Hi If you had to familiarise yourself with the above, what would your main points be? Also if anyone has any links to read about this that would be great, I have tried the HSE but they only have 2007 I don't know if there was much change? Thanks

Thanks Peter Can you think of any reason why I would have been asked to do a presentation on OHSAS18001 2008? I have just sat my GC and hopefully understood HSG65, Im in uncharted waters!

BS OHSAS 18002:2008 is the guidelines for implementation of BS OHSAS 18001:2007. Perhaps whoever asked you just got a bit mixed up.

BS 18000 Series of Occupational Health & Safety Standards:- The first is BS OHSAS 18001:2007, which specifies what an organization needs to have in place to meet the criteria for occupational health and safety management in order to meet the requirements for certification. It superseded OHSAS 18001:1999 BS OHSAS 18001 is supported by BS OHSAS 18002:2008, which gives guidance on what an organization should consider when implementing and operating a system that meets the requirements of BS OHSAS 18001. It supersedes OHSAS 18002:2000 BS 18004:2008 gives good practice guidance on successful health and safety management, and builds on the guidance advocated in HSG 65. Structured around the OHSAS 18001 framework, it provides guidance in line with developments in OHS management within the UK and provides extensive annexes intended to support those organizations that wish to deliver good health and safety performance. BS 18004 takes the form of guidance and recommendations. it should not be quoted as if it were a specification and particular care should be taken to ensure that claims of compliance are not misleading. any user claiming compliance with BS 18004 is expected to be able to justify any course of action that deviates from its recommendations. We have ended with this situation because of the "history" and lack of consensus in the BSI Technical committee HS/1 when the first "British Standard" for Occupational Health and Safety Management was published as BS 8800 in 1996. To cut a long story short, BS 8800:1996 was confusing to some as it had 2 paths, one following the ISO 14001 route and the other HS(G)65. This occurred because ISO 14001 was just being published at that time. It also did not lend itself to be used by certification bodies for certification ( i.e it was not auditable!). Therefore, the certification bodies together with BSI published OHSAS 18001:1999 in 1999 followed by OHSAS 18002:2000 in 2000. They could not call it a standard because to be a standard, it has to be supported by the Technical Committee HS/1 which was not the case. Then there was a revision of BS 8800 in 2003/4, which culminated in dropping the ISO 14001 route and aligning it more with HS(G)65 and ILO-OHS 2001. This was possible because there was OHSAS 18001 & 18002 for those who wanted to go for certification or aligning with ISO 14001. The practical reality was that OHSAS 18001 has become a de-facto international standard. This was despite not being an ISO standard. BERR (previously DTI) only some few years ago included OHSAS 18001 as one that could be accredited fairly recently in its MoU with UKAS. I presume that this led to a rethink by BSI's HS/1 committee and acceptance that it makes sense to have all Occupational Health and Safety Management Standards in the same series--which 18001 & 18002 were, the odd one being BS 8800:2004. Therefore BS 8800:2004 when revised has become BS 18004:2008! There is also an international dimension in that within ISO, BSI proposals to commence work on an international standard for an Occupational Health and Safety Management System failed twice, in 1997 and around 2000.

Just to add a little bit of thought here and apologies for being a bit off tangent. Oncw you have looked at the stuff ask yourself the question "Are safety management systems thebest way to manage H&S?" There is an important discussion here as there is a strong argument to say that such systems are NOT the best way of managing H&S to achive ultimate standards of H&S. It is management that is in final control and it is the whole management system of the company that affects H&S far more than a standalone SMS can ever do. We need to be able to map processes and design change models that work with the Company overall MS to control the risks of the business. Surely risk evaluation and control are within our sphere of expertise so how do we address the business risk issues? How then do we combine our needs into those of the company? We cannot cover ourselves with the comfort blanket of our very own SMS in the belief that we are making a difference. In the 1990s BP made some bold initiatives under a solid leader and made significant steps to creating new waya of managing risk, although they stopped short in the end. It was with the fading of that leadership that problems began to occurr. If we are to support our leaders we have to stop protecting our patch and concentrate on becoming the adviser and assistant to our leaders who actually control events. Bob