Fierce criticism over the HSE’s plans to change reporting requirements under RIDDOR 1995 – particularly in respect of occupational diseases and non-fatal accidents to members of the public – has persuaded the regulator to revise its proposals.
The HSE undertook a consultation to revise the RIDDOR regime following Professor Löfstedt’s recommendation that incident-reporting requirements should be clarified and simplified. Lord Young had also previously recommended the Executive should re-examine the operation of RIDDOR to determine whether it is effective in providing an accurate national picture of workplace accidents.
The consultation, which closed last autumn, called for an end to employers’ obligations to report occupational-health absences from diseases such as lead poisoning and various disabling lung and skin diseases. It also proposed the removal of the duty to report non-fatal accidents of non-workers and many dangerous occurrences.
The plans attracted significant objections from the likes of the Prospect union, IOSH and the British Occupational Hygiene Society (BOHS). Indeed, a senior specialist occupational-health inspector with the HSE confirmed to SHP in September that the Executive’s own staff were unhappy with the proposals, saying they gave out the message that “health doesn’t matter”.
It has now emerged that the HSE Board agreed a revised proposal, which addresses some of the concerns expressed via the consultation, at a closed Board meeting in January. The new drafting of RIDDOR retains the current approach for reporting non-fatal accidents to the public; and keeps in place reporting requirements in relation to six short-latency disease, including Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome, dermatitis and occupational asthma; as well as occupational cancers and diseases attributable to biological agents, in line with EU reporting rules.
Certain additional rail-sector reporting requirements required by the Office of Rail Regulation will also be included in the draft regulations.
Welcoming the HSE Board’s decision, the BOHS pointed out that removing the requirement to report occupational diseases would have left the Executive without valuable information for its inspections, as well as resulting in a lack of surveillance data for epidemiological purposes.
The Society’s chief executive, Steve Perkins, said: “BOHS welcomes HSE’s decision to retain the requirement to report occupational cancers, diseases attributable to biological agents and six short-latency diseases. These account for 90 per cent of all ill-health RIDDOR reports to the HSE. It is therefore important these are retained under RIDDOR reporting requirements.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Well done to the objectors.
So…..nothings changed?