 |
 |
This may have something to do with the Health and Safety at work etc Act 1974? Regards Stephen MIOSH -----Original Message----- From: Car Barnes [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: 04 February 2004 13:45 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Occupational Health structure For some reason of politics the OH and Safety team, who used to share a dept, separated completely some years back. OH is not part of HR and Safety are separate division but we all report to the head of facilities. We are trying (softly) to get Safety to acknowledge that we can be a valuable resource to everyone but have had to get a bit more demanding about this when we found out they were giving out health and ergonomic advice without having any experience/qualifications - the misinformation they were giving out was staggering - did u know that changing posture starts your circulation??? We have now had to tell them that they are not to discuss health in any way until we have reviewed their training packages and worked out where we can help/assist training. For some bizarre reason they insist on calling themselves Health and Safety despite having had no "health" input for the last few years! When I met the manager he tried to explain to me what an ACOP was! -----Original Message----- From: Amanda Dowson [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: 04 February 2004 13:19 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Occupational Health structure I agree with your perception Kate and, as you know, have concerns about those Health and Safety Officers who call themselves Occupational Health Practitioners because they have an interest in the field, not qualifications. I do think that in many cases each person we come into contact with has a snapshot of what we as OH professionals do, and what our priorities should be. Safety officers obviously have a vested interest in safety issues and feel that our priorities should lie in that direction, HR have a vested interest in absence management etc. Even one of the most enlightened safety officers have commented to me that they think HR are monopolising OH and misusing the service to manage their sickness absence. Is there an issue of not knowing what they don't know? (or whatever Donald Rumsfeld's most unplain English quote was!) and within our vision for 2010 and beyond we, as OH specialists, should be seeking to bridge this knowledge gap for a greater understanding of occupational health related issues amongst all of our stakeholders. Amanda -----Original Message----- From: Kate Venables [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: 04 February 2004 12:52 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Occupational Health structure I agree with the comments about the undesirability of reporting through Safety. In many NHS organisations, and some others, Safety reports through OH. This seems to me much more logical because trained OPs and OHAs have had many years more of postgraduate training and also have a breadth of outlook which few Safety Officers share. Many OH staff have H&S qualifications but no H&S staff. I have met safety officers who believe that changing their job title from safety officer to H&S officer gives them authority to deal with all OH issues - it illustrates the shallowness of their backgrounds, in many cases. We are used to treating problems in the round and advising both employees and managers. In my experience, safety officers see themselves as advising only management. We are also used to providing ad hoc professional opinions based on experience and knowledge, whereas Safety Officers only interpret the law. This can lead to a narrowly legalistic view that OH&S is simply legal compliance. It follows from that view that the place of OH is in the consulting room dealing with legal compliance issues such as health surveillance. I also think that many of my colleagues in HSE, both policy and operational, are not aware of the mushrooming of H&S posts. Some HSE colleagues see things as safety (accident prevention) versus OH (prevention of wr ill-health) and cannot understand why OH people are fussing. We are fussing because people with no qualifications or background in OH are claiming virtually the whole of OH as theirs. Some HSE colleagues think that H&S officers cost less than OH, so it is an initiative which should be supported as a way of getting OH to larger numbers. But no - in many organisations, the unqualified H&S staff are paid more than the majority of the OH staff. Other HSE staff have a concept of the "H&S manager" basically a lay manager to whom safety and OH report. I am afraid that this animal does not exist, in my experience. (S)he is either a H&S officer, or an OHA or OP. The best ones, in my experience, have been OHAs or OPs. Rant over - Kate ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please remove this footer before replying. Visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/occ-health.html for list archives ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please remove this footer before replying. Visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/occ-health.html for list archives ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please remove this footer before replying. Visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/occ-health.html for list archives DISCLAIMER : This message and any attachments are confidential. The information contained herein may only be used for the intended purpose and by the intended recipient. The message and attachments have been swept for the presence of computer viruses. In the light of the growing number and complexity of such viruses the College strongly recommends further checking before any attachments are opened. The College accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss or damage caused by viruses attached to these documents. If this e-mail has come to you in error please delete it and any attachments. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please remove this footer before replying. Visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/occ-health.html for list archives