Most websites have a functionality about number of hits, and where downloads are possible, number of downloads, including the IOSH website.

Some websites have an interactive part that asks you whether you want to chat or get help

I will not worry as we do not have to provide our personal details prior to downloading information from the HSE Website--exxcept that it can track cookies/IP addresses.

I have just downloaded L 24 there was no other interface that I could determine

I have tried that and yes, one has to fill in information--again I am personally not bothered as it would be my workplace details. This is not uncommon for downloading documents from oither websites, especilaly free material.

However, at the botton there is a statement, "HSE Books would like to keep you up to date with news about other publications and events. If you prefer NOT to receive these, please tick here"

The information requested is:-

First Name *
Surname *
Address Line 1 *
Address Line 2
Address Line 3
Town *
County
Country
Postcode *
E-Mail Address *
Telephone No.

* denotes that the field is mandatory and must be filled in

I for one don't agree that it is right to give this information to a government body without a clear explanation as to why it has started now and what it will be used for.
It is not the need for updates that is of concern to me-it is the provision of the information allied with what ever guidance is downloaded.
We will see what happens.

The formal response from "HSE Books" I received after I e-mailed them my "observation" was that this is a new "HSE policy" to see which items are being downloaded and who is requesting them.

If you look at the botton grey ribbon on most of the HSE Webages, it has several links including one for Privacy that in my view legitimises the information collection when downloading HSE Resources

http://www.hse.gov.uk/privacy.htm

I agree Chris. I am not at all sure why this is needed and what they will do with it.
It was especially interesting that an old and extremely experienced HSE inspector raised his concerns with me. There in lies a message in itself as far as I can see. Big brother lives for FFI.

Sounds like FFI is not getting the anticipated revenue and a charge is coming for HSE docs.

The HSE produces the ACoP & Guidance after due consultation etc, but the sale & dispatch of hard copy priced publications, as far as I am aware branded as HSE Books is outsourced to Prolog. I see nothing untowards in that as selling publications is not a core HSE activity.

I personally have no issues with HSE asking for some basic info prior to downloading the free & "priced" publications.

As far as I am aware, the primary rationale when the priced poublications were made freely downloadble on the web in 2009 was for SME's to access at low or no cost. My view has been that it is unlikely that SME's would have the inhouse personnel to effectively use it so in effect, HSE lost an income stream --as most of the actual users who stopped "buying" the publications (including myself!) were employers who probably could afford it.

However, all this is speculation as there does not seem to be an updated review of this that has been on the HSE Board meeting minutes recently.


http://www.hse.gov.uk/news/2009/free-guidance.htm

Just downloaded the aforementioned documents with no request for anything at all.
Maybe you need to "clean" your computers. Or question SysAdmin.

Dear All

I have downloaded many documents from the HSE website via HSE books and cannot recall ever needing to give information about myself. That the HSE might take this step should not be a surprise.

At the meeting of the HSE Board on the 13th August 2014 they considered a paper on their 'strategic vision'. It offered a draft statement on the vision 'HSE2020 Strategy'. This set out its commercialisation aims.

In the first section of the paper, one of the reason's for the draft statement was 'how best take forward the then Minister's direction that HSE should seek to develop as a priority its potential for generating commercial income.' Please note the phrase 'as a priority.'

The process of appointing a new Chief Executive of the HSE was halted and eventually Richard Judge was appointed, after those who knew about health and safety at work didn't make the grade for the new commercially orientated - under Minister's direction for generating income as a priority - HSE. The irony of someone whose professional skills were honed on insolvency proceedings being Chief Executive of the HSE should not be lost on people.

So it seems likely that over the next few years the HSE will seek any 'suitable' opportunity to increase its commercial income. No doubt the HSE's Commercialisation Steering Group will be working hard over the summer to realise such opportunities. However identifying what they are would be speculative at this stage.

However when they are announced they will - no doubt - make a major contribution in helping prevent injury and ill-health in the working population, if not just to the HSE's and the Treasury's coffers.

Cheers.

NigelB

When I was unemployed I relied on being able to keep up to date for free. If I had to pay for anything it would not have been possible for me.

Small company's wishing to do the right thing can at least obtain and do their best with the acops, but I suspect if they have to pay even these few instances will be lost.

How many of you have balked at the cost of a BS (especially as you are never sure if it has the answer you need) and just not bought it. I would hate to think ACOPS / Guidance will go the same way. Another nail for H&S.

Didn't we used to have a HSC and HSE, now we have some Gov puppets.

I don't mind FFI if caught doing wrong, then pay, seems fair enough. Why should tax payers and good company's pay to police the bad ones.

All my own ramblings ( sounds better than IMHO)

Chris