Posted By Dave Wilson Would go for inhouse every time! How does an outsourced HS&E person get to know the 'culture' of a company on a 1 day a month visit? External people with 'special skills' could then be used for special circumstances or with a particular project! The Man Regs guidance (Reg 7 I think) says that H&S advice if possible should be gained from inhouse, if I remember rightly. This thread could get interesting!!!!!

Posted By Jim Walker Depends on size & risk levels, I would say. A small firm could not justify a well qualified and experienced (where would you get the experience anyway?) practitioner, full time. Part time, they could get a top person (maybe with a clutch of similar clients) giving them best practice advice. Those who are saying "in-house" are either thinking big (ish) concerns or have experiences of the "consultants" who have rubbish qualifications and know how. One size does not fit all and remember there are an enormous amount of small companies out there with no advice at all, contrary to legal requirements. A proper H&S advisor one day per month would be an incredible step forward for many of these, where the H&S bloke(ess) is in actual fact the sign putter up and little else. In my previous job, there was not enough to keep me busy once I had set up systems, and I was bored out of my skull. I've now moved to a company that needs 10 full time H&S advisors of various levels. My old firm is doing OK with a chap who goes in for one day a week to maintain the H&S system I left behind.

Posted By Paul Craythorne Having been a practitioner for 14 years and now I am a self employed consultant I have to agree with Jim that the circumstances should dictate the resource requirement. A large organisation should have no problem justifying the employment of a full time HS&E Advisor/Officer/Manager with support from external consultants where required whereas it may be impractical for an SME with limited financial resources and therefore they would have to rely on someone like me or Nick to service their needs on an interim basis. Regards, Paul Craythorne

Posted By Geoff Burt Dave says how else could anybody possibly understand the culture of a company on one day a month. Really? That bias is coming out again Dave!

Posted By Raymond Rapp Malcolm, Good question and I see the 'usual suspects' are at it again! Always looking for an original slant (can't find one though)I would have to agree with In-House H&S, with some caution. I believe the updated MHSW Regs 1999 refer to competence of h&s advice by implying that a person should have a knowledge of the organisation/work. Which makes sense to me. Nevertheless there are draw backs with in-house in that they may be more inclined to overlook or take for granted certain situations. Therefore, out source can add a 'fresh eye' to the brew. There could be a good argument for both in some industries. Not sitting on the 'fence' I hope? Regards Ray

Posted By Jim Sweetman Malcolm, Your respondees have hit the nail on the head -it is not a 'black and white' situation! MSHWR Reg 5 requires 'arrangements as are appropriate'. How easily can an outside adviser get to know the organisation in order to be able to advise how the organisation can meet this requirement? Part of my role includes assessing the suitability of contractors for quite large contracts. Those that have been using Consultant advice have rarely been able to show how their management implement their procedures. Interesting thought though, a large organisation that is trying to say, 'we have good systems (not just H&S) in place, employ us', is not prepared to pay for what is effectively a legal requirement. In line with what has been said earlier, if I want to make an effective point, it is sometimes best to have an outsider deliver the message, as an inside response would be ignored. It will be interesting to see how this thread develops. Jim