Yes in a word. You are responsible for the advice that you give and if that advice is negligent, then you can face civil actions and possibly criminal prosecution against you. That is what your Professional Indemnity insurance is designed to cover and it is the same for any profession, accountancy, law, architecture etc. If you can show the correct advice was given but the client failed to act then you probably have a defence. However, you can still incur costs going about proving this since many solitors acting for claimants will go after anyone they feel has had an involvement in the matter. We handle hundreds of such cases each year by the way* One criminal case that I do recall is the Fatty Arbuckle case. Young lad fatally electrocuted at a restaurant in Lincoln. The H&S advisor employed by the chain was an ex EHO and concentrated on the food safety risks, ignoring electrical safety. * My employer is the company that provides the professional indemnity cover for IOSH members through a scheme arrangement. I work for a different division and have no active role in the sales of such insurance policies though. You may feel my advice is biased because of this but I'm sure others will back it up.

Sorry, should read duty holders are normally the employer, not employee.

As the link shows the employer cannot 'outsource its responsibilities' but the consultant is still accountable The article implies he was contracted to do the assessment but failed (totally inadequate). The companies failure was a failure to ensure the advice received was competent. It's odd that the article, while admitting the consultant doesn't divulge the level. Was he associate or CMIOSH. If the later he may well have been on the impending register. So much for it ensuring the advice given is competent. Just goes to show that letters after the name aren't everything, coming back to competence = knowledge AND experience. I haven't read up on the register but does it include areas of competence to prevent this situation arising as that would be of more use to the employer. As for advice, as an employed adviser I am constantly told I am not responsible. I am not so sure and it does help any when the advice is ignored. You can say 'I tried' but there is still a moral argument if something happens. Also don't forget the IOSH code, in effect if you constantly offer advice that is ignored should you continue to offer your services, simply as a source of revenue. We had, many many years ago an annual review by a consultant, bringing up the same issues (some serious) which seemed like a nice little earner with no comeback.

This a constant worry for me as I advise many SME's who then decide the recommendations I make are too expensive, or even too much trouble! e.g. SME's I have advised have failed to: - repair fire alarm systems - conduct fire drills - install smoke alarms, purchase klaxons (where there is no alarm system or sprinklers) - repair jammed fire doors - segregate pedestrians from traffic area where trucks turn around - inform me of new jobs that require risk assessment and method statements - stop un-trained drivers using fork-lift trucks - modify unguarded processes - improve welfare (hot water, toilets) I make sure all my advice is documented, dated, saved, backed-up.

This might be a useful quote from Judith Hacket, chair of HSE at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/ab...cripts/hackitt261110.htm "I also believe it is important that the true role of those who are charged with managing safety is properly understood -especially by senior managers and leaders. Those whose job title is "safety management"are there to ensure that everyone else is playing their part in managing safety as an integral part of every person's job. It is not to do it for them and most certainly it is not possible for senior managers to delegate the leadership of safety to one director or individual. Acting as the conscience or the champion of safety within an organisation is one thing - fragmentation of functions to the extent that senior managers believe that safety responsibility belongs with someone else is another." Steve

I believe everybody is singing from much the same hymm sheet. Without exploring the semantics or definitions of responsibility, accountability, liability etc, in effect it is your responsibility to give 'good' advice and not to give advice that you aren't competent to give. Once the advice is given, there is little you can do to 'force' the recipient to take the advice. Depending on the circumstances I give a couple of nudges and may point out the error of their ways but other than that there is little to be gained by banging your head to many times or too hard. In saying that, if you feel that there is an imminent risk of serious injury or worse then your choices are somewhat different and a matter for your own conscience. I suspect I know what most of us might do. The IOSH Code might be of some assistance in this, and IOSH do have an ethics officer who may also be able to offer some advice, help and support. Bottom line is that you can't force people to take your advice, and I suggest that it is always good practice for any H&S practitioner whether self employed and acting as a consultant or in an internal position to record and archive any 'significant' advice they have given, subsequent follow ups etc'.

I could not count the amount of times I have provided advice, whether as an employee or a consultant, which has not been (properly) implemented. Most of the time it is relatively low risk recommendations, but on occasions it is a higher risk. There is very little that the h&s adviser can do in these circumstances. The onus is on the employer or whoever they delegate to manage. If it is a serious issue then an option would be to escalate the matter to senior management. However, if senior management are responsible, then once again not much can be done about it other than perhaps to whistleblow to the authorities. It is a fact of life that some people choose to ignore advice for whatever reason. The consequences of such action, assuming it was reasonably practical to implement, is on their head and no one else. The giving of advice should not, and does not, infer liability as well.

If roofing remedial works are to be carried out & the CM has no funds for a scaffolding to the perimeter of the building. He tells the safety advisor the work can be carried out from a MEWP with the employee attached to the MEWP whilst on the roof via a Rope & clutch with safety harness. H&S Advisor advises harness as a last resort, but the work are carried out using the MEWP/Harness as a scaffolding is not reasonably practicable. If the operative were to fall by not using the Rope & clutch properly or working outwith the footprint of the MEWP basket. Where does the law see the H&S advisor as he has been instrucet to carry out a MS/RA for the remedial works ? No MEWP should be used as edge protection or as an anchor point, but this has happened What do you think the courts would say/do to the H&S advisor? Mr H&S

Mr H&S If the operative were to fall by not using the Rope & clutch properly or working outwith the footprint of the MEWP basket. Where does the law see the H&S advisor as he has been instrucet to carry out a MS/RA for the remedial works ? Would you do the risk assessment for this works, and recommend that the MEWP is used? What would your RA say. The method statement for the works should be produced by the supervisor/manager and as such should be supervised by him. In reality you may well do the RAMS, but would you for this operation to be carried out in this manner? You can lead a horse to water, you can not make him drink.

The problem is - as I and others always say "you don't know what you don't know" and so may miss something because you are not aware of the exact requirements. I carry our site inspections and try to cover everything but there are areas that I am not 100% knowledgeable about. I wonder if I missed something in one of those areas would I be responsible? Recently I had a client saying I was too over the top and should just stick to the basic regulation requirements and not go for best practice. This because of the expense involved trying to achieve a higher standard - but some were basic regulations not being followed. I will do what he says but have everything written and saved just in case.