Posted By Pugwash The profession was on the radio programme "I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue" this evening (Radio 4 Mondays 18:30-19:00 Repeated: Sundays 12:00-12:30). The idea of the game was that one of the teams was organising an event and the other team were "safety advisers" who had come along to muck it up. There was a wedding at which the advisers recommended everyone wear dark glasses, hearing protection and hard hats because of the glare from the white wedding dress, the noise of the church bells and the risk of foreign objects in the confetti. The bride and groom planned to go to Basra for their honeymoon. The safety advisers thought this was fine. It all worked rather well and fitted in with the audience's idea of what safety advisers are all about. Yes...image problem indeed.

Posted By Merv Newman I do think that IOSH are trying very hard to change our image. But we have such a long tradition as killjoys, regulation quoter's, production losers, cost raisers andsoonandsoonandsoon. And when our dearly beloved president can only get an article (on us being danger experts) in something like the Scunthorpe Times then it will be an uphill battle for a long time to come. That said, do I have anything constructive to say ? Thinks. Parental Warning : The following is likely to degenerate into a sort of stream-of-consciousness Molly Brown monologue. Well then. For a start I think that maybe "Risk Manager" could be a sexier title than "health and safety officer" But I could be wrong. Again, how many studies are there out there which show us saving lives and money ? And increasing production efficiency and quality ? It's a silly thing, but if we do our jobs right absolutely nothing happens. So there is no "image building" there. By the way, does the IOSH annual jolly ever get reported in even the local press ? Can't ever remember even a mention in the Times. Do any of the TV business programmes ever examine H&S in a positive or at least realistic fashion ? Could Jeremy Clarkson show us how he (mostly) ensures safety during the making of his programmes ? That I would really like to see. (sponsored by IOSH ?) Rob, you must still have the contacts. Any help here ? In fact, who is ensuring the safety of BBC journalists in the current war zones ? And how do they do it ? What about circuses and film stunters ? I'll let this dribble off now but I seem to be suggesting a series of "how H&S works" in high profile events ; Formula 1, eventing, journalists, riding your bike to work. What does the BBC (?) do when Jamie Oliver is having a quick Flambé ? Stop there Merv. I can hear your brain burning. Merv (waiting for wife to come home from choir practice. Rarely a high risk activity)

Posted By Pete48 Jonathon, I have taken it that you mean to consider this as a "collective of professionals" and not as individuals. Here are my first 5 for thought, no special rationale; just the way they came out of my head tonight. 1. Sort out this open forum. It is time we had, at least, a clear and an explicit warning about the fact that we may host it but it is not the voice of IOSH and its members. This warning to appear on any page that opens from the open chat forum. 2. Accept that we work in an area where the contradiction of individual freedom and societal control is always available to those who would use the gap for their own purpose. Recognise that we cannot change that, perhaps no rebuff of the obviously puerile is a better approach. Where we choose to respond, then make sure we do it forcefully and honestly; use some Clarkson type approaches and say it is rubbish. Bad decisions are bad decisions NOT bad H&S. 3. IOSH should continue to have an agenda and push that agenda very hard. This should include regular challenges to “street myths” (i.e attack not defence), provide clarification on issues that may be H&S related but are not H&S issues (litigation fears for example), and should also push the technical topics that are important at the time. The message format needs to be very professional and based on good professional marketing techniques. (Which no doubt they currently are) Information or briefing packs for members, perhaps on the closed part of the site, might also help to ensure we can stay on message as individuals. I see this as different from Editors notes. 4. Continue to improve our skills as professionals. Counsel is often a more important part of our work than direction. Too many quote too often from the rule book before understanding the business decision under review. Business is about risk management, SFARP is not an absolute duty and the world is not a perfect place. Where either the codes are explicit and clear or the law is absolute we must ensure this is known to decision makers, where they are less clear then we must help to identify a reasoned basis for the risk decision that a business has to make. 5. Make available and encourage better use of benchmarking to “advise and support” safety professionals. One way to do this would be to have an approved Q&A section on the website for members covering common “grey” areas.

Posted By Adrian Watson Merv, No way do I quote regulations. That's not allowed by the Regulation 1 of the Not quoting of regulations regulations 2001. I'm also not a killjoy, as that's my wife's job - she said so and means it. Regards Adrian ;)

Posted By Adrian Watson Pete, On a more serious note, I agree! We all should take a breather after making a decision... count to five ... and take a sanity check! If if fails the sanity check - would be laugh and roll about if we heard it from the shop floor - we should shut up, put up and walk away. Regards Adrian

Posted By Ken Taylor I wonder whether the other 'target' professions engage in all this soul-searching too (eg tax inspectors, bank managers, estate agents, insurers, vicars, motor mechanics, traffic wardens, etc. What should we do? How about: appearing less pompous or arrogant; seeking to advise on doing things safely rather than going for the easier option of stopping them; seeking to appear more as carers than kill-joys; and developing a sense of humour - even about ourselves at times. As long as we have newspapers there will be writers looking to reinforce stereotypes by reporting, elaborating or inventing 'news' at the expense of 'target' professionals. At least let's try not to provide their ammunition.

Posted By Gareth W Jones Merv, Like the Jeremy Clarkson one, sorry this is written first thing in the morning not late at night (In my contemplating state).. I do believe that to change an image we have to look at the new generation (Our kids) from this generation we are already seeing an interest in the Environment, I think the HSE/IOSH should look at promoting safety as part of education, I know the IOSH have looked at things such as the "Box" perhaps we should be doing more for this generation???

Posted By Peter Longworth We can give up continually worrying about litigation for a start. Companies can only be successfully sued if a duty of care that was owed is breached and someone suffers a loss that was foreseeable ie if the company was negligent. If we as H&S professionals concentrate our minds on that and stop bleating about the so-called litigious society and worrying about whether we are liked or not then maybe public perception will change. As I said earlier just do your job to the best of your ability.

Posted By Peter Longworth In that case litigation isn't the issue, it would be criminal prosecution. Either way it's the job of the H&S professional to make sure that companies fully understand what is required of them.

Posted By Ralph Baqar I have to agree with RobT. Many of the safety practitioners that I encounter pontificate about rules and regulations rather that solving the problem e.g. cost effective, practical solutions that minimise risk. I work in the construction industry and encounter these so call ‘consultants’ who deem themselves as experts (from individuals with the Managing Safety cert, I’m not kidding!, through to corporate members) the majority of these individuals have little or no expertise and practical knowledge in the field.

Posted By J Knight To Steve and others, Like it or not H&S is about law, and many of the questions on here need quotations from regulations to answer them. For example, one poster asked if PDAs are to be treated as DSE; you cannot answer this question without referring to the law and its guidance. Sometimes you have to do Risk Assessments; a recent post asks about a pregnant woman wanting to work from home; there really is no answer to that question without stating that an RA is needed. Some questions do need practical answers, such as how do I jet-wash a drain safely, but its incorrect to think that people just want to be told what to do. In my job I tend to vary my answers based on what people want; sometimes they do want practical advice, often they want to understand, and sometimes you can't understand why we have to do what we have to do without understanding the law. Some questions need technical and legal answers, and some can only be answered by encouraging the questioner to think for themselves. We won't change our image in any useful way if we forget the law and the RA process. It might endear us to journalists, but then again it probably wouldn't. I'm with Pugwash et al, I know my employer values my services, and I really don't care what the meeja, especially the red-tops and the telly, think or do, about H&S or anything else, John

Posted By Richie This thread has similarities with NATO current predicament, that being severe pressure being placed upon them from the States, for NATO to morph (into something they are not) merely to be seen as 'rerlevant' in the current age of "you are either fore us or against us" politics. The similarity I observe is that of the media portraying OSH Professionals in a certain way, bashing us with low-value one dimensional 'on the fringe of our activities' stories. This has had the effect of forcing internal pressure within our collective to be seen as 'relevant', with the very real urge to 'morph' into something we possibly are not. Changing our image because of the odd media bashing from journalists is akin to being a kid in the playground who, picked-on because of the colour of his hair, decides to dye it. Why should he? Therefore as I see it, we need to reconcile our own doubts regarding our relevence in the workplace, before deciding whether or not we need to change at all. We need to decide if it is the substance or the image which requires changing, and depending on the outcome, what direction we need to take. Richie

Posted By Stevie D Maybe its just me, but I think by now anyone involved even a little bit in risk management understands that risk assessment is the basis for everything we do in elf-n-safety. I still think it would be more helpful if people tried to refrain from telling people to do a risk assessment. "Is it okay if I send by maintenance man down that big hole?" ........"Well you'll need to do a risk assessment" ............."most helpful, thanks".

Posted By J Knight Steve, Maybe it is just you; remember that posters on this site aren't always involved in Risk Management. And sometimes there isn't any other answer. To take the case which seems to have raised your hackles so badly; the questioner was asking what legal rights a pregnant worker has to work from home. The legal right arises out of the employer having to follow the findings of a risk assessment, so whatever practical advice was given, an assessment is needed as a way of forcing the employers hand 'it's written here, you've got to do it'. Maybe you've seen too many example of RA used as a way of escaping responsibility on the part of the safety bod, but you could always see it as a way of handing responsibility back to where it really belongs, John

Posted By J Knight Steve, The legal basis isn't hard and fast, it comes down to what is reasonably practicable as a control for identified risks, so I agree there is no legal 'right' as such, but there is a strong case for saying that she must be allowed to work from home for her own safety if this wouldn't be excessively detrimental to the employer, John

Posted By Stevie D Exactly.........sorry, that really is my last posting.

Posted By PH 1) Don't take yourself too seriously all the time 2) Accept that H&S is often a game of opinions. I get fed up with some of the posters on this forum and their self righteous attitude 3) Keep it simple! I do feel that sometimes we over complicate - often for the sake of it 4) Don't get so touchy about the whole CMIOSH thing. It only really means something to those that work in H&S. Until the profile is improved and raised we will not be seen in the same way as other chartered professionals. 5) Be a do-er not just an advisor. Sometimes actions speak louder than words. 6) Lose the tweed jacket, facial hair and clip board stuck to your arm - get tattoos, dye your hair and join a rock band! :) Paul

Posted By Ralph Baqar Excellent advice PH - however, tweed is back-in! and my facial hair is all the hair I have left on my head. I’m off now to join that rock band, I might even go skydiving again (I’m not sure my back will approve though!) ;-)

Posted By Linda Crossland-Clarke Hi folks The bloke who built my trike, is building the worlds fastest trike (or attempting to). He was going to use the Elvington site to test it, but they have backed off now... Could we not use someone in the know, to combine Jezza with IOSH and demonstrate our down to earth approach on safety?? Good PR, fun, even CPD??? Any suggestions on how we could do this? Regards Linda

Posted By Jonathan Sandler CMIOSH Dear all. The time has come, the wallrus said to talk of many things. The facts are that we, who, have contributed to this thread are agreed that we need to change our imiage, IOSH have been trying hard and not only in a local paper but in national papers as well, most dont see the hard work that is going on behind the sceenes, neither do I, but I talk to people, so maybe the first thing that should change is our means of communication, basic NEBOSH question, how do we communicate H&S. If we could talk to people instead of using phones and emails, that could be a start. But this is old hat and sometimes not the only option. Most of us try to talk, some of us achieve it, when I decided to come into this industry a few years ago, my mother said, 'I hope you are not going out to look for trouble?' How far have we come, as an industry, over the last 10 years? A very long way, yes people will always take the rise out of safety, that's because sometimes they don't see the benefits. Who would have thought that whilst in the forces we we be governed by the 74 Act as well as Section 59 of the Army Act. Thanks for all that have contributed to this thread, there are no bad points raised so far. Maybe the way forward is better communications, that's what I try and do, but I still have my clip board!!!!