Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 01 June 2006 13:48:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Andrew Cartridge Please explain why you keep removing all the threads that refer to free speech. Andy
Admin  
#2 Posted : 01 June 2006 14:18:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Martin R. Bessant All contributors to this site are required to comply with the IOSH Acceptable Use Guidelines. Guideline 3 specifically does not permit complaints so they are not allowed on the forums. The webteam at IOSH have specifically requested that any concerns be raised directly with them on WEBTEAM@IOSH.Co.UK. It is not the intention of the moderating team to stifle free speach but all users agree to comly with the AUG's and we will be closely moderating in future. Martin Bessant - Lead Moderator.
Admin  
#3 Posted : 01 June 2006 15:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By 9-Ship But in practice you do stiffle free speech
Admin  
#4 Posted : 01 June 2006 16:17:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Descarte I think it is because (but not limited too) IOSH is a public forum and it has a public face which it needs to represent in a free and impartial way. Therefore it cannot have comments on the IOSH site which are deformatory of any industry, person or institution. Just my opinion
Admin  
#5 Posted : 01 June 2006 16:21:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Steve99Jones I think that blatent censorship is a more appropriate description of the actions that have been taken by IOSH on this occassion. By moving the discussion to the members area, where quite frankly few memebers ever venture is IOSH's way of brushing this matter under the carpet. If anyone looks at the income that is generated by SHP, it is very significant and I must admit that from my reading of SHP I cannot say that I have noticed any reduction in the number of job pages over recent months. Does IOSH have a valid point of view or are they being squeezed by CMP the publishers? For those that want to see the former discussion, visit the following link and express your views either way: http://www.iosh.co.uk/in...m=10&thread=20257&page=1 I trust that the moderators will leave this post in place so that others can visit the above thread and make their opinions!
Admin  
#6 Posted : 01 June 2006 16:33:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By 9-Ship Descarte Just because its a public forum, is no excuse for suppression of free speech among members. As I posted before, before I got my thread pulled - any organisation worth its salt will defend it position in public, not remove all debate from the public arena when members ask valid questions/query non-democratic decisions etc. It seems IOSH has a closed mind
Admin  
#7 Posted : 01 June 2006 19:49:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By phil Andrew and rest, Moderating is relevant in such a medium. However the stifling of this medium is more discriminatory against any post that sounded challenging to the aims of 'iosh owners' from what i can gather. some examples are: SHP does advertise jobs that are non existent from agencies, I need not divulge in to why.
Admin  
#8 Posted : 02 June 2006 09:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Descarte Hey dont get me wrong, I have several posts of mine pulled this year alone for what ever reason. Just I can sympathise with the moderators on this forum (being amoderator myself of 2 other forums with some 10,000 members supported by multinational companies). Just remember they are volunteers and it is always hard to be consistant, and they dont have to give you reasons especially when it falls outside the terms and conditions of the forums to which you have already agreed
Admin  
#9 Posted : 02 June 2006 09:41:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mark Bywater Actually, I'm only guessing mind you, but I would suggest that the moderators are not volunteers but actually paid employees of IOSH. This is meant to be an open forum and the thought that employers will not be allowed to post jobs any longer saddens me as it is a source of employment that I for one have used in the past, although I have never actually gained employment directly via an advert. If IOSH genuinely believe that the number of posts from employers is affecting their income from not using SHP then this is a legitimate course of action. But I seriously doubt it makes the slightest dent in their advertising income. Perhaps they should sell advertising space more proactively(?) However, have the Web Team and IOSH jointly considered a separate forum, where job seekers and providers can post freely without the constraints of the AUG 2. Yes, I know SHP is online too, but for smaller employers the costs of advertising in SHP for a safety person, of any grade, can be prohibitively expensive. I like to be able to see jobs posted here, but I do see how the AUGs are being abused. Nonetheless if IOSH are to remain credible then the Careers forum should be just that, a forum to discuss, seek and post career opportunities and not a stifled forum where only jobseekers can post their pleas for help etc. Come on IOSH, we are the paying members, give the members what they want; not what you think they need. Yours (slightly dischuffed), Mark
Admin  
#10 Posted : 02 June 2006 11:56:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave McIness Reference has been made to a decrease in the amount of advertising in SHP, I have 5 copies to hand which actually show a general increase in the number of pages of jobs. December 05 - 34 pages January 06 - 36 pages April 06 - 44 pages May 06 - 42 pages June 06 44 pages Perhaps someone else has a more complete set of figures for comparison! A drop in advertising sounds like more excuses rather than reality to me!
Admin  
#11 Posted : 02 June 2006 12:21:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jim Walker Mark, You guess wrong! However, why anyone would want to volunteer to be an moderator is beyond me! I think they are all slightly mad.
Admin  
#12 Posted : 02 June 2006 12:59:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Peter Taylor14 The adverstising of jobs on the careers forum by small firms is a very positive action, however the agencies trying to get free advertising have kicked the backside out of it. I think the income from SHP advertising is just a red herring. As anybody else noticed that the salaries offered by agencies, as advertised in SHP, are way above the salaries that are offered by the, dare I say, genuine companies looking for practitioners
Admin  
#13 Posted : 02 June 2006 13:07:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By bec_batty Peter - As an agency we are not permitted to advertise on here but we do respond to IOSH Professionals who post requesting advice or looking for a position, no free advertising for us. And re: advertising salaries above their actual rate... We work on the basis that we get a percentage of our placed Applicants salary, so the more money they get the more money we get. Ultimately we're providing a service and need to earn our crust too. We're not all as bad as some people think! Rebecca (Sanatio)
Admin  
#14 Posted : 02 June 2006 13:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ruth Doyle Dear members, This is not a decision that has been come to lightly – and the threat to advertising revenue in SHP may sound dry and dull, but it is nonetheless a vital one. Let me try and explain why. SHP has only one source of income: advertising revenue. It has no cover price, is not sold via news-stands and the vast majority of its subscribers are IOSH members, who get it for free. The estimated value of advertising income lost to these forums, because employers have been advertising for free, runs to six figures. This abuse of the forum’s acceptable use guidelines comes at a very real price to members – each lost advertisement takes money away from SHP, from IOSH, and from you, the members. By allowing it to continue, it may provide some immediate benefit to a small number of members (let’s say hundreds), but ultimately threatens a key member benefit for 30,000 members. The ultimate consequence (if we left it to continue) would be to ask members to pay for their magazine, or increase membership subscription rates – and I can’t see 30,000 members agreeing to that. The question I would ask you all is this: why should any business get free advertising, particularly at the expense of a charitable organization and its members? I can’t think of any other organization that would allow that to continue. You may think that SHP advertising is expensive – but it doesn’t have to be. Ads can cost hundreds, not thousands – it all depends on the size and position of the space you buy. This is considerably cheaper than the rates we have to pay our local newspaper whenever we need to hire someone here at IOSH. Ads can also be posted on SHP online straight away, without having to wait for the next publication date. Members have been involved in taking this decision: our web moderators are all IOSH members who volunteer their time for free to keep your forums functioning well within the AUGs. The advisory board of the SHP includes IOSH members, as does the Communications and International Committee. They have all been involved in making this decision. All of these members are nominated, or elected, or volunteer to represent you, the members, in the decisions they make about how IOSH operates. Sometimes they, and staff, have to make decisions that are unpopular in the short term, but which ultimately benefit the widest group of members. There is no attempt to stifle free speech here – rather, we want to encourage members to make use of the members only area. Because of IOSH’s charitable status, the OSH chat forum is open to non-members. However, when there are issues that are of specific relevance to members, it makes sense that these discussions can carry on freely among members only. This area is accessible to any members who wish to register – Neal Clarke’s posting explains how you can do this. As the original email stated, IOSH and SHP are now working together to develop a new jobs online service, with improved features, and linking directly with all the relevant career development information on this site. This will be available at the end of the year. In the meantime, individuals looking for work can continue to post on this forum. I hope this answers some of the issues raised on this and other related threads. However, if you wish to raise any specific issue with me, you are welcome to email me directly, and I will try and address your concerns. Yours, Ruth Doyle, IOSH Director of communications
Users browsing this topic
Guest (7)
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.