Rank: Forum user 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Thanks Shineon - this is a really good read. As you say, the comments around FFI are very interesting. Mr Temple is very forthright in expressing his concerns, and his recommendations reflect much of the suggestions made in this forum since the cost recovery scheme's inception.
It will be very interesting to see if our parliament takes as much notice of this as they did the Young and Lofstedt reports! Although frankly I doubt it....
Thanks again - the document was only issued yesterday!
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
ALSO
Anyone with an interest in consultancy should read recommendation 5.20, and the discussion at paras 81 to 83. Draw your own conclusions as to the potential impacts if this recommendation is implemented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
steve e ashton wrote:ALSO
Anyone with an interest in consultancy should read recommendation 5.20, and the discussion at paras 81 to 83. Draw your own conclusions as to the potential impacts if this recommendation is implemented. A very good read, not sure though whether the larger companies with mature SMSs would be as willing as the comments suggest to engage such individuals......& the costs? Having previously been at the 'helm' of a 'blue chip' global corporation, the 'in-house' individual may feel threatened so the request for assistance, IMHO, is unlikely to come from him/her. However, if it happens, well in my experience there are more than enough SMEs & smaller businesses to go around to keep consultants busy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Victor:
I agree with your analysis of the potential impact on 'in house' resource...
I think my own concerns arise from my perception of how previous reports etc on the H&S scenery have been 'acted upon' by this government. For me, it is not too great a leap to imagine DC and his cronies reading paras 3.80 - 3.86 and immediately embarking on a wholesale privatisation of the advice and assistance functions of HSE... It's not how it is said - its how it may be heard....
And - If HSE does start to charge for its advice and assistance - what (if any) safeguards will be needed to prevent 'unfair commercial advantage' over existing consultancies? HSE can trade on their 'brand', and if they continue to use Central Services for things like IT and HR support - these costs (and the benefits of scale they bring) must be factored in (as for a Local Authority DLO for example but more so...)?
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I am afraid that the HSE by undertaking commercial (voluntary) inspections will not be able to demonstrate impartiality for its principal role, i.e enforcement, unless it creates a completely independent group of "inspectors" . I would call them auditors if we are referring to large organisations with mature systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
HSE have historically done some project work that could best be described as fulfilling this role -- I can remember various companies - normally very large ones being voluntarily subject to a detailed 3 or 4 week audit. So nothing new...
One of the major difficulties it appears they currently have is the lack of experienced inspectors. Last month I was told by an ex colleague that Basingstoke office now has less than 10 experienced inspectors as since FFI the others have simply left. I suggest this is even more of a problem as with the skill also goes the culture.... the FFI culture is completely different and without the " old guard" it may be difficult to turn the ship around now that it has changed direction....
Anyway interesting read -- I like that comment that the Board needs to consider if they are suitable and having decided then take an active involvement in recruiting their replacements - is that the same line as HSE's consultation process?
Very much a hanging judge I think
Slightly worried about the social media bit... but can see that if they can make direct contact to people than a quick tweet -- put your mask on ... yes you you muppet may be very effective... and it does go with the drip drip approach that seems to be most effective
Anyway good news for field staff - you are doing a vital and well respected job - bad news for senior managers - you are in danger of ruining all of the historic good work and need to bin FFI and sort yourselves out very quickly would be my conclusion........
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
A fair response from IOSH. Not often that I 'like' any of the institutions pronouncements but this one is good.
The fears for further commercialisation (and consequent inevitable loss of independence / impartiality) seem to have been avoided or skirted around by other commentaries...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.