Posted By FAH Good morning Shaun My perception of these many apparently benign & worthy schemes that are provided by commercial organisations & adopted by organisations as an independant means of measuring another party for anything at all is extremely jaundiced to say the least; although they can certainly provide value to a 3rd party client. James Tye of the British Safety Council did it first - what brilliant marketing - and they're extremely commercial! We must never lose sight of the fact that as a fundamental part of the business model of these providers, they're in business to exclude ALL competitors that they cannot control in any other way - consequently, if the organisation in question is evaluating the competence of such as yourself [or me], then we are expected to jump through the same hoops at the same costs but regretably with far fewer of the benefits. I have no objection to demonstrably impartial & transparent evaluation by the way!!! Trouble is, not only will you be at an immediate disadvantage [as you identify] you will also find that it isn't unusual to find that those evaluating your competence actually have a far lower level of competence than yours! The consultant may also find that subsequently pressure is put on their client to move away from them - especially if theirs is a well-positioned client in a lucrative industry - all in the cause of simplifying the assessment & conformity process for the client of course. Lastly, the client may well find that another of their clients has adopted a similar scheme, but run by a different provider. There is no equivalence as both will jealously guard their turf [revenue!], so the client then finds that the process is repeated [with minor variation] and at substantial additional unnecessary cost. Personally, I sometimes think that we'd be better of as "Management" consultants so that we can then legitimately guide our clients through this morass of duplication without being accused of unnecessary bias.. Frank Hallett

Posted By Crim I have recently assisted a client of mine to get on this scheme. They are a shop fitting company who attempted to tender for some work and were told they must be on the safecontractor scheme in order to be considered. I was asked to provide my CV as their safety adviser, and write and include a couple of new procedures into the company safety policy. They were audited by the scheme and once my bit was done along with some other information i.e. proof of orders and previous work carried out, spending on safety equipment etc. they were accepted. It now remains to be seen if it was a worthwhile exercise as they have yet to receive any work from the client whe made the original requirement.

Posted By Stefan Daunt We are a member of safe contractor, as some of the previous posts, this was to satisfy the requirements of a large retailer we install for. We have had no accidents, prohibitions etc, but guaranteed come our renewal in December I am going to have to wade through countless questions again that I have already answered before. If an employee looks after his PPE and new is not required, how can you prove that he has had new issued? Renewals seem to be the same as a new application. Still, I bet I don't get asked if our employees eat 5 portions of fruit and veg a day as I did on a site induction questionaire yesterday.

Posted By FAH Well noted Dave! Haven't read it through properly yet though. Will it really make any difference though? I have a perception that any organisation that can demonstrate meeting the requirements of OHSAS 18001 should automatically pass through to a 2nd stage of accreditation that requires effective auditing. Incidentally, I also believe that all the accreditation schemes should be subject to on-site auditing to gain the accreditation; and it should be to OHSAS 18001. That way, everyone knows what the targets are and also knows that the schemes really do have appropriate equivalence. Frank Hallett Frank Hallett

Posted By toby liberson Seems to me reading this post that there is a business opportunity here. There doesn't appear to be anybody checking the competence of these competence checking bodies. I think the members of this forum should use their H&S experience and establish a body that will check the competence checking credentials of these competence checking bodies (for a a small fee of course) If we sell it to the major contractors i.e. "who's watching the watchers" we could make enough to cover the cost of joining these bodies by charging them to be accredited to our organisation.

Posted By Shaun Doyle Although a little late, thank you for the information shared. Shaun

Posted By Swis well spotted Ron... I'm a bit confused too!!

Posted By Tony Brunskill Has the RR been taken down from the HSE Website, I can only get a summary and no link to the pdf. Anyone got a copy? Tony

Posted By jde As with many of my colleagues above, I totally agree that the principle of accreditation is fine. However, as with all things relating to competence, it is in the eye of the beholder. Many of the smaller contractors have worked incident free and competently for many clients, yet the various schemes, originally developed to cut down on the amount of paperwork at tendering stages, still does not work! Despite having 9001/14001/18001/CHAS/Constructionline/Achilles/Considerate Constructor we continually still have to jump through the hoops.The whole process of accreditation is a cynical money making exercise for the various bodies. Come on IOSH I think you have missed a trick here.

Posted By Dave Wilson I have the 'waxing lyrical'copy, maybe worth loads on ebay!!!!!! Person who checked this before allowing to be posted on HSE site is in the brown stuff