Black-clad Special Forces
Black-clad special forces raided BP's Moscow offices on Wednesday, deepening the British company's problems in Russia after its attempts to salvage an oil exploration agreement in the Russian Arctic collapsed. The raid, a day after ExxonMobil signed a deal giving it access to fields BP had hoped to develop, was ordered to let bailiffs search for documents in a legal battle over BP's failed bid to partner Russia in the Arctic, a spokeswoman said. But BP, which has a long history of problems in Russia, denounced the raid and said it feared the search could continue for the rest of this week.
"It is our opinion that the court order under which ... court bailiffs are now in our office has no legal grounds. The office's work has been paralyzed," BP Russia President Jeremy Huck was quoted as saying by Interfax news agency. "We see these actions as pressure on BP's operations in Russia," he said.
Most of BP's employees in Moscow were sent home or told not to come to work because of the raid, and the offices were sealed off. The raid highlighted BP's problems in Russia since it fell out with authorities this year over its failed Arctic exploration alliance with state-owned oil firm Rosneft. A group of rich minority shareholders in TNK-BP, BP's Russian joint venture, have sued BP over the failed alliance with Rosneft. They objected to the pact, saying BP was obliged to pursue all its Russian ventures through TNK-BP and that they suffered big losses when the venture collapsed shortly after it was announced in January. The minority shareholders also prevented a parallel $16 billion share-swap deal between BP and Rosneft going ahead.
Arctic Dreams Shattered
Tuesday's deal between Exxon and Rosneft, signed in the presence of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, gives BP's U.S. rival access to potentially substantial reserves in Russia, the world's top oil producer. The deal was a big blow for BP, finally ending its chances of salvaging its own agreement with Rosneft. Yevgeny Minchenko, director of Russia's International Institute for Political Expertise, said BP was now vulnerable to police raids -- which can happen frequently in Russia -- and short of allies. "I
don't think that it was the Kremlin or the government that sent the order to the bailiffs (to carry out the raid). It's just that the people who carry out the decision understand that the authorities won't stand up for BP," he said. But political analyst Nikolai Petrov of the Moscow Carnegie Center said the raid did not mean BP would now face frequent harassment from the police or legal authorities.
"Although there is a coincidence in timings between what is happening with BP and the announcement of the Rosneft-Exxon deal, I wouldn't say the search is a sign that BP will be pressured by the law-enforcement bodies," he said. It is not the first time BP has been subjected to such treatment in Russia. Security forces searched BP's headquarters in Moscow in 2008 during a corporate stand-off at TNK-BP that resulted in TNK-BP boss Bob Dudley, who is now CEO of BP, being forced out of Russia.
Friday, 2 September 2011
Free Ladder Exchange
CRS is pleased to support the fourth HSE ‘Ladder Exchange’, which will be launched on 1 September 2011. The annual Ladder Exchange provides UK businesses with an easy and simple way to replace broken, damaged or bent ladders and trade them in for safe new ones.
This year's programme will run for 3 months from 1 September until 30 November.
Read more and find your local exchange location here
This year's programme will run for 3 months from 1 September until 30 November.
Read more and find your local exchange location here
Summary of recent HSE construction enforcement actions (September 2011)
CRS is pleased to provide a summary of some recent HSE prosecutions and enforcement action in the construction sector.
Work at Height
3 August 2011 – A mechanical engineering company has been fined after a subcontractor suffered serious back injuries falling through a roof.
Self-employed roofer Michael Hawkins, 23, of Rotherham, fell approximately six metres through a fragile roof at a large industrial building. He underwent six operations in just six months including a large skin graft to his back and has been unable to return to work since the incident in June 2009.
The company had failed to ensure the work was properly planned, appropriately supervised or carried out in a safe manner. The HSE investigation found part of the roof was only single thickness and therefore considerably weaker in some areas than others, yet the company failed to identify how fragile it was.
Mechanical Solutions Ltd, of Mansfield pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £5,366. Read more here
11 August 2011 - A Burnley handyman had a lucky escape when he fell through a fragile roof at a factory.
The 67-year-old contractor was fixing a leak on the roof when he lost his balance, stepped backwards and fell through one of the roof panels. He escaped injury after landing on a machine cover more than four metres below.
Engineering firm Lupton and Place admitted breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 by failing to ensure the safety of workers. The company was fined £6,000 and ordered to pay £6,250 in prosecution costs. Read more here
16 August 2011 - A roofing firm has been prosecuted after it allowed two of its employees to work on a slippery roof in Wirral without anything in place to stop them falling.
The two workers from Rainsafe Protect Ltd were spotted pressure washing the sloping house roof in Bebington during a routine visit by an HSE inspector on 26 March 2010. No safety barriers or scaffolding had been put up around the edge of the roof to stop the employees being seriously injured in a fall.
The court was told that the company had received advice about working at height from HSE on four separate occasions during the previous month, but had still allowed the roof to be recoated without safety measures in place.
Rainsafe Protect Ltd pleaded guilty to a breach of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and was fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £2,069 in prosecution costs. Read more here
25 August 2011 - A self-employed roofing contractor from Essex has been given a suspended prison sentence after an incident in which a friend fell through the roof of a domestic garage - and later died of his injuries.
Steve Mason had been contracted to replace a flat roof on a double garage at a house in Stock, near Chelmsford, and James Waughman was accompanying him. While on site Mr Waughman, 58 suffered a stroke and fell through a gap in the rafters on to the garage floor, suffering multiple injuries. He died in hospital just over three weeks after the incident.
Steve Mason received an eight month prison sentence, suspended for 12 months, and was ordered to pay £500 costs after admitting breaching section 3 (2) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. Read more here
9 August 2011 – Two Worcestershire companies and a contractor from Hall Green have been prosecuted for releasing asbestos fibres during an office refurbishment project in Birmingham city centre.
HSE Inspectors uncovered a series of failings during the refurbishment work carried out by Evanacre Colmore Row Ltd, Marchment Consulting Ltd and Roland Morewood.
When lift engineers arrived on site, they found pieces of asbestos insulating board spread around the lift shaft area and refused to carry on working. HSE inspectors stopped all workers from going into the building until it had been decontaminated. Air tests taken on several floors of the premises revealed significantly high levels of asbestos fibres, which were also found in several vacuum cleaners.
Asbestos insulating board was found stored in Roland Morewood's van, which itself was heavily contaminated with raised levels of asbestos fibres in the air.
Evanacre Colmore Row Ltd, of Droitwich, pleaded guilty today to breaching Regulations 11(1)(a) and 16 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 and was fined £7,000 and ordered to pay £1,500 costs.
Marchment Consulting Ltd, of Droitwich, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 11(1)(a) and 16 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 and was fined £7,000 and ordered to pay £1,500 costs.
Roland Morewood, of Hall Green, Birmingham, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 8(1) and 16 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 and fined £1,000 and ordered to pay £823 costs. Read more here
Demolition
30 August 2011 – Whiteinch Demolition Limited, a Glasgow demolition contractor has been fined after a worker was killed when a weight from a face shovel machine fell on him.
On 12 May 2008 Bernard McCarroll, aged 68 years from Croy, was dismantling a hydraulic excavator at the company's yard in Glasgow by the process known as burning, using a flame torch. The machine weighed seven tonnes (7080 kilogrammes) and had a weight at the rear to assist stability. Whilst flame cutting the bolts that held this weight to the frame of the machine, part of it fell onto Mr McCarroll who suffered serious injuries and died.
An HSE investigation found the dismantling operation had not been properly risk assessed or planned by the company. The court was told that a safe system of work had not been provided to those carrying out the dismantling task. It was also found that insufficient information and instruction had been made available by the company with regard to the assembly of this large machine.
Whiteinch Demolition Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Etc Act 1974. It was fined £15,000. Read more here
Management of construction sites
30 August 2011 - Two construction companies have been fined for "appalling" standards at a building site in the London Borough of Merton.
HSE prosecuted principal contractor, Kubik Homes Ltd, and the subcontractor, Bellway Developments Ltd after visiting the site in Wimbledon on several occasions. Kubik Homes Ltd had already been served with four Prohibition Notices, one of which was actually breached while HSE Inspectors were on site.
There was no safe access to the first floor under construction - instead, there was a makeshift 'staircase' formed from a bag of sand and piles of blocks, leading to the roof of a hut.
The first floor was accessed from the hut roof via wooden planks, spanning the gap between them. There was no edge protection to prevent falls.
There was also a 2.5 metre-deep excavation with no precautions taken to prevent people falling into it or the sides of the excavation collapsing in on anyone working within it.
The work areas around the site were uneven, littered with obstructions and trip hazards. Building materials had been stacked excessively high and stored haphazardly. Welfare facilities on-site were also extremely poor. The toilet was filthy and had a leaking cold water supply.
Kubik Homes Ltd, of Wimbledon, pleaded guilty to breaching section 3(1) of the Health and Safety etc at Work Act 1974. The firm was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,426.50.
Bellway Developments Ltd, of Bromley, Kent, also pleaded guilty to breaching section 3(1) of the Act 1974. It was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,384.50. Read more here
Work at Height
3 August 2011 – A mechanical engineering company has been fined after a subcontractor suffered serious back injuries falling through a roof.
Self-employed roofer Michael Hawkins, 23, of Rotherham, fell approximately six metres through a fragile roof at a large industrial building. He underwent six operations in just six months including a large skin graft to his back and has been unable to return to work since the incident in June 2009.
The company had failed to ensure the work was properly planned, appropriately supervised or carried out in a safe manner. The HSE investigation found part of the roof was only single thickness and therefore considerably weaker in some areas than others, yet the company failed to identify how fragile it was.
Mechanical Solutions Ltd, of Mansfield pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £5,366. Read more here
11 August 2011 - A Burnley handyman had a lucky escape when he fell through a fragile roof at a factory.
The 67-year-old contractor was fixing a leak on the roof when he lost his balance, stepped backwards and fell through one of the roof panels. He escaped injury after landing on a machine cover more than four metres below.
Engineering firm Lupton and Place admitted breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 by failing to ensure the safety of workers. The company was fined £6,000 and ordered to pay £6,250 in prosecution costs. Read more here
16 August 2011 - A roofing firm has been prosecuted after it allowed two of its employees to work on a slippery roof in Wirral without anything in place to stop them falling.
The two workers from Rainsafe Protect Ltd were spotted pressure washing the sloping house roof in Bebington during a routine visit by an HSE inspector on 26 March 2010. No safety barriers or scaffolding had been put up around the edge of the roof to stop the employees being seriously injured in a fall.
The court was told that the company had received advice about working at height from HSE on four separate occasions during the previous month, but had still allowed the roof to be recoated without safety measures in place.
Rainsafe Protect Ltd pleaded guilty to a breach of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and was fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £2,069 in prosecution costs. Read more here
25 August 2011 - A self-employed roofing contractor from Essex has been given a suspended prison sentence after an incident in which a friend fell through the roof of a domestic garage - and later died of his injuries.
Steve Mason had been contracted to replace a flat roof on a double garage at a house in Stock, near Chelmsford, and James Waughman was accompanying him. While on site Mr Waughman, 58 suffered a stroke and fell through a gap in the rafters on to the garage floor, suffering multiple injuries. He died in hospital just over three weeks after the incident.
Steve Mason received an eight month prison sentence, suspended for 12 months, and was ordered to pay £500 costs after admitting breaching section 3 (2) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. Read more here
9 August 2011 – Two Worcestershire companies and a contractor from Hall Green have been prosecuted for releasing asbestos fibres during an office refurbishment project in Birmingham city centre.
HSE Inspectors uncovered a series of failings during the refurbishment work carried out by Evanacre Colmore Row Ltd, Marchment Consulting Ltd and Roland Morewood.
When lift engineers arrived on site, they found pieces of asbestos insulating board spread around the lift shaft area and refused to carry on working. HSE inspectors stopped all workers from going into the building until it had been decontaminated. Air tests taken on several floors of the premises revealed significantly high levels of asbestos fibres, which were also found in several vacuum cleaners.
Asbestos insulating board was found stored in Roland Morewood's van, which itself was heavily contaminated with raised levels of asbestos fibres in the air.
Evanacre Colmore Row Ltd, of Droitwich, pleaded guilty today to breaching Regulations 11(1)(a) and 16 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 and was fined £7,000 and ordered to pay £1,500 costs.
Marchment Consulting Ltd, of Droitwich, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 11(1)(a) and 16 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 and was fined £7,000 and ordered to pay £1,500 costs.
Roland Morewood, of Hall Green, Birmingham, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 8(1) and 16 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 and fined £1,000 and ordered to pay £823 costs. Read more here
Demolition
30 August 2011 – Whiteinch Demolition Limited, a Glasgow demolition contractor has been fined after a worker was killed when a weight from a face shovel machine fell on him.
On 12 May 2008 Bernard McCarroll, aged 68 years from Croy, was dismantling a hydraulic excavator at the company's yard in Glasgow by the process known as burning, using a flame torch. The machine weighed seven tonnes (7080 kilogrammes) and had a weight at the rear to assist stability. Whilst flame cutting the bolts that held this weight to the frame of the machine, part of it fell onto Mr McCarroll who suffered serious injuries and died.
An HSE investigation found the dismantling operation had not been properly risk assessed or planned by the company. The court was told that a safe system of work had not been provided to those carrying out the dismantling task. It was also found that insufficient information and instruction had been made available by the company with regard to the assembly of this large machine.
Whiteinch Demolition Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Etc Act 1974. It was fined £15,000. Read more here
Management of construction sites
30 August 2011 - Two construction companies have been fined for "appalling" standards at a building site in the London Borough of Merton.
HSE prosecuted principal contractor, Kubik Homes Ltd, and the subcontractor, Bellway Developments Ltd after visiting the site in Wimbledon on several occasions. Kubik Homes Ltd had already been served with four Prohibition Notices, one of which was actually breached while HSE Inspectors were on site.
There was no safe access to the first floor under construction - instead, there was a makeshift 'staircase' formed from a bag of sand and piles of blocks, leading to the roof of a hut.
The first floor was accessed from the hut roof via wooden planks, spanning the gap between them. There was no edge protection to prevent falls.
There was also a 2.5 metre-deep excavation with no precautions taken to prevent people falling into it or the sides of the excavation collapsing in on anyone working within it.
The work areas around the site were uneven, littered with obstructions and trip hazards. Building materials had been stacked excessively high and stored haphazardly. Welfare facilities on-site were also extremely poor. The toilet was filthy and had a leaking cold water supply.
Kubik Homes Ltd, of Wimbledon, pleaded guilty to breaching section 3(1) of the Health and Safety etc at Work Act 1974. The firm was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,426.50.
Bellway Developments Ltd, of Bromley, Kent, also pleaded guilty to breaching section 3(1) of the Act 1974. It was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,384.50. Read more here
Tuesday, 23 August 2011
Help Beat Cancer, without running a step of the Great North Run
This month on the 18th September, Corporate Risk System’s Richard Ball, takes on 54,000 other runners in Newcastle and Gateshead’s Great North Run. The 13.1 miles billed as the world’s most iconic half-marathon on the planet, is a great opportunity our the Head of Environment to put all his many miles of training into practice. His training runs are based around many of the CRS venues including his home area of Cannock Chase near Burton on Trent and across the country including York, Colchester, Reading, London and Durham.
This year Richard is running for Cancer Research a disease that in the UK, affects one in three people at some point in their lives. Every year, over 285,000 people are diagnosed with the disease, about the population of Reading. Many people believe that getting cancer is purely down to genes, fate or bad luck. But through scientific research, we know that our risk actually depends on a combination of our genes, our environment and aspects of our lives, many of which we can control.
Working in the environmental and occupational health sector, safety practioners understand the importance of risk management in areas such as asbestos, petro-chemicals or those staff working outside with higher levels of exposure to UV light all of which have the potential to increase cancer rates which is why Cancer Research seems a fitting cause. The HSE provides a range of guides on these areas so just click on the links for more information.
Cancer Research UK also advises that up to half of cases could be prevented by lifestyle changes, such as:
If your running in this years Great North run yourself why not give us a tweet @CRS_RISK
This year Richard is running for Cancer Research a disease that in the UK, affects one in three people at some point in their lives. Every year, over 285,000 people are diagnosed with the disease, about the population of Reading. Many people believe that getting cancer is purely down to genes, fate or bad luck. But through scientific research, we know that our risk actually depends on a combination of our genes, our environment and aspects of our lives, many of which we can control.
Working in the environmental and occupational health sector, safety practioners understand the importance of risk management in areas such as asbestos, petro-chemicals or those staff working outside with higher levels of exposure to UV light all of which have the potential to increase cancer rates which is why Cancer Research seems a fitting cause. The HSE provides a range of guides on these areas so just click on the links for more information.
Cancer Research UK also advises that up to half of cases could be prevented by lifestyle changes, such as:
- not smoking
- cutting back on alcohol
- keeping a healthy body weight
- eating a healthy, balanced diet
- keeping active
- staying safe in the sun
If your running in this years Great North run yourself why not give us a tweet @CRS_RISK
Wednesday, 17 August 2011
RIDDOR reporting extension to seven (7) days gets the green light
The reporting period for injuries sustained at work is to be extended from three to seven days, following analysis of responses to the consultation on RIDDOR carried out earlier this year.
At a meeting of the HSE Board today (17 August), it was decided to recommend to the Work and Pensions Secretary that the proposed change to reg.3(2) of the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 be carried into effect. The decision was based on 776 finalised responses to the consultation – held between February and May this year – among which there was a two-to-one majority in favour of the change.
According to the HSE, a majority of respondents felt the change would not have an adverse consequence on national statistics. Other positive key themes identified from the consultation were that administration burdens will be reduced; aligning the reporting period with that required under the new fit-note system will make sickness absence easier to manage; and the extended period will allow more time for employers to investigate the incident internally.
Concerns highlighted by those against the change included the likelihood of a negative impact on the health and safety culture of organisations, leading to a lowering of standards; less opportunity for duty-holders and regulators to spot trends and incidents that could have resulted in more serious injuries; and overall less compliance with RIDDOR – under which around half of all non-fatal workplace injuries currently go unreported.
Around 8 per cent of respondents felt the change would have no advantage for either their organisation, or the national health and safety system. A number of others, including IOSH, the CBI and trades unions, while supporting the change, called for a fuller review of the Regulations. To this end, the HSE has signalled its intention to look at wider issues surrounding RIDDOR 12 months after the current amendment comes into effect, which is likely to be from 6 April next year.
Jason Cropper, a regulatory lawyer and director at DWF, said the move could mean that health and safety will no longer be at the forefront of duty-holders’ minds. Echoing his colleague Steffan Groch, who spoke on the proposed changes to RIDDOR at the SHP Legal Arena at the NEC in May, Mr Cropper said: “I think this change will diminish what health and safety is about, and affect how seriously it is taken in organisations.
“The quality of data collection, too, will be poorer, which will cause the HSE all sorts of problems. It will be less able to understand trends in injuries and occurrences and therefore affect how it strategically targets resources over the medium to long term.”
Given that under-reporting of injuries and incidents is already a huge problem, Mr Cropper said the change to the over-seven-day period is likely to make things “significantly worse”.
The HSE’s chief statistician, however, assured the board that the regulator would still be able to spot trends “for the whole of the workforce and each sector, and feed these into the HSE’s planning process.
To discuss the implication for your business, call CRS on 01283 509175 or via the links at www.crsrisk.com
At a meeting of the HSE Board today (17 August), it was decided to recommend to the Work and Pensions Secretary that the proposed change to reg.3(2) of the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 be carried into effect. The decision was based on 776 finalised responses to the consultation – held between February and May this year – among which there was a two-to-one majority in favour of the change.
According to the HSE, a majority of respondents felt the change would not have an adverse consequence on national statistics. Other positive key themes identified from the consultation were that administration burdens will be reduced; aligning the reporting period with that required under the new fit-note system will make sickness absence easier to manage; and the extended period will allow more time for employers to investigate the incident internally.
Concerns highlighted by those against the change included the likelihood of a negative impact on the health and safety culture of organisations, leading to a lowering of standards; less opportunity for duty-holders and regulators to spot trends and incidents that could have resulted in more serious injuries; and overall less compliance with RIDDOR – under which around half of all non-fatal workplace injuries currently go unreported.
Around 8 per cent of respondents felt the change would have no advantage for either their organisation, or the national health and safety system. A number of others, including IOSH, the CBI and trades unions, while supporting the change, called for a fuller review of the Regulations. To this end, the HSE has signalled its intention to look at wider issues surrounding RIDDOR 12 months after the current amendment comes into effect, which is likely to be from 6 April next year.
Jason Cropper, a regulatory lawyer and director at DWF, said the move could mean that health and safety will no longer be at the forefront of duty-holders’ minds. Echoing his colleague Steffan Groch, who spoke on the proposed changes to RIDDOR at the SHP Legal Arena at the NEC in May, Mr Cropper said: “I think this change will diminish what health and safety is about, and affect how seriously it is taken in organisations.
“The quality of data collection, too, will be poorer, which will cause the HSE all sorts of problems. It will be less able to understand trends in injuries and occurrences and therefore affect how it strategically targets resources over the medium to long term.”
Given that under-reporting of injuries and incidents is already a huge problem, Mr Cropper said the change to the over-seven-day period is likely to make things “significantly worse”.
The HSE’s chief statistician, however, assured the board that the regulator would still be able to spot trends “for the whole of the workforce and each sector, and feed these into the HSE’s planning process.
To discuss the implication for your business, call CRS on 01283 509175 or via the links at www.crsrisk.com
Tuesday, 16 August 2011
What are the differences between the old Level 4 NVQ and the new Level 5 NVQ Diploma?
The latest Occupational Safety and Health Practice NVQ standards (now called the ‘Level 5 NVQ Diploma in Health and Safety’ 3654-05) were developed with Proskills and other awarding organisations to replace the previous standard (3644-40) with effect from April 2011. This is part of a regular evolution of the standards, which takes place every few years in the same way as the periodic changes to driving tests.
The new standards are aligned with the new Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF), which is the framework for all recognised qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Qualifications are made up of units that are worth ‘Credits’. The Level 5 NVQ Diploma in Health and Safety is worth 108 credits; each credit representing ten hours of work.
There are still ten Units, which are numbered 401, 501-508 and 601. There have been minor amendments and changes to some of the ‘Assessment Criteria’ (formerly Performance Criteria) to reflect continual improvements, and these are available through the secure area of our website for enrolled candidates.
Candidates currently working towards the 3644-40 standard are assured that the qualification they are pursuing is at the same standard as the new Level 5 Diploma, and that when they have achieved their NVQ, they are eligible to apply to IOSH for Chartered Membership through the IPD route as previously. There is no need to ‘upgrade’ from your current level 4 qualification to the new standard as some candidates have asked. Candidates on 3644-40 should complete their work and have it assessed by 31 December 2013.
This summary provides the key changes to the NVQ qualification; you should contact your mentor should you have further questions.
Andrew Arkinstall CMIOSH
Centre Co-ordinator
The new standards are aligned with the new Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF), which is the framework for all recognised qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Qualifications are made up of units that are worth ‘Credits’. The Level 5 NVQ Diploma in Health and Safety is worth 108 credits; each credit representing ten hours of work.
There are still ten Units, which are numbered 401, 501-508 and 601. There have been minor amendments and changes to some of the ‘Assessment Criteria’ (formerly Performance Criteria) to reflect continual improvements, and these are available through the secure area of our website for enrolled candidates.
Candidates currently working towards the 3644-40 standard are assured that the qualification they are pursuing is at the same standard as the new Level 5 Diploma, and that when they have achieved their NVQ, they are eligible to apply to IOSH for Chartered Membership through the IPD route as previously. There is no need to ‘upgrade’ from your current level 4 qualification to the new standard as some candidates have asked. Candidates on 3644-40 should complete their work and have it assessed by 31 December 2013.
This summary provides the key changes to the NVQ qualification; you should contact your mentor should you have further questions.
Andrew Arkinstall CMIOSH
Centre Co-ordinator
Monday, 15 August 2011
Stephen Asbury's SHP article "Just the Job", August 2011
Stephen Asbury of CRS has written two (2) articles in recent months, both published in ‘SHP’ magazine, the official journal of the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health IOSH, for Health. Together, these articles advise safety, health, and environmental Practitioners how to properly apply for, and how to be successfully interviewed for a job in the SHE sector.
Stephen’s view are highly practical in that they are based on his experiences of short-listing and interviewing for Corporate Risk Systems Limited (CRS) during a recruitment campaign earlier this year.
The first article can be downloaded for review here , and the second article is available here Page 1, Page 2 and Page 3. Both articles have received rave reviews by practitioners, and are now in extensive use in schools, colleges, and private sector training providers for educating students on how to be successful in this regard.
Both articles feature prominently on the SHP website, and can also be reviewed here [links below].
http://www.shponline.co.uk/features-content/full/career-development-situations-vacant
http://www.shponline.co.uk/features-content/full/career-development-just-the-job
Stephen’s view are highly practical in that they are based on his experiences of short-listing and interviewing for Corporate Risk Systems Limited (CRS) during a recruitment campaign earlier this year.
The first article can be downloaded for review here , and the second article is available here Page 1, Page 2 and Page 3. Both articles have received rave reviews by practitioners, and are now in extensive use in schools, colleges, and private sector training providers for educating students on how to be successful in this regard.
Both articles feature prominently on the SHP website, and can also be reviewed here [links below].
http://www.shponline.co.uk/features-content/full/career-development-situations-vacant
http://www.shponline.co.uk/features-content/full/career-development-just-the-job
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)