Rank: Guest 
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Of course we could use CIOSH - Chartered Institution of Outsider Hellraisers seeing as the image corporate identity consultants afvised Council that the use of this combination of letters was totally unwarranted. The set is therefore available.
Underlying this is the serious point that we can be led astray by the so-called experts who think they know better than us what our identity should be. If we accept the fact that Council members are like us all, seriously overworked, things can slip past without enough questions asked. I understand that Council have also just realised that they have accepted a report which dispenses with Fellowship, this can of course be readily corrected by vote of Council. To use CIOSH now as our title involves convincing Privy Council that we were in error originally - not an easy taskwith a great loss of goodwill.
I think someone mentioned IEMA's intention earlier in this thread to have Chartered "environmentalists" within the next 18 months. I am more likely to see 4 Sheffield Floods and 2 Blue Moons in a month than for this timetable to work. Privy Council grind exceeding slow and small. The failure to seek CIOSH as the title was remarkable and leaves problems in defining the Membership grades and lettering. If Council had spoken to members rather than experts we would not be here now in my view.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
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?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Taylor
Do you know why they have left it out in their title, Gavin?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Oliver Whitefield
Ken
I'm also a Chartered Civil Engineer (CEng) and like the Institution of Mechanical Engineers the ICE does not use the word Chartered in its title, nor for that matter does the Institution of Structural Engineers or the Institution of Electrical Engineers.
Oliver
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Got an example mate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Sounds like a blinkered attitude to me!
Whenever I go to a Board meeting with a proposal i always try and make sure that you have covered all angles and have a response to that, this will in the end same Management Time if they have all the facts, however outrageous, so that a reasoned well researched decision is made as quickly as possible.
Can't just say something and hide, if you put your head above the trench then be prepared to be shot at!
But you need to be bullet proof, if you haven't got the answers then say so but with a proviso that you will come back!
So agree with what you say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Alan,
You said that you wouldn't be back on this thread. Only kidding.
I cannot agree more with your comments, it is something which I try and instill in my kids that a Democratic vote is probably the most important thing we have in the free world.
There are people out there who have died and are dying today for that right!
feel quite strongly here in that if you have the vote then use it, if not then get yourself a vote and if you can't or won't then dont join the debate.
Well put Alan and I agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Thats not really what I am saying, or Alan for that matter, there are mechanisms within IOSH where you can get the 'vote' and think that is the point ie Get MIOSH status I believe.
So if you are MIOSH and don't use your vote then don't complain when it goes against what you want.
However we live in a free democratic society and everyone is entitled to express an opinion and be recognised for that, but within IOSH you would not be allowed to vote on the matter and I think what is at stake here.
An MIOSH,RSP I'm alright Jack attitude as we may get RSP and poo to everyone else won't further the Safety cause and quite frankly I do not believe will work or is any good for anybody.
Someone corrcet me if I'm wrong about the voting etc.
I am MIOSH, RSP and welcome any person with grandfather rights who can provide evidence or pass a peer review etc that they are competent to undertake the role of a 'Chartered' SP as if you are then you should have nothing to fear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.