Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Ciarán Delaney  
#1 Posted : 03 July 2010 15:07:03(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

With the recession, some people might be tempted to cut corners and not renew their certification/registration. But what are the consequences for you and/or your organisation if there is an incident where the person delivering the training to your staff is out of certification or is not even on the approved register of trainers for the subject matter that they are delivering? Do you ask for copies of certification before engaging them?

Do you seek verification from the certification organisation/ registration body that they are legitimate?

A similar query would arise with Insurance cover, does the insurance cover the training been delivered, for example, live fire extinguisher training, which is expensive?

Have you contacted the Insurance provider and verified that the Insurance Cover is current and not just go on face value?

A friend of mine has just had a very lucky escape when they checked the above out. They were told that if there had been an incident, that the company would NOT have been covered by their Insurance policy.

In Ireland, the law requires you to do all "as is reasonably practicable" to ensure the safety, health and welfare of your employees in the workplace. I presume the same applies in other jurisdictions.

It might be no harm to instigate a review of providers before it is too late.
freelance safety  
#2 Posted : 03 July 2010 19:38:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
freelance safety

You make some very valid points here. I have come across many so called ‘consultants’ who have little or even no formal qualifications. Some don’t deny this others actually use designators letters that they don’t actually have?

I have come across numerous training providers whose trainers have been less than competent due to experience and technical ability. This is why the government must listen to IOSH and look at defining competency with the assistance of IOSH and others bodies.

Maybe then we will have less of the fool hardy media hype and people we see the actual work of professional health and safety practitioners.

This would also help in eradicating the less than competent consultants/consultancies that are currently in operation within the UK. We already have the basis for competency via IOSH and CPD, we just need that government support?
freelance safety  
#3 Posted : 03 July 2010 19:40:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
freelance safety

Few spelling hiccups, sorry!
chris.packham  
#4 Posted : 03 July 2010 22:14:03(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris.packham

Is it quite that simple.

Of course, where there is a legal requirement for a certain level of training and an appropriate standard that must be reached then yes, there must be some confirmation of competency.

However, not all health and safety training is of this nature. In my particular, specialised, area there are no clearly defined standards nor any recognised 'qualification' (IOSH or other) to demonstrate competency. In such a situation the organisation requiring the training will need to convince iteslf of the competency of the trainer, possibly through their reputation or referrals for others who have used that trainer.

Chris
Ciarán Delaney  
#5 Posted : 03 July 2010 23:27:25(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Chris, In Ireland there is a Government body called FETAC who are, to give credit where credit is due, working hard on developing standards where the trainer must meet competency standards, in relation to health and safety training.

This is been done in tandem with trainers, employers bodies, HSA (Irish equivalent of HSE) and there is a general consultation process involved as well.

The Insurance angle though was a worrying development as well.

bleve  
#6 Posted : 03 July 2010 23:46:16(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
bleve

Though in reality insurance is covered at all times through employers liability and so it is only the recovery of cost from the third party or trainer is the issue

Immediate loss or liability is covered in the first instance by the employer
Ciarán Delaney  
#7 Posted : 04 July 2010 14:33:30(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

bleve, and what if the third party or trainer does not have adequate funds to pay for the damages? Hence the suggestion that you verify that all is in order before engaging the trainer/third party.
chris.packham  
#8 Posted : 05 July 2010 11:29:38(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris.packham

Ciaran

When asked to provide training in our particular speciality the client often asks for a copy of our liability insurance document. Particularly in the pharmaceutical industry it seems to be becoming standard practice.

With regard to any accreditation, will the system allow for those who operate in just one specialist area and thus would not consider themselves as 'normal' health and safety consultants, nor be qualified as such?

Chris
Ciarán Delaney  
#9 Posted : 05 July 2010 11:39:41(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Chris

According to FETAC, it will do exactly that. They will have to attend a course on a specific subject, sit an exam approved by the FETAC council and if they pass that exam, it will issue a certificate specifically for that subject matter.

This is a fairly recent development but in my opinion, a progressive one.
Safety Smurf  
#10 Posted : 05 July 2010 11:53:57(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Safety Smurf

Hi Ciaran,
Will FETAC also be assessing individuals competency in teaching? There are plenty of 'specialists' out there, registered and otherwise that know their stuff but are completely clueless when it comes to imparting that knowledge.
Ciarán Delaney  
#11 Posted : 05 July 2010 12:14:19(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Yes, and there is a requirement for feedback from the participants that the 'specialists' have been imparting their knowledge to.

It is definitely the right way to progress. I attended one of their briefing sessions and they pulled no punches. Any major issues and after all avenues have been exhausted, if they are not satisfied that you are delivering what you are supposed to be delivering in a manner that can be understood by the intended target audience, certification and registration is withdrawn.
PhilBeale  
#12 Posted : 05 July 2010 12:29:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
PhilBeale

All i can see is another means of someone making money for doing very little. I provide fire safety training and i believe i have the training and knowledge to be able to provide that training at the level i do (company employees) i would certainly not look at paying some organisation no doubt a substantial fee to issue me with a certificate to say i can provide that training. If it does come in to force then all you will do is increase the cost of the course and reduce the number of people providing the training.

I always think it's best to sit in on the courses and judge for yourself whether the information and training is relevant. also a lot of companies provide there own in house training where often they might just stick a DVD on or read from powerpoint show. But so long as the given target audience is suitable for this level of training then this should be all that is required.

There's to many bodies trying to find ways of making money for offering no real benefit. i accept if you are going to be teaching an approved course by that training body then you should hold there certificate to be able to train the subject.

Phil
Ciarán Delaney  
#13 Posted : 05 July 2010 12:57:53(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Phil,

The cost is actually very reasonable and the accreditation assists with insurance costs, getting new business and guarantees quality
PhilBeale  
#14 Posted : 05 July 2010 13:29:21(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
PhilBeale

Originally Posted by: Ciará Go to Quoted Post
Phil,

The cost is actually very reasonable and the accreditation assists with insurance costs, getting new business and guarantees quality


Then hopefully it will be a scheme that will work but i don't see it having much affect on insurance costs. i would be interested to see what the costs would be compared to what some bodies want to charge. The trouble is we need just one body or organisation currently there are to many jumping on the band wagon so you either have to belong to
either belong to all of them or none. any with so many different organisations and schemes it just creates for confusion for the client.

Phil
Ciarán Delaney  
#15 Posted : 05 July 2010 13:42:56(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Phil, that is the beauty of FETAC. Everyone in Ireland HAS to recognise it. It is the one body that is GOVERNMENT accredited.
IsafeUsafe  
#16 Posted : 05 July 2010 14:20:50(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
IsafeUsafe

I am probably going to go along with Phil on this one - this appears to be another body that promises to improve standards but has no power to deliver it.

The questions that need to be answered are - are they so sure that this is going to be successful that they will meet any claims arising from any incompetent training that is delivered? And will a competent and independent body with the apporpriate amount of power be scrutinsing them?

If the answer to either of these questions is no then in all honesty this is just another guild.
chris.packham  
#17 Posted : 05 July 2010 14:50:12(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris.packham

Ciaran

Your response raises a question. If I am the only person in my particular specialised field, who is going to assess whether what I do demonstrates competency? It isn't just a hypothetical question. Over the past thirty years I have developed an approach to a particular aspect of health and safety that is both evidence and experience based and that contradicts in many areas aspects of what is considered frequently as 'conventional wisdom'. So not infrequently what I say contradicts what some others, not specialists in my field, state, including sometimes our own health and safety authorities.

Who would assess me?

Chris
Ciarán Delaney  
#18 Posted : 05 July 2010 14:56:19(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Chris, to be honest, I haven't got an answer to that. I am just relating that there is a body operating under the auspices of the Irish Government, who will certify a course/provider of said course once they have scrutinised everything that you do and once they are satisfied that you have met all the criteria, they will accredit you.

Seamusosullivan  
#19 Posted : 05 July 2010 18:31:02(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Seamusosullivan





Ciarán, I am aware of an employee who suffered a back injury at work, the employer is a major supermarket. The employee received manual handling training. However on further investigation, I understand the trainers manual handling Instructors cert was out of date by about 6 months. I understand that was a crucial element to the employer having to pay out. The argument may be that the trainer was not qualified. I suppose the learning outcome of this would be to see the cert yourself and to keep a copy of it. Many inhouse manual handling instructors may not have certificates in date.




Ciarán Delaney  
#20 Posted : 05 July 2010 18:36:09(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Seamus, that is exactly the point I am making. I am trying to raise awareness of this, as a result of my friend making contact with me about this type of scenario.

There could be consequences for the person who hired them in good faith but didn't take the time to verify the bona fides of the company/trainer i.e. the sack.
alan_uk  
#21 Posted : 06 July 2010 15:53:32(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
alan_uk

I was immediately drawn to the wording of the original posting title - the correct approach would be to verify competence before booking the trainer. Ciarán then seems to have then answered most of his own questions in the posting itself and obviously has a good understanding of various methods of verification.
Ciarán Delaney  
#22 Posted : 06 July 2010 15:58:58(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Hi Alan,

Thanks for the post. As you can see, from seamusosullivans post, there has been consequences all ready for not having carried out the checks that I have pointed out for a major Irish company.
bleve  
#23 Posted : 06 July 2010 16:54:38(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
bleve

I am some what out of touch in relation to Occc Health. Seamus could you remind me what Irish statutory instrument or enactment prescribes the requirement for certification and duration of certification with respect to manual handling instruction?

It is also interesting to note that the New Fetac level 6 will be phased in over the next two years and is not mandatory for sole traders or individuals offering manual handling training.

bleve  
#24 Posted : 07 July 2010 15:08:20(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
bleve

Seamus,
Any chance you can help me with this? Also if you have the details of the case you referenced it would be a great help.

Thanks
Ciarán Delaney  
#25 Posted : 07 July 2010 21:05:33(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

bleve, I hope that no one will take offence at my answering the question you directed at Seamus but I asked for clarification at the IOSH Ireland Branch Executive meeting this afternoon what the official legal position is and an update regarding FETAC.

(a) No S.I. exists defining the time frame for length of certification of either Manual Handling Instructors
or validity of trainees certification.

(b) Under the 2007 General Application Regulations, there is a requirement for all employees who engage in
manual handling activities to be trained to carry out these duties.

(c) With the new FETAC system, the initial plan APPEARS to be is that once you are certified to deliver
manual handling as an instructor, you will be certified for life.

(d) The recipient of said training will be certified for a period of three years (This will be contained possibly
in a code of practice emanating from the HSA

(e) There is no exclusion for sole traders or individuals offering manual handling training.

This is what I have been told this afternoon, at the IOSH Ireland Branch Executive meeting by a person who is engaged in the process with FETAC in creating the new protocols.

Hope this is of assistance to you and to others who have an interest in this field

Regards,

Ciarán

ianjones  
#26 Posted : 07 July 2010 22:52:16(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
ianjones

Its an very interesting question

as a generalist consultant i can prove competency for manual handling via a certified manual handling instructor course and teaching certificate

but how do i proved competence to teach coshh?

yes i have IOSH certification, letters after my name and qualifications but what level do this qualify
me to teach too?

all i can do is be honest with the client and state what i feel comfortable to teach and what is a specialist area i.e asbestos or cdm
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.