Posted By Dave Wilson Thought I would put this back on the front page as its important, rebel I am!! but in the best possible taste.

Posted By Gavin Gibson As well as achieving RSP status I am a Chartered Mechanical Engineer - CEng. I hold chartered status, but the Institution of Mechanical Engineers does not use the word chartered in its title. Perhaps this is the route that IOSH has decided to go for?

Posted By Tim In answer to the original question. “The name "Institution of Occupational Safety and Health" was approved by Council and the name and acronym "IOSH" was fully endorsed by members when feedback was sought during the branding and corporate image consultation process.” Ref: Colin Gore Posted Nov 2002 When did this endorsement by members take place? Do any of you members remember that taking place? Apart from that little episode the Institution has singularly failed to address all of the key questions raised in this thread. So we still do not know the Council/ Managements views. By the way did anyone take up the President’s offer (December 18th) to write to her with your questions, which she indicated would be answered? “Considered responses to points raised will be sent during January to those members who write to me.” If anyone did, was a satisfactory response gained? Tim P.S For Allan St Holt You said among other things “there are Council elections coming up. If you want to change things, stand for election on a platform of your choice.” Tell me is it true that less than half the membership are corporate members? And Since the Institution only ballots its Corporate members to elect a new Council how democratic is that. Many of the contributors are not Corporate and therefore your suggestion is of no use to them.

Posted By Geoff Burt Tim You'll see I trod this path 7 or 8 messages ago. What I'm finding on this particular thread is that some contributors are making comments that are clearly questionable but they are not prepared to defend them when questioned. Geoff

Posted By Tim Dave If its an example of "What I'm finding on this particular thread is that some contributors are making comments that are clearly questionable but they are not prepared to defend them when questioned" that you want. Look to postings by or on behalf of:- 1. current president 2. past president 3. council member and 4. One of the moderators All of whom hit out and ran. At least Jack stayed and defended the position he took. Tim

Posted By Allan St.John Holt Tim, Is that your real name? Why don't you follow the convention here and reveal your identity? If you want to snipe at people I think it would carry a bit more weight if you stopped being anonymous. And like most people I like to see my name spelled correctly. I think IOSH does its best to listen to its members. As to who gets a vote, the old Articles of Association and the current ones state that only corporate members do. It was a very long time ago that I was involved in looking at the Articles last, but I do remember that John Barrell explained to Council that it was/is part of the deal for being the type of prganisation that IOSH was/is registered as - a Company Limited by Guarantee - is legally that only its members can vote. And that was defined for IOSH by its solicitors and a barrister as meaning that only full members got a vote on issues such as changes to the Articles (e.g. to let other grades have a vote, or any other issue for that matter). There seems to be a general ignorance of this - the vote thing is simply not IOSH's decision, whether you like it or not. I do know that IOSH has been trying to change the balance by encouraging more people to work to upgrade - the ratio was said at the time to be one of the stumbling points for the Privy Council. but if people don't want to, choose not to, can't be bothered, or whatever, there's not a lot IOSH can do about it. Anyway, I was simply trying to point out in my comment that if people feel really strongly about any issue then they should be or support a candidate who feels the same way when it comes to election time. I really feel this thread has outlived its usefulness - we're rolling over old ground. Allan

Posted By Geoff Burt Dave The point was that a large number of members of the institute don't have a vote. I'm not saying that is right or wrong just that it is a fact. But from what you and Allan (hope that is spelt right!) are saying, then those people should not enter into debate - and that is clearly wrong. Allan - I wasn't aware a thread had to be useful? Personally I find the different opinions very interesting and just from this thread I have learnt a lot about the various issues involved. I started off being neutral regarding chartered status but I now see clearly that it would have advantages for the institution internationally and for the profession as a whole. I don't understand the thinking of the advocates for having the word chartered in the name or for individuals - but that is another matter. Geoff