Posted By Nick Higginson Stuart, You make some really good points here. I have just done an assignment on control of contractors for NEBOSH Diploma Part One, and it has really opened my eyes. Too many people take the view that it is only their responsibility to select the contractor. "What the contractor gets up to is his own business" is a dangerous view indeed.

Posted By Stuart Nagle Ken. Thanks for your comments. Yes I am in agreement with you on pre-start meetings for the 'larger' works, which usually takes place and in the most part, with larger organisations, is also included within their QA systems (ISO9000/9001 etc). The application of a 'Code of Conduct' is something I have heard of before, and is an interesting point. Perhaps you could expand a little on what this requires and how it is enforced (if necessary). Stuart Nagle

Posted By Nick Higginson Stuart, The assignment was in 2 parts: 1. Determine the key issues of contractor control through a review of legislation, guidance and case law. 2. Determine my company's current position by use of a survey, then recommend improvements. So as you can see, I learnt a lot about contractor control! The EEF (Engineering Employers Federation) publish a great booklet on client/contractor relationships which I managed to get hold of. Have you seen it? It mentions many of the points you made.

Posted By Nick Higginson Stuart, No problem. Book is called "Safety & Contractor/Client Relationships - The Good Practice Guide". EEF Details are: Telephone 020 7222 7777 Email enquiries@eef-fed.org.uk Website www.eef.org.uk As far as I am aware, the book is free, but I was given it on a seminar, so I'm not 100% sure. It includes: Establishing scope, Pre-tendering, Tendering (Risk Assessment, Permits, Competence), Awarding the contract, Managing the contract, Review, References, Appendices, Case Studies.

Posted By Nick Higginson Rob, Interesting you talk about overkill and excessive cost but employ contractors to repair a toilet seat?? I think the thread is generally discussing larger contracts, and my company is issuing a one page safety instruction/hint card for staff required to manage smaller contracts (5 staff or less on site at once) but these still need to be managed. Maintenance work you speak of would surely be under a maintenance contract, and this contract should be subject to all the things we have spoke of i.e. pre-contract meeting, supervision, monitor and review etc. TO say that "supervision doesn't come into it" is a dangerous view for any contract. A one man contractor can cause serious injury to himself or one of your staff if left to his own devices.

Posted By Nick Higginson Rob, I disagree with your view that you have discharged your duties as long as the risks have been assessed and the hazards notified. It is all well and good a contractor saying how he is going to control risks, but experience tells us this is not always the case. By "supervision" I don't mean checking on is work or looking over his shoulder. I mean checking that he is carrying out work as laid down in his method statements or risk assessments. It is not good enough to look at his risk assessment or his method statement at your desk and say, "Yep, that looks good enough for me, let him get on with it." I'm not talking about watching each individual contractor employee, but surely every contracting firm must have their health and safety performance monitored in some way? When i referred to danger, I was indeed referring to legal factors (criminal and civil), as well as the physical risk that contractors and your own staff can be placed at. Maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one? I'll endeavour to e-mail the hint card when it's completed. Regards Nick

Posted By Ashley Williams Interesting reading. I work for a small charity providing training and advice to the voluntary sector and have the same discussion on one of my courses. Its nice to see that this goes on in the real world too. I'll remember to keep using the liability hand outs. Ashley

Posted By Andrew Powell I am pleased to see that it is not just relatively new safety practitioners who have problems dealing with contractors. I have been in the "job" for 6 months now and need to take tighten up our contractors COP. I am particularly interested in your code of practice Laurie would you mind Emailing a copy?

Posted By Ken Taylor We have a policy statement on H&S in construction works and a code of conduct for contractors working on our properties - both as appendices to our H&S policy statement and issued to contractors as relevant. The code of conduct being part of the contract can be enforced in terms of contract compliance and the usual threat of not getting another contract! We have to rely upon the local management at the premises and visits by myself, our surveyors, planning supervisors, property manager and the like to monitor compliance. The items covered include: introduction; notice of commencement; notification of risks, safe and legal plant and equipment; statements of health and safety policy and safety precautions to be taken; insurance cover; COSHH assessments; lists of personnel; training; use of our tools and equipment, gas, electricity, water, etc; signage; dust control; noise; hot work permits; fire provision and training; electrical and gas safety; safe access equipment; provision of records of inspections; security - including searching, not taking photos, reporting losses and fencing; informing us of accidents; reinstatent upon completion; removal of refuse; etc. Particular reference is made in the policy statement to the vulnerability of children and elderly residents. Much of this may have been covered at the tendering and selection stage or in other standard conditions - but it's useful to pull these things together and clearly commit them in writing. Suggestions for improvement are always welcome!

Posted By Stuart Nagle Laurie. I would welcome a copy of your Code of Conduct. Double click on my name in 'BLUE' above to e-mail direct to me, and you can attach the file. Thank you very much. Stuart Nagle

Posted By Stuart Nagle Ken. I would welcome anything you could forward to me on this topic. To e-mail: double click on my name in 'BLUE' above and then attach files. If you require my postal address please let me know similarly. Thank you very much. Stuart Nagle

Posted By Robert Dee Laurie, I would also be interested in the Code of Conduct you have. Please let me have your e-mail address for me to give you my details. Stuart. Your use of the phrase "..a supervision rating which shall also be guaged by any supervisor against the skill and competence levels of the contractors employees.." reminds me of the 4 hour meeting with a company Health and safety officer discussing contractor site safety.She ALSO got confused and thought site supervision was something new, created by the Health and Safety Executive. "Supervision" of contractors has been going on before 1974! Trained and qualifed surveyors have done this since Stonehenge was built ( that's why its still standing) The RICS has a library(0207 222 7000) of books on site supervision.Checking the competence of a contractor's work comes with building contruction experience, not health and safety training. What you must not do is suggest to the Health and Safety fraternity that they run construction projects.Their role is to ensure that all who are involved in a project are aware of the risks, both for themselves and those affected by the work. This means a broad statement of competence, site assessment, monitoring of risks ( NOT workmanship)and final review. No, not as you suggest another list of check boxes for budding Napoleons. If your system of grading skill on site had been adopted by Neolithic man we would still be waiting for the second arch to be erected at Stonehenge because you'd have scared off the skilled labour willing to turn up on site.

Posted By Stuart Nagle Robert. Thank you for your interesting response on my phrasiology in respect of the term 'Supervision'. What I am concerned with is the supervision of safety on site, not specifically the craftsmanship skills employed. However, whilst it is obvious that the two go hand in glove in many areas, and as a Civil Engineer myself, I have undertaken the building of many (Henges)constructions in my time (and although not that old !!)., Site supervision in relation to building and construction skills is not what is at question here. Safety, in essence, demands that supervision is applied to 'ensure' the safety and health of all persons working within the employers undertaking. The supervision element in respect of H&S therefore is to see that what is required is employed on site. Whilst this extends to the works generally, the works issue is mostly addressed by the known competencies of skilled employees (Whether or not they are directly employed or sub-contractors)putting their skills to use (e.g electricians, plumbers, carpenters, bricklayers etc...) however, the need to ensure that safety generally is complied with is an 'additional' area that needs competent supervision to comply with the legal requirements. My argument, if that is what you would like to call it, is that this is failing and that adequate levels of supervision to ensure safety are not being met - but asking how to achieve that they are. You may well say that if supervision in respect of H&S is not being met, then supervision of the construction/works are not being met either, and would tend to agree with this finding to a greater degree. The argument you put foward, of course, could be countered by stating that; 1) just because a skilled craftsman is employed, it does not necessarilly follow that he/she will employ safe methods of work. 2) just because a skilled craftsman is employed, it does not necessarilly follow that he/she knows what is required to ensure the H&S requirements are met/fullfilled. 3) just because a skilled craftsman is employed, it does not necessarilly follow that he/she will not cut corners in H&S to achieve a personal target/do the job quickly/easily. call me sceptical if you wish, but in 30 years of both practical and managerial work on sites, I can state catagorically that these are common faults/floors in the method/manner of works undertaken, even by 'skilled' craftsmen/operatives. Unfortunately, possession of skill and experience is not a licence stating that the task/job will be done in a safe manner unless adequate levels of competent supervision are applied. After all, why else would chaps like yourself be employed if supervision was not deemed necessary for the competent completion of the construction itself, and of course, H&S professionals to ensure that safety is achieved !! best regards... Stuart Nagle

Posted By Ken A wise man once told me that when dealing with contractors you get what you inspect......not what you expect.