Posted By David A Jones
The simple answer is that the regs etc do not make any mention of who should take the minutes.

It is probably worth noting that responsibility for organising these meetings rests with the employer and as such it seems logical that responsibility for the minutes rests with them.

In all my previous companies (and my current company) the person taking the minutes is always the same - this ensures consistancy etc and avoids the situation of people suddenly being unable to attend as it is their 'turn' as well as avoiding the 'press gang' approach

Posted By JayneAnne Ridgway
Thank you for your responses so far,

The same person chairs the meeting, we are a large organisation, but have very little secretarial / typist resource, so basically everybody does there own typing / presentations etc. This is why it was suggested that perhaps a rota for minute taking could be introduced so that the same person does not get lumbered every 6 weeks. Approximately 18 people attend the meeting and so it was suggested that a rota for minute taking be implemented, but the Safety reps (there are 4 of them) are refusing to be included in this rota. The whole idea of H & S is that everybody is on board 100% and not when it suits - surely?

Posted By Richard Mathews
When I was a TU convenor & safety rep. in an engineering factory, we also had very little secretarial support. The H&S Committee was chaired by the Director of Manufacturing and the minutes were taken by one of our TU reps. It was the same rep. who took the minutes every time to ensure consistency and it worked well for us. We also had peace of mind knowing that as we were in control of the minutes, nothing went unrecorded.

Posted By Richard Mathews
Ross

We had thought about the rep. taking the minutes not being able to fully participate in the meeting. To get round this “H&S issues” was a regular item on the weekly Shop Stewards meeting agenda. All issues were discussed in that forum and any that were deemed to be in need of consideration by the H&S Committee were taken there by the convenor and if any were relevant to minute takers area, the minute taker would then give his input. But bear in mind the minutes were not a record of everything that was said they were basically a record of the subject raised, actions required and actions completed. So it was not necessary for the minute taker to concentrate on writing all the time.

Posted By Neville
Simple! . . Pick the one with short hands !!!

Generally speaking, you are much better off having someone taking the minutes who has no input to the meeting, thereby putting their mind on the job. As with other comments on here, normally down to an administrator, if there is one spare who can attend other meetings too, for the continuity.

Posted By David Wilson2
I agree with Clive, on the balance however I suspect the balance of votes is equal? 10 ex-officio members? Still 18 attendee's is a lot, either the meetings drag on for hours or there are several people who dont need to be there at all.
As for the minute taker, Id never expect a key contributor to take mins, that would include all Union side reps, chair, Official side members with votes and any full time advisers (ex officio normally).