Accident Reporting, Investigation & Notification to CWU ASRs

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Letter to Branches




No. 303 /12
Ref A3
Date: 24 April 2012

To: All Postal Branches

Dear Colleagues

Royal Mail - Accident Reporting, Investigation and Notification to CWU Area Safety Representatives

CWU Conference has once again debated and carried several motions on the problems with accident reporting and investigation procedures in Royal Mail along with the problem of the lack of consistent notification of accidents to Area Safety Reps and the lack of involvement in investigations and remedial action decisions. This subject matter is now a matter of primary concern amongst CWU ASRs and CWU Branches and Officials.

Attached to this LTB are copies of 5 letters sent to the Royal Mail Operations Safety Director Ricky McAulay and Royal Mail Group Head of Safety Keith Scott. All letters were widely circulated at senior Board Level including all Operational and Functional Directors (Delivery, Processing, Logistics), HR/ER/IR Directors plus the Managing Director to ensure the messages and CWU disquiet was getting across at the top of the business, regarding the Union's serious concerns once again reflected at 2012 CWU Conference as it was last year and previously to that.

The correspondence attached serves as a detailed report of the issues raised in the strongest terms, continually with Royal Mail and covers the four key areas as follows.

Early Notification of Accidents to ASRs
The first problem in the current situation is the failure to promptly inform CWU Area Safety Reps of all accidents, dangerous occurrences and near misses when they occur in order to give the ASR the opportunity to investigate and be involved in discussions on site at an early stage with Management and the enforcing authorities, if involved. We have yet again requested action in this area to ensure all Managers inform all CWU ASRs promptly of all accidents in future. One of the attached letters relates to a proposed new national agreement we have tabled on this aspect and have been pressing Royal Mail to
negotiate and agree it. The proposal has been with them since last May, following 2011 CWU Conference.

Accident Investigation Process, ASR Involvement and Report Forms
To overcome the problems presently being experienced with the adoption by Royal Mail of unagreed World Class Mail (WCM) accident investigation and reporting processes, along with WCM forms, such as the WCM "Human Error Root Cause" (HERCA) analysis Form, we have proposed that Royal Mail abandon those forms and instead adopt the standard HSE model contained in the HSE produced HSG245 entitled "Investigating and Reporting Accidents and Incidents - A workbook for Employers, Unions Safety Representatives and Safety Professionals".  One of the attached letters deals with that proposal. Problems are continually being reported to the CWU/HQ Health, Safety & Environment Department by ASRs regarding the problematic World Class Mail
variants, being used around the country without ASR input.

The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, regulation 5, requires employers to plan, organise, control, monitor and review their health and safety arrangements and Health and safety investigations, like accident investigations, which form an essential part of this process.

Following the 'Woolf Report' employers are expected to make full disclosure of the circumstances of an accident to the injured party. We have pointed out the need to make sure Royal Mail management and CWU Area Safety Reps know what went wrong. There needs to be a thorough investigation of accidents and in agreement with the CWU ASR, a suitable remedial action plan needs to be devised and implemented to prevent further similar accidents in order to demonstrate that Royal Mail has a positive attitude to health and safety.

To make accident investigations worthwhile, it is essential that the management and the Safety Rep are fully involved. Work Area Managers, health and safety Managers and Union Safety Representatives must be involved. It has been found by the HSE that where there is full cooperation and consultation with Union Safety Representatives and the workers they represent, the number of accidents is half that of workplaces where there is no such involvement.

This joint approach will ensure that a wide range of practical knowledge and experience will be brought to bear and the Safety Reps and their members will
feel involved and supportive of any remedial measures that are necessary. A joint approach also reinforces the message that the investigation is for the benefit of everyone. In addition to detailed knowledge of the work activities involved, those investigating should be familiar with health and safety good practice, standards and legal requirements. It is essential that at the end of this investigation someone with the authority acts on the recommendations.

'Blaming' Accident Victims
The accident should be investigated and analysed as soon as possible. It's important to be open, honest and objective throughout the investigation process with no pre-conceived ideas about the process, the equipment or the people involved in an adverse event and importantly the investigation should be wary of blaming individuals. The investigations must find the causes, learn from past failures and prevent future failures - Not Blame People. Underlying causes and root causes need to all identified and remedied. The investigations should be conducted with accident prevention in mind, not
placing blame. Attempting to apportion blame is counterproductive, because people become defensive and uncooperative. If any individuals acted inappropriately then the aim should be to Inform, Instruct, Train and Supervise better. The HSE advise that Investigations that conclude that Worker or Operator error was the sole cause are rarely acceptable. Underpinning the ‘human error’ there will be a number of underlying causes that created the environment in which human errors were inevitable. For example inadequate training and supervision, poor equipment design, lack of management commitment, poor safety culture creating poor attitudes to health and safety. The objective is to establish not only how the adverse event happened,
but more importantly, what allowed it to happen. As the HSE again advise - The root causes of adverse events are almost inevitably management, organisational or planning failures.


Another of the HSE Publication HSG 65 entitled "Successful Health and Safety Management" states in its Key Messages "recognising that accidents,
ill health and incidents result from failings in management control and are not necessarily the fault of individual employees;



HSE Publication HSG245 - "Investigating accidents and incidents: A workbook for employers, unions, safety representatives and safety professionals"
states repeatedly that accident investigations should steer away from apportioning blame as follows:-
Page 12 -Investigations should be conducted with accident prevention in mind, not placing blame. Attempting to apportion blame  before the
investigation has started is counterproductive, because people become defensive and uncooperative.
Page 17 - Comments such as '...we've been doing it that way for years and nothing has ever gone wrong before...' or '...he has been working on that
machine for years and knows what to do...' often lead to the injured person getting the blame, irrespective of what part procedures, training and
supervision - or the lack of them - had to play in the adverse event. Again, it is important to pose these questions without attempting to apportion
blame, assign responsibility or stipulate cause.
Page 21 - Laying all the blame  on one or more individuals is counter-productive and runs the risk of alienating the workforce and undermining the
safety culture, crucial to creating and maintaining a safer working environment. What you should aim for is a fair and just system where people are
held to account for their behaviour, without being unduly blamed. In any event, your regime of supervision and monitoring of performance should
have detected and corrected these unsafe behaviours.

Under-Reporting or Non-Reporting
CWU ASRs in growing numbers across the UK have been reporting to Union HQ that they continue to have major problems with the blatant under-reporting and investigation techniques aimed at avoiding making ERICA (Accident Reporting System) entries at all costs, so as to make the statistics look good and achieve targets set by the MD and RM HQ Board and Regional Boards. As Mail Centre and Delivery Sector Managers are driven
towards achieving targets and WCM Award standards, keeping Accident numbers down becomes a key objective instead of dealing with the accident risks and causes. Hence a 'Blame Culture' develops as the aim of achieving the accident reduction targets comes into focus, so attacking the statistics rather than establishing route cause and contributory factors then applying remedial action and supporting victims.

Many Area Safety Representatives have questioned the claims made by Directors giving presentations at last month's Royal Mail Managers Conference, reporting big number reductions in accidents which has added fuel to the fire of discontent around CWU Representatives concerns about the under reporting or misreporting of accidents.

CWU lawyers Simpson Millar LLP have advised regarding the provisions of regulation 25 of the Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1979 (as amended). In particular subsection 3 which reads:

(3) Every owner or occupier (being an employer) of any mine or quarry or of any premises to which any of the provisions of the Factories Act 1961
applies and every employer by whom 10 or more persons are normally employed at the same time on or about the same premises in connection
with a trade or business carried on by the employer shall, subject to the following provisions of this paragraph—
(a) keep readily accessible a means (whether in a book or books or by electronic means), in a form approved by the Secretary of State, by which a
person employed by the employer or some other person acting on his behalf may record the appropriate particulars (as defined in regulation 24)
of any accident causing personal injury to that person; and
(b) preserve every such record for the period of at least 3 years from the date of its entry.



In particular with regard to the above regulation:


1. The accident book or equivalent must be readily accessible.
2. It is a matter for the employee, not the employer or any one acting on behalf of the employer, whether an entry is made in the accident book or
equivalent.
3. There is no restriction on the nature and type of accident and injury that can be entered into an accident book or equivalent. It is for the employee
to determine whether or not they have sustained a personal injury and whether they have been involved in accident.
4. There is no restriction on the time within which an accident has to have occurred in order for an employee to make a record in the accident book
or equivalent. Regulation 25(3)(b) implicitly recognises that an entry may be made in an accident book at some point after the accident occurred.


Royal Mail have further been advised that a failure to provide a proper, accessible, accident book or equivalent may amount to a breach of statutory duty pursuant to Regulation 5 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.

In another of the attached letters to Royal Mail dated 23 April 2012, we have reminded Royal Mail of the provisions of regulation 25 of the Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1979 (as amended) and Regulation 5 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 and have requested that they circulate an Instruction to all Managers ensuring that all accidents are properly recorded and entered on the ERICA Electronic Accident Book, system with an explanation of what occurred in the victims own words and not those constructed by someone else. We have requested that Royal Mail confirms that our members will now be permitted to make any requested entry into the ERICA accident recording system.

Royal Mail have been advised that any pattern of behaviour on their part which suggests that there is a consistent breach of obligations under the above Regulations can be drawn to the attention of the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). The HSE have been made aware of the problems and complaints from ASRs regarding this matter which we have raised with Royal Mail.

Simpson Millar have also advised us to notify Royal Mail that should it become apparent that there is a systemic failure to comply with the above regulations, it is open to Royal Mail  staff/CWU members to seek an injunction, declaratory relief or judicial review of the practice.

Ending on a slightly more positive note, the positive response to our earlier representations by Royal Mail's Safety Director Ricky McAulay has been
acknowledged with regards to his clear statement to 4,500 Managers and last month's Royal Mail Operations Management Conference in Birmingham when he told Managers that they must ensure that all Accidents are properly reported.

Secondly Ricky McAulay has responded positively to our concerns and representation with a proposed "Accident Reporting - Issues Escalation Process" for CWU ASRs which is currently being considered and has been given our in principle agreement, subject to a suitable covering Joint Statement being finalised following CWU Conference.








Our conclusion is that rather than drive accident and near miss reporting underground by blaming members, we need to encourage staff to report ALL accidents and near misses in a 'blame-free' culture in order to address the problems and make sustainable improvement in safety not just numbers on bits of paper with only a short-term cosmetic effect.


Yours Sincerely



Dave Joyce
CWU National Health, Safety & Environment Officer



                   "When management, Union and employees work together we succeed and do things better and results are excellent!"
                                                         Mark Higson Royal Mail Operations Managing Director

[DGP1]

'Blaming' Accident Victims
The accident should be investigated and analysed as soon as possible. It's important to be open, honest and objective throughout the investigation process with no pre-conceived ideas about the process, the equipment or the people involved in an adverse event and importantly the investigation should be wary of blaming individuals. The investigations must find the causes, learn from past failures and prevent future failures - Not Blame People. Underlying causes and root causes need to all identified and remedied. The investigations should be conducted with accident prevention in mind, not
placing blame. Attempting to apportion blame is counterproductive, because people become defensive and uncooperative. If any individuals acted inappropriately then the aim should be to Inform, Instruct, Train and Supervise better. The HSE advise that Investigations that conclude that Worker or Operator error was the sole cause are rarely acceptable. Underpinning the ‘human error’ there will be a number of underlying causes that created the environment in which human errors were inevitable. For example inadequate training and supervision, poor equipment design, lack of management commitment, poor safety culture creating poor attitudes to health and safety. The objective is to establish not only how the adverse event happened,
but more importantly, what allowed it to happen. As the HSE again advise - The root causes of adverse events are almost inevitably management, organisational or planning failures.

And this is why people don't report accidents, even if you've done everything by the book they'll find something to blame you on so you just stop reporting things.

[Glenno]

Is anybody else having problems opening the Word attachments????????

[POSTMAN]

Is anybody else having problems opening the Word attachments????????

Yes,I couldn't do it either.

[Glenno]

throw it back to HQ or Joycey then me thinks

[brothermagrew]

Attached to this LTB are copies of 5 letters sent to the Royal Mail Operations Safety Director Ricky McAulay and Royal Mail Group Head of Safety Keith Scott.

Got them in PDF versions PM requests only

Recommended reading for all CWU health and safety reps

[Elle]

My husband had to fight to get his accident at work submitted and has asked where the paper accident log book is. HIs line manager claimed because they deemed it an incident the ERICA did not need submitting (my husband ensured it was)

[lg]

Well I did the Erica report straight after the accident and then a fact finding interview. And because there were inconsistencies Im being taken down the conduct code procedure. Advice?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Well I did the Erica report straight after the accident and then a fact finding interview. And because there were inconsistencies Im being taken down the conduct code procedure. Advice?

Is it the conduct code because of an absence triggering the system, or is it a disciplinary process because they think you are falsifying something. If the first a rep is needed to defend the AOD not being counted as it sounds as they are putting the blame on you. If the second get an ADR or ASR involved because the above LTB says

system with an explanation of what occurred in the victims own words and not those constructed by someone else.

Which means to me that ERICA cannot be used - also it goes against HSE advice which DGP posted above.

[pink panther]

Just more proof that wcm is a farce.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Just more proof that wcm is a farce.

It might if there was any connection.

[wazer]

Thanks for reply.
Im not looking for blame,i just want the help and support (not nice stuck home with mrs and kids lol)and also make sure all staff are aware of the procedures.
Also had problems opening files,ill try another file.
Cheers

[wazer]

Had a quick read of some files I found this ..
4.There is no restriction on the time within which an accident has to have occurred in order for an employee to make a record in the accident book
or equivalent. Regulation 25(3)(b) implicitly recognises that an entry may be made in an accident book at some point after the accident occurred[/u].
[/[/b]b][/u]
Also I still cant find the 24hr report procedure.

[midvillain]

Is there anything further to this, does anyone know?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

https://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communi ... 36&t=84016" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; perhaps