Posted By Lee Ainsworth I apologise for showing my ignorance, but I won't learn if I don't ask. Now that IOSH has received the Chartered status: 1. What effect if any, will it have on the membership? 2. Also, will the membership be restructured in any way? Again sorry for the ignorance but I have seen articles discussing membership and wondered if this had any relevance. Lee

Posted By Philip McAleenan In effect Bob, the position is that the change to Chartered status means that IOSH will "surrender[s]significant aspects of the control of its internal affairs to the Privy Council. Amendments to Charters can be made only with the agreement of The Queen in Council, and amendments to the body's by-laws require the approval of the Council (though not normally of Her Majesty). This effectively means a significant degree of Government regulation of the affairs of the body,..." (see www.privy-council.org.uk) regards, Philip

Posted By Wai Ming WU Would we use any chartered title similar to CEng in future?

Posted By Robert K Lewis Individuals will not have a chartered status as the Institution itself is the chartered. Richard I know where you are coming from Bob

Posted By Robert K Lewis I am not certain that CIEH Pract. is a formal usage and if so how it came about Bob

Posted By Bryn Maidment Clearly a lot of hard work has gone into achieving this - congrats! Sorry to spoil the party but what will be the actual benefits of Chartered status for IOSH and members. "enhancing the status of IOSH" etc. etc. How exactly? IOSH hasn't changed has it? So can someone explain why so much effort and resources have been put into achieving this label. To me, as a relative young 'un, Chartered equates to stuffy, outdated, bureaucratic, dinosaur driven and jobs worthy. Please convince me otherwise. Have suggested before that an article in the THSP would be an idea!

Posted By Bryn Maidment I have no doubt that effort etc. has been expended in achieving this 'label' and I commend that. My concern is over how this subject has been communicated to members. IOSH is a professional body and is recognised as a leading light in H & S. Influencial nationally and internationally. So how will Chartered status improve this. What hoops does IOSH have to jump through to get it? What improvements have to be made to the organisation that make it more professional than before. Having some crusty embellishment doesn't make IOSH better than before UNLESS in order to get it some very real improvements are made. Tell me what they are please. I am ripe for having my mind changed believe me, but I don't know what it's about and would welcome the opportunity to improve my knowledge. I am not alone in this. How about that article in THSP to explain it all. Not just the usual "you should be proud" chants. 'Communications' sums it up I think!

Posted By Philip McAleenan There are those who may think that being a chartered institute is not so wonderful. Several questions have been asked in this thread, re. what happens to democracy in IOSH, and status of members? I wonder if these words from one member of the Privy Council, Roy Hattersley, written two years ago (Guardian Dec. 14 2000), would have any bearing on how the new status may be viewed. On democracy he wrote, "At worst the privy council is neither an instrument of baronial tyranny nor the last bastion of monarchist power. It is simply pointless. The usual complaint against it (normally made by Tony Benn) is that it is the institution through which orders in council are made and the royal prerogative exercised - both potential abuses of our parliamentary system. But the blame lies with ministers. The Privy Council only provides the flummery which camouflages their autocracy". He went on with some items which showed how the democratic will of parliament and one local police authority were both threatened with the Royal Prerogative unless they "voluntarily" did what the government and Home Office wanted, and concluded "No government could have survived so gigantic an affront to parliamentary government. But the royal prerogative is still used to legitimise smaller acts of autocracy...Power lies with politicians. So does the opportunity for power's abuse... It is one of those elements in our constitution which, because they have arcane rules and archaic associations, exist to prove that real power lies in places remote from everyday life". And what does he say about status, "The privy council is part of the deferential society", and "The aura of the privy council is attached to both institutions because of two peculiarly English diseases - the belief that association with the sovereign reinforces authority and the conviction that antiquity increases respect". So what does all this mean for IOSH? That internal democracy has been surrendered in favour of ministerial autocracy and that we return to the days of doffing our caps at the bosses? Regards, Philip

Posted By Shaun Deely Congratulations IOSH and all who contributed. As another younger member of the family I too wonder what this newly conferred honour will bring to us in a practical sense? Will it gove a bigger voice or, dare I whisper, more power to affect change directly where safety is concerned? I for one fervently hope so, and look forward to reading the next issue of SHP with more than usual anticipation.

Posted By Bryn Maidment I'm sorry if this is starting to sound like a stuck record but I'm still not convinced that this status will enrich our lives nor bring increased benefits to the world of safety. I haven't heard a single valid argument / comment / reason why this status will make us any better at our jobs or IOSH more effective. Does anyone else share my doubts about this whole Royal association business? The majority of responses have been about praising the hard work of IOSH staff (quite rightly so). The majority of questions have related to individuals and the possibility of them using new letters after their names. It does appear to me that the whole issue is one of perceived kudos. I look forward to the SHP article and hope it answers my questions.