Posted By Neil Cooper
I believe the adage that you pay for what you get fits nicely here. The item was written by a sales director and it shows.

Posted By Paul Craythorne
I think the big danger with this sort of service (and there are others offering similar deals) is that the company who buys it will, in all innocence, believe that they are adequately covered for health and safety.

It won't be until the HSE/Env Health (or someone like me doing an insurance audit) visits the company and exposes weaknesses in the system that they will realise otherwise.

Perhaps the enforcement authorities should re-focus their attention.

Paul

Posted By Paul Craythorne
Annette,

We do seem to have struck a raw nerve with you.

My point, and I think that of the others, is not to carry out a 'Witch Hunt' as you put it but to make comment on the services on offer.

If you ran a small to medium sized business and didn't know anything about health and safety law and health and safety management you may, and I repeat may, be led to believe that purchasing such bargain delights would be the answer to all your prayers and thus leave you with a false feeling of being secure and immune from prosecution.

Let's face it, there are masses of companies out there who fall into the above category and some will no doubt be feeling quite comfortable if they have purchased such services.

However, I do agree with you that there are also companies out there who charge an absolute mint for a pile of irrelevant garbage that is only fit to wedge the door open with. I am working for a client now who purchased such a service at great cost.

I think the phrase 'Buyer Beware' should be applied to some offerings.

Paul

Posted By Robert Paterson
Hi to all

Although I concur with all the comments made about this website, it is concerning that the IOSH logo features at the bottom of the website which would indicate to the layman that this service has been endorsed by the Institute.

Can anyone from IOSH comment on this? Was the website and service checked out by IOSH and was permission given to use the logo?
I would like to think that use of the logo would be only allowed after strict conditions of use have been met.

I look forward to hearing from IOSH soon

Kind Regards

Robert Paterson

Posted By Geof
Have to agree with Annette on this one. Perhaps you've struck a raw nerve with me as well Paul!

You all seem to be getting upset/concerned, or call it what you will, but without any real foundation.

I suggest one of you pay for the service they offer and then comment. Until you do surely none of your comments are valid.

I know one thing, criticising without getting all the facts is not something I would encourage in this profession and I'm surprised you have even considered it on this thread.

Posted By Geof
Instead of speculating - ask them.

Posted By Nick Higginson
Frankly some of the comments in this thread beggar belief.

Are there really safety professionals out there who believe that "suitable and sufficient" risk assessments can be produced by a person that has never been to a site???? "From a few simple questions about the organisation"???

Hardly a blanket statement!

Nick

Posted By Geof
I'm agreeing again with Annette - have to put a stop to this!

Nick - I am a consultant. I have provided policies and risk assessments for clients without ever being on one of their sites.

Presumably that beggars your belief?

Before you issue words like incompetence, cowboy, kettle, black etc - you just step back and think about it.

If you ask the right questions you might get some reasonable answers.

Posted By Linda Crossland-Clarke
Hi
Just out of interest, how many of us actually believe the testimonials we read on sites and adverts like this? Do people actually check them out to see if they are genuine?
Linda

Posted By Nick Higginson
Annette

I totally agree that sample risk assessments can be provided as a starting point, but this must be made clear to the client.

The company that Paul pointed out appears to be offering these policies and risk assessments as a completed article. I cannot even see how this can be possible?

How can the risk assessments identify all the hazards? Identify all who are at risk? Identify which control measures are currently in place?

In my opinion, this is a con. It is taking advantage of small companies who are frightened into handing over unreasonable sums of money for something they could do themself. I agree that there are many others doing the same.

Kind regards

Nick

Posted By Geof
Hope Annette and Peter are OK with me using their words.

Annette
I just perceive some H&S professionals as being too rightous and unaccommodating/inflexible to changing circumstances or ways of working. What are you afraid of?

Peter
I suppose in conclusion, each site should be taken on its own merits. You need to find out about the service and products you are getting for you money, be it through a traditional consultancy service or via a web based service, and decide what is right for you.

I couldn't initially understand the opposition to the site in question (and I assume to others like it) until I put the above two comments together.

Surely these two comments are common (good) sense and together they encapsulate the fears being expressed on this thread?

We all need to move ahead, to move forward with the changing times.

The critics on this thread need to allow that companies must have some sense (otherwise they wouldn't survive) and they must have the freedom to choose the service they want.

It is important to note that this is not necessarily the one you think they should have.

Posted By Geof
At the risk of a debate within a debate - what you put depends on you (obviously), but I would be disappointed if you didn't consider the degree of risk as a factor that would influence your opinion/comments, and the scale of the required skills within the company.

Posted By Nick Higginson
Geoff and Annette make a valid point, but unless I have missed something, I don't think the services were advertised for just small shops and offices?

In fact, the actual words are "You may be a self employed builder or run a multi national corporation either way we are waiting to help..."

So what would Paul do if a multi national corporation have purchased a £99 h&s pack consisting of 3 risk assessments and a h&s policy?

Regards

Nick

Posted By Nick Higginson
Annette

Agreed. I think we were talking at cross purposes. I was talking about this site specifically and think I had seen enough from the website to be a concern.

Regards

Nick

Posted By Richard Spencer
I would be concerned to establish the bona fides of this organisation particularly as they have permission (it seems) to fly the IOSH banner?

Who is investigating this.

Richard

Posted By STEVE
Maybe the answer lies in the Company offering an additional service to the Client by showing them how to complete the R/A,or explain (verbally or writtenabout the documents) this would generate additional income for the Company(but could stillremain viable).

Also is this not similiar to the many hundreds of Training Courses offered via Computer based packages(is this the right method) through Internet Companies, got to move with the times.

Steve

Posted By Hilary Charlton
I don't see a problem necessarily. They are offering a health and safety policy document, most of which is, of necessity, pretty generic - with a quick word change my policy document could be adapted to suit any other Company.

They are also offering a series of templates and examples to help you get going. However, these risk assessments still need to be completed by in house personnel using the examples they have been given, the same for COSHH templates and the other services on offer.

Basically, it is cheap because they are providing the wherewithal to do-it-yourself. It is not an ideal situation as the ideal would be for everyone to employ a fully qualified H&S Practitioner, but we all know that this is not always possible.

This appears to be quite a good starting point for someone who currently has nothing, don't knock it until you try it.

Hilary

Posted By Richard Spencer
Louise

I don’t want to sound picky; the name is Richard or was the last time I looked. I assume this as I can’t find a ‘Robert’ on this thread that made the Logo point.

Correct me if I’m wrong?

Richard ;)

Posted By Lewis T Roberts
Robert, I counted that the posting was number 7.

Lew

Posted By Ralph Ellington
Paul, I am with you on this one. I believe that the health and safety policy needs to be tailored to the needs of the organisation. I think you are absolutely right to take time and trouble to visit your clients and find out what they do and how they do it. The same applies for risk assessment.

I find it hard to understand some of the comments of previous respondents who seem to be suggesting that health and safety policies and risk assessments for that matter should just be regarded as a commodity that can be used with minimal effort.

John thank goodness you are still on this forum to inject a bit of realism based on real life experiences. Long may you continue to contribute. The trouble is I think you are right. Far too many people regard health and safety policies as irrelevant. Far too many do not regard risk assessments as a tool to be used to help control risk – and yet this is precisely what they should be!

To see what policy is supposed to be just go back to the HSE publication "A Guide to the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974":-

"The purpose of the safety policy requirement is to ensure that employers think carefully about the nature of the hazards at the workplace and about what should be done to reduce those hazards and to make the workplace safe and healthy for their employees. The written safety policy must set out the employer's aims and objectives for improving health and safety at work. It must also set out the organisation and arrangements currently in force for achieving those objectives. 'Organisation' can be taken to mean people and their responsibilities and 'arrangements' to mean systems and procedures."

How much careful thinking is required to use one of these online policy / risk assessment writing services? Does it even matter any more? I was talking to a contractor who argued that policy does not matter as everything is covered in the construction phase health and safety plan required for CDM. So should anyone still worry about policy?

I would say yes as policy serves a different purpose, and anyway not all work is covered by CDM. The organisation section of the policy should say who does what. In an organisation of any size this may not be as straightforward as it seems. The arrangements section should say just what it is they do to control risks in the firm in which they work. O.K. so one can include material from other sources, how about the excellent GE700 Site Safety Manual? Surely even this has to be tailored to the particular work of the firm involved.

There is no point in including masses of information on topics that the particular firm never actually gets involved in. Neither is there any point in including just a few lines of flim flam on the main work of the company. Yet I have seen both these approaches taken.

Sorry Paul if I am drifting off the topic but I think policy and risk assessment are fundamental to good health and safety management. Perhaps if there could be more recognition of the purpose and value of these outside of the safety profession, rather than looking to get them done with the minimum of fuss and expense, then we might make real progress with accident and ill-health reduction. At the moment there is a lot of truth in what John says. I, for one, would like it to be otherwise.

Ralph