Rank: Forum user 
|
Hello,
I have Nebosh general only, however I train safety reps at each site of the company I work for on fire training and I also fire risk assess new sites.
I only know what was taught in the Nebosh which wasnt that much and common sense.
Am I required by law to have training in order to carry out these duties or is it recomended I do?
I would like to enhance my skill set , however I have to have a good case to get training approved by my director for myself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hi Lisa. I wouldn't feel comfortable with doing a fire risk assessment with just the NEBOSH Cert. Have a look at the document here: http://www.britishfireco..._competency_document.pdfCan you confidently say that you tick the boxes? Depending on what sites you assess, if lower risk levels, the NEBOSH Fire Cert may suffice. If I were you I would pitch for something higher. http://www.vulcanfiretra...__fire_manager__2011.pdfOther training providers exist- I have no commercial connection to them- just a satisfied customer. There is no legal requirement for you to have a recognised fire qualification. Hope this helps. Andy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
are U a professionally trained trainer/educator as if not you need to cover these areas as well
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
bob youel wrote:are U a professionally trained trainer/educator as if not you need to cover these areas as well Does she need to be Bob? I recall conducting training on our worksites with no qualification at the time. Without knowing the scope of Lisa's training package, I would say that training safety reps on their duties, the role etc wouldn't necessarily require a professional training course. And, as long as she's within the remits of her knowledge on fire, passing on fire prevention / safety, in-house company procedures I woudn't say she needs a professional training qualification there either. However Lisa, I did my CIEH Train the Trainer which provides me with the basic knowledge to prepare and deliver training courses. Good luck with whatever studies yo udecide to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
A reason I say that you should be a trained trainer is the fact that if you end up in court this question about trainer competence is regularly asked and if you cannot demonstrate competence your professionalism is at question
The old way of working e.g. 'Sitting next to Nelly' is not the new way of working and not all of us can train just by knowing our subject we also need to know about cognitive, affective, experiential learning and other educational subjects that help a person train and educate properly
Just my thoughts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I agree with you Bob. It can be an issue sometimes in odd ways. All my team can train, and they have different approaches, but they are all variously qualified. One of them teaches safety law on a NEBOSH Dip course, but his only training qualification is an in-house certificate from a consultancy he worked for. He's desperate to get himself technically qualified, as he feels a bit out on a limb if the dreaded 'competency' question was ever to be asked. Competency is a mix of many things (and he is a competent, even a very good, trainer), but it usually gets the conversation with the enforcers off on the right foot if you can wave a piece of paper at them,
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
bob youel wrote:A reason I say that you should be a trained trainer is the fact that if you end up in court this question about trainer competence is regularly asked and if you cannot demonstrate competence your professionalism is at question
The old way of working e.g. 'Sitting next to Nelly' is not the new way of working and not all of us can train just by knowing our subject we also need to know about cognitive, affective, experiential learning and other educational subjects that help a person train and educate properly
Just my thoughts As I've been in this scenerio, I feel "qualified" to answer...! We had an employee who took the company I worked for to court for a manual handling injury sustained. As I was the person who trained him, I was called to attend. At no time was I asked if I had a professional training qualification. I was asked about my H&S qualifications and also the synopsis of the course I delivered. The chap in this instance, was unsuccessful. Competence is an one of the greyer areas. Who deems the person assessing is competent, and the person assesing him etc etc. I think you have to apply a degree of sensibility. Without knowing the synopsis of the course, it is impossible to say whether an additional qualification is needed. If Lisa's fire marshals are required to sweep the building, take the roll call etc, i.e. company arrangements, then I would say no training required. If Lisa's company was training fire marshals to operate different fire extinguishers for different fires and complicated behaviours of fire, structural effects etc then, no. However, I am fully qualified in H&S, 10 years experience in H&S, and hold a training qualification, but I wouldn't even begin to start to train in the subject, as I don't deem myself competent as it's outwith my limitations. What I'm trying to demonstrate here is practicality and sensibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi Lisa,
I don't believe there is a statutory requirement to have teaching qualifications to 'teach' others H&S.
If you were teaching an accredited course then the course provider may expect a certain level of H&S qualification/competencies and possibly a teaching qualification as well.
The RR(FS)Order 18 states that a responsible person must appoint a 'competent person' to undertake the fire risk assessment, 18 (5) goes on to define a competent person as someone who has sufficient training and experience or knowledge and other qualities.
So you need to consider whether you are competent to carry out an FRA based on the content of the NGC alone.
If you are specialising in fire then the NGC is unlikely to be sufficient and my thoughts echo Motorhead that I wouldn't want to do an FRA with just the NGC, unless it was on a very very simple premises.
The British Fire Consortium published a document at the end of last year titled Competency Criteria for Fire Risk Assessors (Just realised MH has done a link!). I would suggest you read this with your boss and then decide whether you need additional training to carry out fire risk assessments.
If your sites are complex or the work carried out needs a higher level of fire safety procedures or fire protection measures then it would be sensible for you to have additional training.
I was once asked by a HSE inspector what qualifications and experience a trainer who we had used to do some simpe H&S training had themselves, and this was just for a tool box talk type scenario.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.