Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 23 February 2005 16:43:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By alan bradley
I advise several firms on their safety registration with the CHas Scheme which, when it first started, I thoought was a good idea. However it seems to be developing into a steady earner rather than a safety item.
To summarise:- The original CHAS cost about £120 per application and lasted for 3 Years. Now I am informed that they like you to register every year (still £120). Also if you are also registering for Constructionline (at a cost) they insist that you are not just compliant with CHAS but are also accredited. The accreditation comes from CHAS at an annual fee of £40 and entitles you to a certificate and an electronic logo. Most firms working for local authorities have to comply with both schemes. To my mind this devalues the two schemes from a Health and Safety point of view as it now looks like out and out profit seeking and bureaucracy. Does any one else feel the same?
Admin  
#2 Posted : 23 February 2005 18:16:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stuart Nagle
Alan.

From my understanding CHAS was started as an idea at a South London Borough Council, and was deemed good enough to be expanded and eventually adopted by most if not all councils for their schedule of rates and tendered works etc.

It set out specifically with the smaller contractor in mind, most of which were not compliant in respect of health and safety on site and this caused headaches for the local authorities employing them.

When CHAS first started it was a small operation, but has become increasingly popular as it also relieves the burden on local authorities to each continually check-up on contractors, thus costing the rate payers like you and I much money in continually repeated checks by the authorities.

CHAS is now a very large system and in line with this expansion, I would assume staffing to carry out checks, maintaining records and electronic systems etc also come at a price and that price is one which the applicants and users pay for, not the rate payers per se.

It seems fairly obvious to me, but perhaps not always to everyone involved using or applying for the certification, that as things grow and more input and resources are required, costs may increase to maintain and administer the service and someone has to foot the bills.

Whilst the case could be put of more customers less costs, this is a system that requires individual checking and acceditation and is not on a par with a wholesale operation where buying in quanity often achieves better prices....

Hope this helps.... (PS not involved in the CHAS system, but understand the principles)

Regards...

Stuart
Admin  
#3 Posted : 23 February 2005 18:26:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Linda Crossland-Clarke
Hi

I had heard (but don't quote me!) that one of these organisations (best not say) does not actually keep up to date records on its lists. So there have been occasions when local authorities have used contractors off the list only to find out that the criteria is not longer being met, as the contractor "joined" over 1 year ago. Something to consider, dont just presume a certain standard is met.
Linda.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.