Why Management Health & safety 1992

[eggyhead]

Okay, I will phone the disclosure officer as soon as I can. I feel if anything the first one was not reported, as this was on a right of way to the factory, that the company is ment to keep in good order and clean, as they run heavy plant on it.

[andie_303]

whether the company drops it or not - what happened in that appeal cannot stand as it was not held in accordance with procedure - grievence would be going in if it were me - but then I'm a stoppy cow and don't let anything go.

[Helford]

As an aside, the RIDDOR regulations also require an employer to report an incident that could have led to accident or injury.

 

For example; a brick is accidently knocked off a scaffold and hits the ground where someone could have been standing - this is reportable. Or if you had to swerve on Company premises to miss a piece of debris or a pothole. The fact that you might be unhurt is NOT the issue.

 

Bottom line all employers should have a dedicated individual appointed to carry out Risk Assessments and if more than 5 employees, a written Health and Policy presented to all and more importantly constantly reviewed and updated. If you have sustained illness or injury in connection with your employment you COULD make a claim against the company's Employers Liability (EL) insurance - details on the displayed (A legal requirement) EL certificate.

 

Good luck!

[eggyhead]

I have phoned HSE and gave them the ref number that RIDDOR gave me. It came up as an arm injury to another employee.

I told the person on the phone how I got to where I was and asked, had I asked for the search to be done in the right way. He said I had, but could do another search if I wanted, so I said yes.

 

He got back to me and said my accident was reported. I checked the date of the report, and it's for the second one. He said it was reported that a bike had skidded on sheet ice, resulting in an injury to the riders right foot.

[eggyhead]

I have been back in touch with the HSE just to make sure that my accident from 3 years ago was not reported, and this is the case.

 

I still feel like I'm carrying the can for the company's failings on their traffic routs though.

 

Not only is it all the points that have been mentioned above, but now I know they were happy to brush the first accident under the carpet, but say they are banning bikes because of two accidents when it suites them. And as we have said the second may not of happened at all, had they acted on the first one.

 

Anyway, as this thread has died of some what and I don't know if there is anything I can do to have my grievance upheld, I would like to say thanks for all the replies.

[andie_303]

you're right the first injury should have been reported and appropriate action taken at that point.

 

Anyway, you can put in another grievence citing the 1st grievence and subsequent appeal were flawed due to inccorect information i.e. management of health and safety regs 1992 and the fact that the appeal was held by the same person - in direct contravention of the grievence and appeals process.

[eggyhead]

I did think of doing this, as you mentioned it earlier. But not sure it will change their minds.

 

And now I know they never reported an accident that they should have, it's just another fact I can chuck back at them. I'm not very good at all this though, and so find it hard to understand what to do. For example, I can't just say that the appeal was, in direct contravention of the grievance and appeals process. Because if they press me on it, thats all I know lol.

 

Where can I read up on the proper way do this process?

Edited May 12, 2009 by eggyhead
bad spell

[eggyhead]

Well I have been looking but can't find anything that says the same person can't chair the grievance and it's appeal. In fact on the businesslink site it says this.

 

 

Ideally the person hearing the appeal shouldn't be the same person that heard the initial hearing, eg a more senior manager who has not been involved with the grievance process at all. They will be able to hear any appeal without having any assumptions.

 

 

However, where the person hearing the appeal is the same person who heard the first hearing, they should act impartially and make sure they review the original decision carefully.

 

So I feel this is all the MD will say!

[andie_303]

but correct me if i'm wrong wasn't your grievence about a decision made by this person??

 

therefore they should have been nowhere near it in the first place let alone the appeal?

[andie_303]

This is off the ACAS website - which is the be all and end all of employment law.

Noone wants to fall foul of these...

 

Conduct of the hearing

• remember that a grievance hearing is not the same as a disciplinary hearing, and is an occasion when discussion and dialogue may fruitfully produce the answer
  

• make introductions as necessary
  

• invite the employee to re-state their grievance and perhaps how they would like to see it resolved
  

• care and thought should go into resolving grievances. They are not normally issues calling for snap decisions, and the employee may have been holding the grievance for a long time. Make allowances for any reasonable 'letting off steam' if the employee is under stress
  

• after any summing up, management may find it useful to adjourn - they may need to explore possibilities with other managers about the resolution of the grievance, or they may themselves wish to take advice on how to proceed further
  

• tell the employee when they might reasonably expect a response if one cannot be made at the time, bearing in mind the time limits set out in the procedure
  

• respond to the employee's grievance in writing within the time limits specified in the procedure
  

• if the employee is unhappy with the decision the employer should arrange an appeal
  

• the appeal should be heard by a more senior manager than the one involved in the grievance. In small firms, if this is not possible, another manager, the owner or, in the case of a charity the board of trustees, should hear the appeal.
  

[eggyhead]

I was just on the ACAS site. Honest lol. Thanks for that.

 

Am I within my rights to ask my employer to see any risk assessments they have done in relation to the two bike accidents? Or does he not have to?

[andie_303]

All employees should not only read all risk assessments relevent to their job but should have signed something to say they have read and understood them

 

Health and Safety 101 - your employers don't seem to know very much at all.

 

I bet a drop in investigation by the local EHO might go down a storm

[eggyhead]

Sorry for not getting back sooner, but I now have more important things to press on with. My employer has now decided I am being considered for redundancy!!

 

I think I'll need to start another post lol.

[68904]

I would stop messing about, and go to Claims Are Us, and let them do the shouting.

The employer has got to provide you with a safe working environment. The fact you went down a hole in the road, is your employers fault, cos if oil wont there tha wunt of gon down it.

These type of incidents can be stopped by 3 monthly inspections of the workplace.

You have 3 years to claim for this type of thing.

I fell down a manhole and sustained 6 stitches in my right shin, I claimed through the Union and nearly 3 years later I got £2000.

I would rather have not gone down the man hole, but the employer is at fault.

As the advert says, " A slip, trip or fall anywhere. "

[eggyhead]

Yes, I know they have failed in their duty of care and have had a claim on going from day one, and have brought grievances about the traffic routes and being banned from using my bike on site, all is in this thread.

 

This is why I feel I am about to be made redundant. I have a solicitor to look into it and a union, because yet again I don't feel my employer is following procedure.

[SAAW]

Regardless of what regulation your employer is banding around he has an overall responsibility for the safety of all that visit his site, which would mean repairing pot holes and the like. I would look at pushing him with section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 as he has not provided you with a "Safe Place of Work". Of course there are plenty of more Acts and Regulations that would apply to your case.