Hi All Has anyone else come across the situation where a contractor that they have engaged (lets call them Company A) has subbed out the work to Company B but the RAMS documentation is presented in such a way as you are led to believe that Company A is doing the work. My first thoughts were that it seems underhand. Even though the hazards are clearly presented and controls identified it seems wrong! We even confirm with all contractors that they have auditable means of approving their own sub contractors so this is not an issue. I guess that its done to make Company A appear larger than it is. Comments welcome on whether or not this seems good practice Cheers Rich

Hi Rich In construction and civil engineering this a fairly common practice. Subbing out to smaller or more specialised companies is often done because the main contractor does not have the available staff or expertise. In effect, the smaller company are working for the main contractor and usually work under their banner and documentation. There is nothing insidious about this practice, unless the contract specifically prohibits sub-contracting out, often I find it is not 'advertised' especially if using agency staff. If, everyone is singing off the same hymn sheet, then I do not see it as a problem. Ray

Not an issue I would suggest unless your appointment sub-contracts the work in its entirety and does not at least supervise his appointment ( I think that would potentially breach industry contract terms). That said, documentation you refer to should describe supervision arrangements. If your appointment is a CDM PC, things become even messier, but I think this often happens in that context too.