Posted By gary k browning I recently completed a audit on a supplier who where using a consultant to provide health and safety advice. Upon checking the credentials of this company I discovered to my shock and surprise a MIOSH with only a national certificate this candidate had other qualifcations but no others for safety, also from the national cert to MIOSH was 5 months. Conducting a little more research. I discovered that it has been possible to gain Techspec status with only the construction cert and relative experince. I struggled hard to pass my diploma, but had I realised its not what you know its who, I dont think quite frankly I would have bothered I know quite a few people who do very nicely with the bsc diploma are excellent safety advisors and that may have been the route I would have taken if I had the information. I feel really cheated and conned

Posted By Dave Wilson I understand that you can get MIOSH status as outlined however RSP is the bit which diploma holders etc with relevant experience and peer review process can achieve. So prospective employers who understand and want an all round General Safety Practitioner plump for the MIOSH,RSP and not just MIOSH. So stick at it and get the RSP bit

Posted By Ken Taylor I am horrified at the poor standard of grammar and spelling presented in my offering above. Here is the revised version:- 'A problem is, Dave, that many prospective employers will be impressed by someone presenting corporate membership of a professional body rather than seeking an assertion of being on a register of which they know even less.' I really ought to no/know better.

Posted By Peter Lee Indeed, one could counter argue that someone who achived MIOSH many years ago (grandfather rights) may be less competent than persons who have just passed Dip 1 or Dip 2.

Posted By Dave Wilson Alec, take your point mate, so lets just get rid of safety qualifications and let eveyone with experience be a safety professional? NEBOSH Cert holders are not safety professionals and if you read what the target audience for this cert is, it says just that!(there said it) (it is a start though)at least NEBOSH Dip/ NVQ / NTU etc shows that the person has an 'examined' relevant level of domain knowledge in the subject, experience comes with experience. gone are the days where the production manager is coming up to retirement and given the safety job for his last couple of years etc loads of experience but in safety? Ken, Agree and thats the problem some employers do not know what they 'need' and some safety Professionals are 'too qualified' for certain working environments and do not need RSP's etc. However if you have a Phd in a realted subject does this make you a competent 'generalist?' Read the jobs page in the SHP and this bears this out. Nebosh cert £30k for some jobs and £18k with MIOSH,RSP its a farce mate Peter, Been down this road before mate, not just in IOSH either, until the 'elder' generation have retired and everyone has a 'requisite qualification' you will not persuade the experience v qualification brigade, the trick is to bring them on board and embrace the old and the new.

Posted By Dave Wilson as spooky as a spooky thing on a spooky bank holiday!

Posted By Dave Wilson Ken, Does that mean you are onboard and embraced?

Posted By Robert K Lewis Let us not forget that MIOSH is NOT about professional competence. A corporate member is one who has been admitted to that status following successful application to Membership Committee. Professional competence concerns the RSP and TechSP, albeit at a lower level, status. This MIOSH problem is a hangover of the much beloved idea of some previous thinking with regard to what were known as topic specialists. There are a fair number around still. I would remind people that in the early 80s the levels were not comparable, initially there were the Higher and Lower levels and they were both certificates but broadly the standard did not differ significantly from the Part 1 & 2 although some will claim otherwise. There will always be a mix of certs, diplomas and degrees. Just remember it is not the MIOSH that should count! Bob

Posted By Hazel Harvey This thread has very nicely summed up why Council at its meeting on Wednesday have proposed a 'new' membership structure. There is confusion about what represents competent safety practice and if it is confused within the profession what chance do employers have! The MIOSH category of membership does NOT represent competence in the current structure, only the RSP does ( and to a limited extent the TechSP). The MIOSH category covers a whole range of people either qualified with an accredited OSH qualification or in a related subject and it was devised to broaded and deepen the whole discipline of health and safety not just reflect safety practitioners competence. The RSP, which is underpinned by mandatory CPD to maintain competence, is assessed for competence before entry is given. This although a good idea in practice hasn't worked and Council are now proposing to the membership that the whole of the corporate membership will now need to be assessed for competence and to maintain it through CPD. This was described in the SHP last year and on the members only web-site and now, after considerable work, this proposal has been developed by the Professional Affairs Committee and accepted by Council, to be presented to AGM in November. If the timescales that are proposed are kept to and there are no hiccups than this will start to operate in mid-2005. At this point ALL those entering the MIOSH category will be assessed for competence and RSP as such will disappear (being redundant). So for those of you undertaking accredited qualifications you have not wasted your time! We all know that there will be anomolies and perceived unfairness in the system as the transitional arrangements click in but we can't go backwards we are where we are but can and will get better. Professions develop from having no apparent standards to having rigorous and respected standards. Health and Safety is just about there! Really it is a case now of keep watching this space as things develop!

Posted By gary k browning Thank you for all your responses I didn't think I could raise so many hackles. The fundenmental point I was raising is, there is no way of knowing someones competency by their status. MIOSH or Techsp should mean that an agreed standard has been reached and that IOSH has accepted that the person is competent to give professional health and safety advice. If that is wrong tell employers MIOSH or techsp are not competent at the present moment this statement can be true as I have discovered these awards are attainable by backdoor entry. I work in the rail industry where if you wish to maintain your competency such as PTS, COSS, PICOP, SPICOP, you are subject to continous assessment and retesting. I am not suggesting safety advisors need retesting (first time was hard enough) but all MIOSH and Techsp need compulsary CPD to maitain there status, not optional, that way when I assess someones comptency or they mine, I know that they are competent to give advice. I have until recently held IOSH up as a shining light in safety but until these membership issues are resolved the association awards have become devalued and I will no longer look to confirm comptency with an IOSH award without some supporting evidence.

Posted By Fiona Cowan Will Compulsory CPD be at a price available to the majority and costs of courses accessible to all members? Or, will there be substantial recognition of day-today development/experience? Fiona

Posted By Stuart Nagle In respect of the above interesting topic of debate it is worth noting the contents of the 2003/04 IOSH Finacial Accounts, and in particular the section on membership, which informs us that in the year 2003 university sector education continued to expand, and 54% of members qualified for the corporate category with higher education qualifications. Of the remaining membership 24% joined with vocational qualifications level 4 and 22% with NEBOSH Dip2. This shows that higher level qualifications (BSc/MSc) are now being taken in preference to NEBOSH, and that NVQ level 4 has replaced NEBOSH (for those not taking the higher education route) as the preferred choice of qualfication. I am not sure, based on Hazel's comments above, if IOSH are going in the right direction, as there will be members who hold MIOSH who will not, or may not want to progress, for example to chartered status, as there will be those who can and may. It may be preferable to have a senior - non chartered grade, as well as a senior chartered grade (as the Institution of civil engineers - the leading professional engineering body) has done, for example; MIOSH RSP (now) or CSP (future), and MIOSH (a non RSP/CSP) I also consider that a structured mature candidate procedure, all the way up to RSP/CSP standard should be available for those who cannot assert themselves via the academic route, as exemplified by a contributor above. After all, we not want to appear to be institutionally discriminating against people, would we? I think it would be well worth all those interested in this to look at other profesional bodies membership grades to get a grasp of what is going on out there and reflect on this before changes are made, that may require another set of changes before too long....