Hi, I did a safety inspection on a shop fitting site yesterday. The site manager is half way through his first NEBOSH course, he did a mock exam on Monday, and we had a good chat about the course content, the instructor, and the good group attending with him.

His intention is to pass this and then go to the NEBOSH Construction cert in February.

During my site inspection I came accross all the same old issues as before he started the course, for example I don't know how long I have been talking to him about machine cutting timber and the need for extraction at source but there is still lots of wood dust around the chop saw on site, no bag fitted and no extraction. Just one example - there are many more!

In the past you could say he was ignorent and/or incompetent as he previously had no safety training but now he is a bit more informed I wonder when he would become negligent?

Indeed Phil. I would also add that competence cannot be measured simply in terms of knowledge, however useful it is, nor compliance. As we all know, good h&s practices include the quantums of time, cost and effort. Knowing what should be done and then doing it is another matter.

Chris,

This post does sound a bit harsh. I understand from what you post that there is little (if any) improvement, however, this may not be his fault and how would the individual concerned feel if they read your post and recognised themselves? Not the most encouraging of introductions to the safety community.

You haven't really posted enough information to give other readers a fair chance at judging either way.

When I started my safety career, a company I worked for was made very aware by myself of the relevant safety issues but whilst I had the title I had no resources or authority to sort the problems - eventually the company was caught when the HSE did random inspections on companies on our industrial estate.

All the items the HSE picked up were exactly the same as the items I had been flagging up, but not being listened too.

In the months prior to the HSE we had an external consultant inspect, and quite frankly I would be appalled if they posted here about me based on the condition of the workplace when my hands were tied firmly behind my back.

Is there more that you can tell us that indicates to you the problem is with him and not the company?

Hi Brett and Taylor, for further information the person in question is a partner in the company, the other partner is his father.

Does this make any difference to your thoughts?

Blodwyn

The case you refer to is a very rare one and no reason for a 'knee jerk'. Just as to my knowledge only one designer has ever been successfully prosecuted under the CDM Regs, does that mean all other designers are competent - of course not. I would like to think the levels of qualifications we must attain and maintain, particularly through CPD, that h&s practitioners are well versed in their field.

Apologies to the poster of the thread for digressing.

Ray

Chris,

it starts to give an idea, (though if the father is anything like mine he still knows it all).

What have you been doing (advice, comments etc)? What is his response ?

Has there been any change in the way he now handles safety?

I've got to admit I'd be somewhat wary about discussing a client so openly here on the forums. If its your business then crack on, but if you are as I have been a consultant for a company, I'd be in breach of client confidentiality for discussing a client the way you have here.

Absolutely agree that competence and negligence are 2 eseentially different issues.

But not quite sure what you mean by "..extremely unlikely that a court will find anything but negligent." Could you expand?

Chris - not sure if that was aimed at me or whether the last sentence was a statement or a question.

Agreed, someone is is not competent CAN become become competent with training, although not necessarily so. Competence is just that competence, people either are competent or they are not depending on the task etc etc. The competence issue has been debated on these forums and elsewhere time and time again. But you shouldn't confuse competence or if you like a lack of competence with negligence, I would say that the two are essentially separate things.

Anyone can be ACCUSED of being negligent by ANYONE at any time, but 'proving' it is something different. I am not sure if "..not following the rules.." necessarily makes someone 'automatically' negligent, although they may very well be percieved to be and quite possibly found to be. Similarly, just because someone isn't competent to do something doesn't necessarily mean that they can't subsequently be found to have been negligent, if for example they have done something that is grossly and obviously 'wrong'.