Posted By Sean Fraser Jim, I'm not totally clear on why you have an employer and also other "owners" - I am presuming these are clients who own premises your subbies are working in. It isn't that important in relation to my answer though. I would approach this from a contractual law direction, influenced by statute law. From what you've said, your management interprets it's duty of care obligations regarding ensuring safety of others not in it's employ to extend to their sub-contractors - quite rightly. As a consequence, you require the subbies to demonstrate they have an effective SMS to operate on your behalf, with standardised methods such as the CSIS being acceptable. According to your management, it is important that this be demonstrated before the work starts. Knowing the construction industry, a major project can involve literally dozens of subbies - if not more - ranging from established firms down to self-employed jobbers. To gather all of this info must be a frustrating experience, but there is a simple approach that you could consider. Make it a contractual obligation with fiscal penalties for non-compliance. For larger organisations, you could operate a 2nd party audit programme which would allow for automatic acceptance via the approved supplier records, where one audit is valid for three years and can be used as evidence of an effective SMS for any job offered during that time. For smaller outfits, ensure that you send a questionnaire in good time before the start, with the incentive that once logged it will allow automatic acceptance for a period of say 18 months. For one-offs, a failure to provide the information prior to work being undertaken will have a percentage penalty taken off the invoice payments, with an increasing penalty as time goes on without compliance. A complete failure would result in a maximum penalty of say 20% off the total invoice payments. Complicated, but it will hit them where it hurts - in the wallet. And we all know that construction is competetive business with low margins. The aim should be to reduce your mutual paperwork burdens, make sub-contractor selection and use easier and re-inforce the poitnt that this IS important and not just a fad that will eventually fade away if they can just ignore it long enough. Good luck!

Posted By JamesK My apologies for not making it clearer. I suppose I have my boss wanting to get the job done..telling me to ensure a safe approach but not allowing me to take action IE removal from site or safety at always but at no large expense. I seem to be getting caught in the middle. I know its all part of the process but I was just after peoples experience on this to see the various approachs.

Posted By Sean Fraser Sorry to ressurect this one again as it was slipping off the radar screen (as our American cousins are wont to say) but I read with interest an article in Risks, one of two safety e-zines sent out free by the TUC, about an ex-railway labourer who at 35 is claimed to be the youngest person to have contracted asbestos cancer mesothelioma in an occupational setting. The reason it caught my attention was that he intends to sue his employer - not the railway, but an employment agency (unfortunately he cannot recall the name and he is needing help, hence the article). This chap is severely ill - he has already lost one lung and the prognosis is poor. I am not debating the rights or wrongs of the case, but I thought it fitted in neatly with this thread, where the legal responsibility is being recognised as the employment agency, not the controller of the place of work. Food for thought for agencies who mistakenly believe they can abrogate their legal responsibilities and muddy the waters as to who is the actual employer.

Posted By Stephen Ashton Jim I'm surprised no one else has referred you to the IOSH code of professional conduct which is quite clear that 'members owe a primary loyalty to the workpeople and the community they serve' (clause 1 of the code) and 'members called upon to give an opinion in their professional capacity shall be honest and, to the best of their ability, objective and reliable' (clause 3)and 'members having good reason to believe their professional advice is not followed shall take reasonable steps to ensure the persons overruling or neglecting their advice are made aware of potential adverse consequences which may result. These steps may be in writing.' (clause 7) In other words, occasionally you will need to bite the bullet, and recognise that you are in the business of protecting people - this is not always the same as protecting the employer. You need to maintain your standards even in the face of opposition, and occasionally may need to tell your employer some home truths... This does not always have to mean having a blazing row, but it can, and does happen! After which, you may well be looking for another job rather than 'keeping a job' (which is what you chose to call this thread) but at least you will know that you're in the right!!!!! During my NEBOSH course, many many moons ago, this was referred to as 'cosmopolitan' management as opposed to 'local' management. i.e. stick to the professional (ethical) approach at the expense of the company or become a Company 'yes man' and sacrifice some measure of ethical behaviour in favour of job security. The choice is yours, but make sure for your own sake that your conscience is clear... Or, as another trainer put it: If you can't change the Company you work for, change the Company you work for..... Good luck, if you find the right answer, please let us all know... Steve