reporting requirements will be simplified, it is essential that businesses retain records of incidents covered by RIDDOR as an aid to risk assessment and to help develop solutions to potential risks.€ﾨ€ﾨBut Steve Murphy, general secretary of UCATT, said the changes would impact on companies’ attitudes to risk.
“The reduction in the requirement to report major injuries is dangerous,” he explained. “Many of these types of injury are potentially life-changing for those involved. If companies no longer have to report them, then they are less likely to take preventive measures to stop them re-occurring.”€ﾨ €ﾨ
Added Murphy: “The Government is determined to ensure that the reporting of accidents is so weak that they become meaningless. The Government says it wants to simplify accident reporting for employers; it is clear they don’t care about the consequences it has for workers.”
For more information, visit the HSE website at www.hse.gov.uk/riddor/october-2013-changes.htm
So providing the person does not die electrocution from an unsafe system is not important. Are we dealing with government hypocrites who simply want to save money or are are they just idiots.