Posted By Graeme Scott Nick As a young (30) and new practitioner I would welcome an initative like you suggest. This may help people like myself to become more productive in the health and safety world and reduce the mistakes that may happen. Reguards Graeme

Posted By Karen Rogers As a young member of IOSH (27), I would suggest a new practitior section as during the last 5 year that I have been involved within the Health & Safety Field I have met alot of over 30's( not going to call them Old, as I'll be there soon) who have reciently qualified / changed career into our field - It would seem a pity for them to miss out just because of their age. Karen

Posted By Ken Taylor - but do we really want to separate the 'young' from the 'old'? Isn't the interaction between members of different ages and experiences a means of edifying the 'young'? Will the next call be for separate groups based upon gender, race group, etc? I can see the value in age groups for social events and the like but not for sharing information and experience in health and safety. Ken Taylor (neither old nor young).

Posted By Nick Higginson Ken, Don't the specialist groups already separate us into areas? i.e. construction, education etc. Whats the difference? I'm not suggesting different grades of membership, or separate branch meetings. How many twenty-somethings would be confident enough to do a presentation at a full branch meeting? Not many I'll wager, but they may be prepared to do so in front of their more immediate peer group. Regards, Nick

Posted By Robert K Lewis The comment on MIOSH can be to an extent be justified if one remembers it is not a competency grade. In practice, under the articles, a person is admitted to Corporate gtrade at the decision of admissions committee, it is not essential for a person to hold Part II or any other academic qualification for this to happen. Mike Garstang completed a report last year on this matter and came to some radical conclusions!! I personally think the TechSP and RSP have to be preserved as the competency grades. The MIOSH and FIOSH simply then designate memebership and service to the advancement of safety practice. I think the differentiation between the MIOSH and FIOSH still perform an important function, certainly to the outsiders view. On the original point I am driven to think of the segregation and isolation that can occurr if we break the Institution into groups based on age, sex, ethnic origins etc. The separation between new comers is also a little bit questionable as the mixing of old and new ideas is one of the joys of our profession Bob

Posted By Hayden Mead At 22 I completed my NEBOSH NG Certificate with the intention of gaining employment within the industry. Having successfully completed the course, I attended numerous interviews for jobs without success. At 22 I wanted to get into the industry gain experience further my education and progress. My age and experience was most certainly a major factor in my inability to gain employment. I subsequently decided to do a degree in computing. I beleive anything that will both support and help younger less experienced people within the H & S field will only reap positive benefits. What a great idea Nick.

Posted By Nick Higginson Dear all, Thanks for your comments. I think some of the older members have taken the segregation issue to far. Perhaps there opinion is biased due to their greater experience? As a younger practitioner, I am well aware of how daunting it can be to try and put your ideas to more experienced members. I am certainly not suggesting splitting younger people from the mainstream, just an EXTRA forum for us to gain some much needed experience. Come on IOSH, you must have a view? Feelings are obviously strong on this subject. Kind regards to all, Nick Higginson

Posted By Ian D Sorry Nick to deveate from the original thread this is for Bob I am right,in reading your posting,that you beleive that TechSP and RSP are competency grades whereas MIOSH and FIOSH are indicators of membership status I don't know about the IOSH technicality however I don't accept that as being the case, for instance I obtained the TechSP status then competed the Dip 2 and obtained the grade of MIOSH - if your statement is correct then to prove competency I would revert back to TechSP status ignoring the more senior grade. I have over 8 years experience in full time health and safety positions(all high risk) but because I have not obtained 3 years post qualification experience I can not use the apply for RSP - but thats another thread. I belive as stated many times before that you have to view each case in turn, before you can make generic statements. Just aired by views regards Ian

Posted By Zyggy Turek I've just completed over 20 years in the H&S profession & can still remember the sense of achievement in gaining MIOSH, then RSP and ultimately pride in being awarded FIOSH. Yet I'm still learning & am happy to take advice from Cert. holders, TechSP or indeed anybody irrespective of their qualifications or experience.The H&S field is immense & nobody can be expert in all its dimensions. I can also remember how I first felt attending meetings in a sea of tweed jackets with patches on the elbows & pockets full of drawing pins (to put up posters); woollen ties on checked shirts; an assortment of safety shoes & a car park full of safety helmets perched in the rear windows of vehicles! Did I feel intimidated....well probably yes, but I would have hoped that times have changed and we are now seen as modern professionals. My view, for what it's worth, is anything that can help to promote young people into the profession should be pursued & if our younger member still feel uncomfortable at larger gatherings, then let us help them to move forward, but let's see this other forum as part of the solution & not the cure-all.

Posted By Russ Clarke totally agree, but why keep it to engineering,i am a supervisor looking for info on toolbox talks , i can find talks on specialist subjects, BUT NOT THE BASICS,are we loosing the plot here, house keeping ,every safety inspectors GLORY TOY, forget a pat on the back for good things the boys on the tools do, just do them for what you can ,REMEMBER BOB. ALWAYS.

Posted By Hazel Harvey As you may gather I have been away from the office and have only just picked up this thread. To explain the current membership structure,there is a lack of clarity about the grades. As a part of the 1987 Corporate plan of IOSH an attempt was made to expand the learned society of aspect of IOSH by inviting people with a specialism related to safety into corporate membership. These people bring a wealth of depth of expertise in topic areas such as occupational health, medicine, hygiene, engineering etc. beyond the normally expected depth of a general safety practitioner but without the broad coverage of all health and safety aspects. To distinguish between the two and to reflect the professional body or regulatory aspect of the Institution, the RSP was introduced which does require qualifications in OSH with assessed skills and experience and also demonstration of continuing competence through CPD. The confusion we see expressed here is as a result of this not being properly clarified at the time of introduction as prior to this MIOSH had been a competence grade. However, the system does mean that it may appear that someone moving from TechSP to MIOSH has actually lost their competence, which is, of course, not true. There is a three year wait before they can move to the RSP which was introduced at a time when qualifictions were only knowledge based and did not include skills assessment as they do now. This is a position that will be addressed in any revision of the membership structure. The recommendation of the working party which Mike chaired last year was that any designated grades of IOSH should reflect competence and as such have mandatory CPD attached. The Professional Affairs Committee are currently developing these proposals for the Council which accepted the findings of the working party. This is a case of watch this space, but be reassured any changes, if there are any, are not imminent as they are still under discussion and will need to be approved by Council before they come into being. Back to Nick's original posting about a young people's group. I have seen these initatives in other organisations and by and large they are very valuable when they operate side by side within the structure of the organisation. I don't think any of the younger respondents are suggesting that experienced advice is not welcomed, more that a young practitioner's forum could be a network opportunity for this generation of practitioners. They are also a good starting point for those who may want to progress within IOSH. If there is sufficient interest in an initiative of this nature I will be happy to take it further. Please contact me by e-mail or letter and I will see what can be done.

Posted By peter gotch Nick, An excellent idea. Institution of Civil Engineers branches have Graduates and Students Sections to do roughly what you suggest with input from wise owls to mentor. As one of the oldies (but without the woolen tie etc) I have no problems with the youngsters attempting to muscle in. Involvement of the younger / less experienced members in all aspects of running IOSH would help to deal with some our less thought out practices. Nice one Ashley. Good policy not to put your letters after your name if you are looking for advice from your youngers and betters? Regards, Peter

Posted By Nick Higginson George, Thanks for your response. I will be in touch with yourself and David Bloodworth in the near future to see if there's any mileage in a specialist group. Kind regards, Nick Higginson

Posted By Nick Higginson Andy, 30 was just the cut-off point that the IEE had used, I'm not suggesting that should be used anywhere else. The mentoring idea from George Wedgewood also seems a good idea, but I assume this would have to be on a voluntary basis from more experienced members. How on earth would the criteria for a mentor be decided? RSP, FIOSH?? There are obviously more questions than answers at the minute, but hey, nothing ventured, nothing gained eh? Regards, Nick P.S. Young members - watch this space.

Posted By Andy Petrie Nick, I would welcome a young members group at IOSH. I have spent several years learning various aspects of safety, and one of the best means of doing this is through discussions with peers. There are two aspects to this, learning from an older, more experienced person who shares their knowledge with you and secondly through discussing ideas with people on a 'similar' level to yourself. A young members group could serve both these function by organising talks/meetings/newsletters from older/experienced members where by they pass on the benefits of their experience and secondly by encouraging ideas and constructive discussions between the members of the group. One example would be to organise meeting where young members make a presentations on an issue of their choice. This would give them a chance to practice their public speaking without the fear of a backlash or difficult questions from an expert (or just a difficult person), which would damage their confidence. This would also aloow attendees at the meeting a chance to learn a new topic and to discuss it in a small group of similar minded people. I hope IOSH take up your idea and I look forward to joining. Andy

Posted By keith scott Hello Nick, I think your idea is sound but why not a new to health and safety forum, rather than under thirty. I am 39 and changed career last year and would be not allowed to join. Yet I would be in the same boat as some younger people. I also think that although new to the career, my age and experience might add a good ingredient to discussion. Regards Keith

Posted By Ken Taylor In practice, will the 'young' be in a position to attend twice as many fora (forums) in future - or can we expect an age-related split to the detriment of shared experience? Interaction isn't only a one-way benefit. Some of the 'older' members can benefit from the enthusiasm, etc of the 'young'.

Posted By Ken Taylor Probably not, in as much as the Construction SG is job-related and age-inclusive. It's not so much a matter of whether people are prepared to attend extra meetings as whether they have the time or whether they would be allowed to do so by their employers (particularly for younger and, possibly, junior staff). Consider that the proposal would involve Construction SG members attending yet another meeting. I think this is one of those 'good ideas in principle' that could involve more loss than gain in practice. If it goes ahead, I shall hope that I am wrong.

Posted By Nick Higginson Andy, Hear, hear. Are the Young Conservatives labelled as ageist? Young members sections within other institutions appear to function perfectly well without segregating them from the rest of the members - why should IOSH be any different? Regards, Nick

Posted By Dyfed Rowlands Hi Nick, Have you made any further progress with regard to your idea. Again, should you require any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards Dyfed