Posted By Robert K Lewis
In spite of many claims that may be to the contrary the requirement is to have a competent work force with respect to health and safety. I know however that many will interpret this as a must for CSCS but it is not so. You can demonstrate competence how you choose. Only problem is however that many organisations issuing work have been subjected to the political railroad and submitted to the pressure.

There is no IOSH safety passport - We withdrew from the SPA some time ago. What concerns me, as I have made clear on many occassions, these schemes do very little for H&S competency. The bar is set very low for some and too high for others. The operatives need only know what is relevant to their work but I have seen such as drain laying operatives being subjected detailed information that they will never use such as inspecting scaffolds, but strangely not shoring and excavations.

All training needs to be clearly targeted and specific to the needs of operatives. This is not the end of it however, such training, even when tested, is not evidence of competency this is much broader. The blunderbuss of uniformity however seems to rule at this moment with little measurable effect.

Bob

Posted By Salus
RKL, my views on this subject are the same as yours, if not more negative towards the many schemes that are constantly being introduced, set up, and run by those who have only one interest "MONEY"

RKS,please please please, keep us all posted on any benefits or problems you / your company and your contractors have with this.

Posted By rks
RKL

Thanks for the responses.

At this present time we are doing the working safely and also offering CSCS and then a NVQ 2 if the operative wants to do it.

I think this over the top after reading the draft ACOP I personally read into it that we could just do the CSCS and offer them the NVQ2.