Posted By Keith Bell
Hi all,

I'm new to the forum so please bear with me!

I've just taken up the position of Health & Safety Officer in a Primary Care Trust employing around 550 people, I'm qualified to NEBOSH Certificate standard passing with credit last August.

I have asked for funding to undertake the new NEBOSH level 4 Dip and have been told that I do not necessarily need to be "Qualified" to be "Competent" which I agree is true to a point (see Fatty Arbuckle!).
Could anyone please offer advice on this as although I do not want to do myself out of a job and say I'm not competent I feel very strongly that a "competent" person should hold more that just a General Certificate.

Posted By Rob Todd
Keith,

There was a case a while ago (was it Tesco? - someone will no doubt be able to enlighten us) which decided what competence in the safety world was required. From memory I think it basically stated that the NEBOSH Cert could be considered as reasonable for sedentary office type environments but no more. If I remember correctly the individual concerned in the case had the Cert and had made a judgement in respect of the use of forklift trucks. The judge ruled that he/she was not competent to that standard.

I hope this will jog someone's memory so that they can give you the actual case.

Cheers

Rob

Posted By Steve Holliday
The case was as follows:

In the case Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council v J Sainsbury plc14 (1998), Sainsbury was
fined £425k and £75k costs when a warehouse operative was killed by a reach truck in
December 1996. The truck’s safety cut out switch had been deliberately disconnected. The
charges included failing to appoint competent person under 7(1) of MHSWR. The person
appointed as H&S adviser at the depot was a general nurse with a general certificate from
NEBOSH, an insufficient qualification to undertake this role unassisted. At company level
there was a safety advisor but his role did not extend to advising on the operational hazards
associated with reach trucks at the depot.

Posted By Rob Todd
Thanks Steve H that's the case I had in mind.

I do however consider that someone with safety experience in a full time role, with Tech SP status through NEBOSH Dip part 1, could be considered competent particularly if they have experience of the specific safety issues concerned. I personally would employ (and have employed) a Tech SP for a full time role as a Safety Professional, dependant on experience.

Posted By Jim O'Dwyer
Dictionaries define competence as 'ability' and competent as 'adequately qualified'.

The Approved Codes of Practice say that for simple situations knowledge of best practice and an awareness of one's own limitations may be sufficient and the guidance notes that accompany section 7 of the Management of Health & Safety Regs 1999 say that wherever possible the competent person should be someone from inside the company.

Academic qualifications alone will not qualify a person as competent.

They must also possess experience relevant to the workplace where they are to be the competent person.

A good example of this is the Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council v J Sainsbury PLC case.

The court's decision was that although the person said to be competent had health and safety qualifications she had little experience of forklift trucks and in this instance, could not be deemed competent.

So, to sum up, a competent person should possess:

1. Experience of the type of work and workplace where they are to be deemed competent.

2. Knowledge of up to date best practice.

3. Health and safety qualifications that allow application to a professional
body [IOSH IIRSM].

4. An awareness of their limitations.


I hope this helps you.


Best wishes

Jim O'Dwyer