Posted By John Picken I'm doing some research into where Occupational Health and Safety professionals fit into an organisation's overall health and wellbeing strategy - what is your contribution? Who do you report into? Do you have a direct line into senior management?Who coordinates your activity with others who have a health and wellbeing responsibility such as HR and Insurance and Risk Managers? I know these are very wide questions and the answers will vary on size and type of organisation but I'm trying to understand your profile and influence. Is it at the right level bearing in mind the importance of what you do? How much involvement do you have in setting and managing the health and wellbeing strategy? Who owns this strategy in your organisation? Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Posted By Merv Newman Forget the "wellbeing" idea. It's far too nebulous and mainly a HR/management function/cultural factor. Health, as related to work activities I will take. But making employees feel happy in temselves is not in my bag. It helps if they are but ... I always reported to the site HR manager, with a "dotted line" reporting function to the site manager. Merv Now someone tell me I've misunderstood.

Posted By Raymond Rapp John As our honourable Merv has indicated a well-being policy is poorly understood and implemented by many organisations. Exactly what should be covered with a well-being policy in terms of health, stress, fatigue, bullying and life style is a moot point. No doubt the cross-over between several functions and including HR add to the complications. In a previous role my boss wanted a policy to include activities outside of work. I have never been comfortable with any involvement outside of work and believe that in general terms this is not within the remit of occupational health and safety. Ray

Posted By AMelrose Health & Safety Adviser for Public Sector organisation (about 570 employees at present). Report to HR Director and part of HR team. Main responsibilities H&S (advice, training, accident investigation etc) but also involved in "well-being" - mental health, fit to work, dental health, quitting smoking etc. View being if the staff are fit and healthy then there should be a reduction in sickness absence. Should note that organisation has a large percentage of female staff so anything on these areas normally well received. For example, have a "focus of the month" on the intranet. Last month was about blood borne diseases (February being the month of Lurve and all that). March looks at Mental Health with links to contact organisations staff may wish to access. As staff office based, some of the "traditional" safey issues (such as COSHH / PPE etc) aren't as big a problem as say if I were working in a factory or construction based environment....

Posted By Haggis JM I suppose it all depends on your, and your company's, definition of 'fitness for work' and where the demarcations are between HR, Occupational Health and H & S... Well-being can also be over-promoted, I've come across a company who gave demerits to anyone not using the corporate gym, even if you were running outside during your lunch-hour or ran to and from work!

Posted By John Picken I'd like to thank everyone who has responded to my question. For me, a health and wellbeing strategy covers anything that an organisation does to promote good health, prevent ill health and for ill or injured employees,what it does to manage their treatment and rehabilitation. From the research I have done to date, I've yet to come across anyone who oversees or coordinates all this activity. There seem to be a lack of ownership with demarcation lines and remits stopping everything being pulled together. As prevention is better - and mostly less expensive - than cure, I'm not convinced that Occupational Health and Safety has the level of influence perhaps it should have. Regards John

Posted By Corrina Evans I report to HR Director and I am part of the HR team,I also work closely with Risk Management and Infection Control team. This seems to work well in our environment but I suspect that is because my boss has an interest in H & S and how it impacts on other areas of work, and she allows me to operate as I should be able do as the competent person for our organisation. Corrina

Posted By soundadvice Hi all, Wow!! you have all got me worried now, as an occupational health advisor I can't emphasise how important it is for H&S, HR, management and OH to work together, we all have our own roles but they over lap and working together makes every ones life easier and the company will work better. This is something that I talk about a lot as a speaker. The Health and well being strategy is not about making people feel happier, it's about working together to get the most out of employee's in the best way. Surely that is what we all want!

Posted By Kieran J Duignan Thank you for your observation, Ray Would you like to state what inference, if any, you imply in observing that mine is a minority view? I took the trouble to comment, choosing my words carefully, because it appeared (note this choice of word on both occasions) that on such a basic issue, a minority view, when based on relevant information, could be useful to those with open, enquiring minds.

Posted By Kieran J Duignan Your further observation adds nothing, unfortunately, Ray, to the issue... In any event, so what if my opinion is in the minority. Quite apart from the rights of minorities, the issue that matters is the quality of understanding within the safety profession of cultural influences on your/our professional work. My contention is that you, Merv and others you cite ignored such issues and that the questioner may be misled, to a degree, by your observations. As he raised an important issue, is it not worth considering carefully the reasons why you turn such a blind eye to relevant cultural issues? My hypothesis is that it is due to the inadequacy of treatment of cultural questions in the single most common safety education programme, the NEBOSH Certificate General module. This module has one of eight elements dedicated to cultural influences on safety management, safe work and safe conditions. While the other elements are well designed, this particular element (number 4) by contrast is very lacking compared to other relevant literature (such as The Handbook of Safety Management, Saunders and Wheeler, Pitman, 1991). If you have an alternative opinion, other than to repeat the obvious that my view is a minority, why don't you say what it is? While I share the questioner's belief that safety and health professionals should have greater influence on wellbeing at work, it is the profession's lack of understanding - as your observations sadly illustrate - not their status in hierarchies that is the root problem. This is far from 'nebulous', if you consider, for example, the impact of the Employment Act 2008 which comes into force on 1 April, 2009. The practical effect of this will be to oblige employers to pre-empt the grievance process through mediation. If, as the questioner apparently contends, safety and health professionals had earned the status of experts on wellbeing, they would be well-positioned to initiate mediation. Regrettably, the profession is still at the starting blocks on such issues and may well remain so unless they open their minds to opportunities and change. After all, there is no objective reason why they should not serve as mediators any less than solicitors who commonly profess expertise in this role for which they are seldom particularly well trained. For the sake of clarity (and since the medium of internet discussion can distort intended tone), I should add that I very much respect you, Merv and Ron not only for this but for all the other contributions you make to the forum. I'm criticising your opinion (not you as a person) because in this instance I believe you are not only mistaken but appear to be vexaciously so. Good wishes.

Posted By Kieran J Duignan Merv I regret that you find it necessary that to infer that I 'jump to conclusions' when I challenged your assertion The point I was making is based on the HSE's assertions about culture. We're entitled to differ about what they say without making invalid inferences

Posted By Raymond Rapp Kieran When I, and I hope I can speak for others, suggested that a well-being policy is nebulous, there was no inference that it is a trivial topic. Perhaps a better definition would be to say that there are many complex issues which require some careful planning, co-operation and expertise. Many practitioners and I include myself are 'general practitioners', hence we cover many aspects of health and safety management. Indeed, in my own particular industry (railways) there are numerous activities which require a degree of specialised knowledge. General practitioners cannot be an expert in all areas, including occupational health. Certain aspects of a well-being policy require a more in-depth knowledge than many encounter in their role. Making the issue of a well-being policy yet more complex for us lowly creatures. So, rather than making accusations of other professionals integrity and lack of knowledge, I respectively suggest that you consider some of the difficulties we have to overcome. Oh, by the way, a little humility also goes a long way too. Good night.

Posted By Ron Hunter Ooops! "very range" above should of course read "very wide range" - sorry about that. Must go to bed...........must maintain healthy work/life balance.............;-) According to the Horizon programme the other night, this is my peak alertness time. Now where's that giant hamster wheel...........

Posted By Ron Hunter "providing information for people so they can read it if they want to" = the internet? Why this predeliction to waste effort in "spamming" your workforce on every topic under the sun, when information overload is already a serious issue for many organisations, and important messages get lost in the noise?

Posted By AMelrose p.s. I would have contacted you direct to discuss but you don't seem to have your e-mail address link. Please remember this is an open forum so respect others views and options (even if it's not yours).

Posted By John Picken Thanks Doug, I have the PWC report. I'm not sure I agree with their conceptual model for wellness - page 10 - where they have Health and Safety sitting separately outside Prevention and Promotion and Managing Ill Health. They also qualify health and safety interventions purely as being driven by government policy initiatives and shaped by statutory requirements. Beyond that and a couple of case study references, there is no mention of the role that Health and Safety should play. My original question to the forum was based on trying to get a better understanding from Health and Safety professionals as to how they saw their role and influence in the wider organisational strategy. I did not realise that so many reported into HR rather than a risk/ finance/ legal function.

Posted By Melanie Fellows I report directly to the Managing Director. That was part of my contract negotiations and he was more than happy to go along with it. That said, I have dotted lines directly into most departments (of which most managers think I report in to them), I let this slide most of the time, unless it's necessary to get the big stick out. The size of the company means that I'm quite closely linked with the HR department, and sometimes our roles are entwined. I'm quite involved with "well being", and actively promote it, although it's generally taken up on an individual basis (giving up smoking etc.), as a company I/ we try to support everyone as much as possible, I have an open door policy to ensure I'm as approachable as possible. Mel

Posted By Merv Newman John, your post of 26/02, 9.33 (?) I do know of some companies who have nominated a "social correspondent" - a person who looks to the welfare of employees. Following up on absences, sickness, pregnancies and so on. With the brief "can we help you ?" This person, in HR but NOT H&S may liaise with H&S and medical to propose/offer general advice on diet, fitness, dental care and so on. May also be charged with the "back to work" policy - reducing/avoiding lost time. Just once in my professional life was I asked to do a home visit. THE injury to a colleague which resulted in my being named to the H&R position. (1976) While we were good friends at work, turning up on his doorstep was not a comfortable situation for either of us. Ever since I have tried to stay out of "well-being" and "return-to-work" stuff. It's a management/supervisory function. Merv

Posted By Ron Hunter Jay, I've read the White Paper, the DWP Strategy Paper and Dame Carol's Paper (which would seem merely to plagiarise the other two documents). Whereas you say that "The Health, Work and Well-being is a Government-led initiative to protect and improve the health and well-being of working age people." I suggest to you that it is primarily concerned with (a) reducing the costs of sickness absence and (b) getting the long-term unemployed back to work. Both (a) and (b) cost the Government a lot of money in statutory sick pay and benefit payments, and they want employers to do the bulk of the work to reduce that cost. The "softer" elements of health promotion by employers rate barely a passing mention in these papers, before the real discussion on sickness absence strategy kicks in. The Government (the DWP) see fit to wrap this goal up in fancy wrapping as a "Health and Well-being Strategy". Bear in mind too that the HSE lost it's autonomy some time ago,and their masters are the DWP. No surprise then that the HSE has little choice than to support & publicise the same "health and well-being strategy"?