Posted By Robert K Lewis
The level of knowledge and competence will depend on the demands of the job undertaken. Regulation does not imply exclusion of those in training but a structured approach to controlling those who are in practice. If trainees and technicians were excluded then the profession ultimately dies!

Bob

Posted By Bob Youel
Well answered Bob!

Its just the same as in any other profession

I find it to be common practice for people to 'pick-up' things, which we all do, but then they go on to think that they are competent re those things that they have 'picked-up'

A mark of being competent is to recognise that what we 'pick-up' does not usually make us competent in those areas

Its not easy to gain competence in any profession and whilst there may be arguments as to the route taken I feel that most people use common sense and accept the systemized approach

Ask yourself; would you like a doctor to perform an operation on you who has not taken a recognised route to become suitable to undertake that operation?

All the best in your studies / route you are taking to be competent; I am still studing etc to remain competent and all this after being in the profession since the late 1970's and holding the charter grade of membership!

Posted By Rakesh Maharaj
The thought convergence is amazing. Bob and Bob, in my view have hit the nail on the head. If our role is to advise or equip individual managers and organisations how to behave responsibly then regulatory knowlege becomes subservient to the practitioners knowlege of business operations and processes.

In his paper, Ciaran argues that a 'competent practitioner' should successfully empower or expound competence within figureheads within organisations to achieve this degree of responsibility. In doing so, the practitioner should in effect make himself or herself extraneous to the organisation.

A compelling yet sobering thought!

Posted By Robert K Lewis
Merv

Better still pay for next year as well:-)

On a more serious note though, picking up some of R's points - There is perhaps a real need for IOSH to be developing clear guidance on this issue but we still find a narrow focus on the S&H practitioner when the question is raised. We do need as a profession to enable organisations to develop their employee H&S competency such they can develop and manage their own day to day affairs - At that point we become the technical advisers, standards developers and auditors of functioning systems. In short somewhere other professions seemed to have reached in terms of their activities.

The broad point is however that even competent professionals, in other sectors, fail to grasp the reality of proper H&S management often to the detriment of all their employees and 3rd parties. IOSH Committee plans of work need to focus now in acting in a proactive manner rather than reactive - leading the agenda not following the nuances of the journalist hacks who determine what needs to be discussed and what does not. Hence assisting others in establishing a management process that is efficient both financially and in terms of humanity.

Bob