[ Focus on: Insurance ]
any shortcomings or learning points should be fed into risk assessment and training programmes. The above, if properly deployed and appropriately
enforced, should reduce the risk of injury and/or disease, and with it the incidence of lost time frequencies giving rise to claims. Additionally, where claims do nonetheless arise, these measures will enhance an organisation’s chances of successfully defending claims.
Post-incident investigations By definition, a post-incident investigation is reactive and therefore differs from more proactive elements of an organisation’s safety and occupational health management system such as risk assessments, safe working procedures and training programmes. Nonetheless, the investigation and the documents that accompany it are important ingredients in any organisation’s attempts to reduce lost time injury frequencies and near misses. Although the primary function of the investigation report
is accident prevention, it must always be borne in mind that the manner in which the post-accident investigation is conducted, and the findings and recommendations recorded, can potentially influence the outcome of civil claims, both in terms of the insurer determining whether to contest a particular claim and what might happen to it should it go to court. The purpose of the accident form is to capture the
facts surrounding the accident, to preserve with it any evidence obtained as part of the investigation, and to make recommendations to prevent a recurrence and/or reduce the risks of injury in the future. In the context of a civil claim, the report and any material accompanying it are important pieces of evidence and disclosable documents. More organisations these days tell their employees
to report workplace accidents promptly. We would strongly encourage this practice because any delay could compromise an investigation team’s ability to establish all relevant facts. Any delay in reporting should itself be investigated and challenged, if necessary. Where accidents or injuries are repor ted contemporaneously, the investigation team should: Move fast – Conduct an early enquiry and inspect the
alleged scene, including any work equipment that may be involved. Photographs should be taken where necessary; Take statements – The injured person should always be
interviewed as quickly as possible and required to provide a concise statement, signed and dated; Arrange visits if necessary – Where the individual
concerned is not in work, the investigation team should arrange a home or hospital visit. A conversation by telephone will sometimes suffice, providing that the person making the call makes a contemporaneous note of what they have been told, again signed and dated; Witnesses – All relevant witnesses should be identified,
interviewed and their accounts recorded; Monitor inconsistencies – Any inconsistencies in the
injured person’s account, or between their version of events and those of a witness, should be challenged and recorded in the investigation; Follow-up on suspicions – In cases where the investigator harbours suspicions regarding the incident and/or how it
July 2011 ECA Today 67
Organisations that are successful in defending against claims are usually those that have prepared their position in advance
happened, it may be advisable to examine the individual’s accident/claims history; and Consider evidence – Where appropriate, the investigator
should check CCTV and other sources of evidence – for example, shift reports, maintenance logs and attendance records. When the investigation is complete, the team carrying
it out will need to record their findings. In most cases, a thorough enquiry will elicit an uncontroversial set of facts, thereby facilitating a review of working procedures and/or health and safety arrangements. Where, following the investigation, there is uncertainty as to how the particular incident occurred, the person(s) responsible for completing the accident report should never speculate. Doubts or uncertainties should be articulated in the main body of the report, and any root cause analysis should be conducted and recorded with care. All post incident action points, whether they be, for example, a review of a risk assessment or a revised safe working procedure,
CAPIFRUTTA / SHUTTERSTOCK
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72