Call to cancel construction health and safety registration

Consulting body NIOCCSA calls for objections against SACPCMP construction health and safety registration, to ask DOL to scrap it.

The email circular reads: “NIOCCSA wants to apply to the Minister of Labour to amend the Construction Regulations and withdraw the registration requirements.

“We base our application on two aspects. Many people working as consultants will no longer be allowed to practice; and the CPD requirements are too costly to make consulting viable in a market that is saturated with offers.

“If you support this, please forward this to as many of your colleagues as possible. We want to launch a national campaign to end the registration process before August 2015.

“Please pledge your support to and add your own comment and concerns. Thank you.”

The postponed scheme is based on the tenuous statutory status of SACPCMP, support by some major employers, and its appointment as designated construction health and safety registrar by DOL.

It is set to be enforced in August 2015, following two postponements this year.

• See other posts on the SACPCMP, and on voluntary health and safety registration, including many negative comments from practitioners in the Comment windows, on Visitors may also comment in the Comment window below. editor Edmond Furter supports the call to cancel construction health and safety registration with the SACPCMP, for these reasons;• Registration does not address flaws in the NQF, DHE, universities, QCTO, SETAs, legislation, or enforcement, nor in business employment, HR and operational practices.
• Registration does not compensate or ‘plaster over’ these flaws.
• Registration is based on semi-privatisation of pseudo-training functions such as exams, interviews, CPD, workshops, and quality assessment.
• Registration would perpetuate and magnify systemic flaws such as duplication, OHS generalism (health, safety, and often environment, quality, and training lumped together at managerial level), sectoral fragmentation (construction only).
• Registration is expensive, and further flawed by low institutional capacity.
• The roles of voluntary board members in the SACPCMP activate conflicts of interest.
• Moving the focus of health and safety employers and practitioners towards institutions, weakens our fragile education and training system, and diverts the role of associations into pseudo-training and pseudo-discipline, instead of representation and advocacy.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
The following two tabs change content below. is Africa's largest independent SHEQ Magazine, hosting over 2 000 articles and news items since 2007. is owned by the Cygma Group, a global provider of risk management and compliance solutions. is registered as a digital publication with the ISSN.

39 thoughts on “Call to cancel construction health and safety registration

  1. For 7 CPD points you can attend the Construction Management Conference.
    Registration for this event (if you are already registered) is R7182

    Now do the math. At R1026 per CPD point, how much do you have to spend over 5 years to get to the required 52 to prevent deregistration? R52 000?

    I support scrapping the registration process.

    1. And that does not include airfare and accommodation.

      I support scrapping registration

  2. Says Maritz who holds multiple registrations with SACPM and applied for a forth. In your dreams, just like he told every one a year ago that he got the Minister of Labour to hold back on the promulgation of the Construction Regulations until his previous scam Dash submitted a position paper on it, bullshit. Wonder if Maritz also want to scrap CM and CPM registrations, it is the same thing just a different occupation and what about other statutory registration bodies, scrap the lot then Pinky and the Brain can take over and rule all professions with their incompetence register.

  3. Mark
    Why do you not send him a mail and raise your issues with him directly?
    Your comments reflects nothing more than a gutless uninformed individual.
    There are obviously matters you are totally unaware of.

  4. In which other countries are statutory registration of H&S practitioners enforced?
    I cannot find anything in the UK, USA, Canada, Australia, Singapore or New Zealand.

    1. Hong-kong
      These are their requirements.
      For the purposes of regulation 5 and the Second Schedule, the qualifications for
      registration as a safety officer are as follows ─
      A. A recognized degree or post-graduate diploma in occupational safety and health, or
      equivalent, and relevant experience of not less than 1 year.
      B. A degree in Science or Engineering, or equivalent, and a recognized certificate,
      diploma or higher diploma in occupational safety and health, and relevant
      experience of not less than 1 year.
      C. A recognized certificate, diploma or higher diploma in occupational safety and
      health, and relevant experience of not less than 2 years, of which one year must be
      obtained after the academic qualification.
      D. A recognized certificate in construction safety and relevant experience of not less
      than 2 years, of which one year must be obtained after the academic qualification.

  5. Donavan this is a publick forum, no lovey dovey private emails required. I’m aware of everything and so is most people out there, not everyone is “dom” safety officers. Maritz tried his hand at so many things he does not know if he is coming or going. He ran down everyone and everything remotely related to H&S on public forums and now he want the people to support his schemes and his pathetic call for no registration. No my friend the time had come for this profession to be professionalised and I like thousands of others have the right to be professionally registered in construction H&S. Pinky and the Brain is nor going to rule this profession.

    1. ” have the right to be professionally registered”
      Since when is this registration a right?
      But I guess you do have a point. Not all safety officers are “dom”.
      Sadly, you are not one of them.
      First of all, you have no legal duty to register.
      Secondly, the right to work are being compromised.
      Personally I would just issue a general prohibition. All those without at least a B degree should immediately be removed from the profession.

      1. Or like this person who said; “I must say I was privileged enough to be qualified in all, and a government certificate of compitance (CM)IOSH.”
        CMIOSH is now the new Government Certificate of Compitance?

        If that is what they believe they are seriously not very bright.

    2. Pinky and the Brain would not rule this profession? You are off the Mark – pardon the pun.
      They have been ruling this profession for 30 years. That is why the standards in education of OHS are so low, and whey there is no single professional body, no standards of practice, and as many types of site files as there are practitioners. They choose to not understand the law.
      And the DOL is too blind to see that registration would not “fix” what is damaged beyond repair.
      Perhaps Bluetooth and Blackberry would do a better job than Pinky and the Brain.
      From where I sit, the problem is the profession itself – it believes it exists.

  6. There will be lots of persons supporting this call, hundreds if not thousands, all those incompetent persons that do not hold formal qualifications but operate as Agents and do not qualify to be registered as Agents with SACPCMP. For those I say think twice before you send your letter of support to NIOCCSA, you are the very same persons that they will be listed on their “incompetence register”.

    1. Good, I like it when nobody hold back punches. There must be transparency. Anybody who wants to place other under scrutiny must be willing to place themselves under the microscope too.

      Even in the UK it is not mandatory to practice under any form of registration. But at least enforcement and the threat of prosecution keeps HS practitioners for the most part honest.

  7. Our company is planning to retrench around 200 H&S people in SA, because they are outsourcing the function to a consulting firm. The annual costs for the company to keep us “registered” is too much and now we are all facing unemployment.

  8. Ever watched a fly on a dung heap? Trying to clean its face, then its feet, then its face again? It reminds me of safety officers. (The fly; not the dung) They don’t want to be labelled incompetent, but don’t want others to be labeled incompetent either; rather call them “fly by nights”. They want to be registered but the majority does not like the two bodies they have had for 30 years to register with. They don’t know how to compile safety files, and object to the file approval syndrome, but when a job starts what is the first thing they call for?
    This profession you are so proudly protecting by attacking everything that resembles a bit of image, is nothing but hogwash. Your average rate is R73 an hour, but you want to rub shoulders with lawyers, doctors, engineers and architects, earning ten times as much. You cry over regulations and a lack of consultation but when you get the chance to speak you all go silent. And if someone dares to speak out, you cannot wait to run to mommy and complain about it.
    You all moan like weeds in a storm about lower level of training, and downplay short courses against degrees, but when a degree is needed to get registered, you all are up in arms?
    The DOL should not register you guys, They should actually write your functions and limitations into the freaking OHSAct. They should write a definition into law, defining your competency like with mechanical engineers (GMR2). You know as little about health, hygiene and ergonomics as the average Grade 8 learner, but are quick to reject a medical report issued by a registered occupational health practitioner. You think you are the only people who deserves the “Professionalisation” and even think it is your right. And then you object being called “dom”?????
    Morons have better professional ethics than this.
    Okay, now that it is out, I can hold back my punches again.
    Here is some advice from Danny Boy:
    Get a freaking degree in Health and safety or move out of the way for the professionals to advance. Your Samtrac or whatever trek you claim you have does not cut it. Your Nadsam does not cut it anymore, its a dinosaur.
    You need decent education, not some silly pie in the sky that will make you competent.
    You need a professional body that can stand up and say what you need to have to get “in” to the profession. Not selling Chamois for any “relevant” NQF level 6 qualification.
    Just look at the list of courses “accredited” by the SACPCMP to “include” you in CHS. Architects, Engineers, QS, and Building Managers are soon going to eat away at the cake you are fighting over, and ECSA has far more clout than Pinky and the Brain.
    Mr. Maphaha, register these morons, they deserve to be turned down as “not qualified enough”. Staan in die Ray and get your log boekies signed. And go on your CPD koek en tee parties. And blame the H&S practitioners for every single slab than falls between now and 2050. They want the job, make em pay for their negligence. Make them pay for the people they killed because they are too worried about files and vormpies that they hardly get out on site to “SEE” how things are built. Do not teach them how to read building plans. They will only read it upside down and argue the position of the emergency exit requires fall protection. Register them all, and turn down as many as you can, so you can make a killing with reassessments, appeal fees, and “how to fake an orgasm” courses. I support registration.

    1. Ag Danny, I fought my engels was not very delicious. Look the whole reason we are in this mess is because there is a serious lack of formal and reputable H&S qualifications in Souf Afrika. Simple. Yes, to compete wif the best, degree level is best PLUS relevant experience. Don’t knock the National Diploma in Safety Management – there is no such thing as NADSAM – that is something NOSA and all its old fart henchmen and wannabe rays of sunshine promoted. A National Diploma is a perfectly relevant qualification, not the best, but 1 million times better than SAMTRAC – my diploma included Safety Management Law I to III, Risk Management, Occupational Hygiene, Environmental Management, Fire Technology and other non-core subjects such as Businees Management, The Bachelor for Technology in Safety Management covered things like research methodology and strategic management – you cant get there without having done the diploma first and let me tell you, one has to put in some work to get marks – yes, its not nuclear physics, but it is light years from SAMTRAC – don’t even mention the two in the same breath. OK, so now, if you want to do a proper Masters degree you have to go to the UK, Australia or the USA. I can bet you all the kak H&S people you have met do not even have the diploma – if you have, please enlighten us. The true test is if these people you talk about could get a work visa and a job based on their qualification in the USA, UK and Australia – if not – they have KAK qualfications. I have done it, as has Shane and others. If you can’t even think about that, and don’t come talk about being loyal to Souf Afrika and all that kak – that is just a smokescreen – but honestly, those wif de best can come and go as they like and work amost anywhere in the world – we only waste our time talking about Souf Afrika’s problems because (a) we feel something for the country we once lived and (b) we like winding up the mense who think they know it all but have never stepped voet from behind the boerewors curtain and we just want a laugh.

      1. Koos. Let me be frank. I do not like safety occifers, no matter which side of the Boerewors Gordyn they work. They are underqualified and incompetent to carry any professional status. Guys like Shane, and yourself, are not in the same league and I simply fail to understand why (if not for the money-making rackets) do you waste your time to “support” any form of professionalising people who do in fact not belong in the profession. Having said that, here they are. Millions a dollar, or ten for the price of one. We as human beings, cannot now all of a sudden say “sorry guys, get out” (although I did).
        What this profession need is people with guts who can stand up and draw a line. Degree or nothing. Instead of wasting money on councils and KAK as you call it, and this body and that scheme (scam) or what ever, address EDUCATION.
        Force the Universities and Blades and his flock of seagull at the Department of Education to offer the B.Tech PART TIME, like with the N.Dip Safety Management (Not the Nadsam) through open-learning online. THAT is where the answer lies. Not in registrations and CPD. It is only channeling desperately needed funds in the wrong direction. And I am sorry to admit this, but it seems that this article addresses this already. Cancel the registration and force universities to come to the party. Prof Smallwood has published many research papers on what is wrong, offering many recommendations, but never made an offer to H&S to offer courses part-time.
        Where is CPUT, WITS, and all the others? What are they offering for a Saamtrekker to get a degree? NADDA, FOKOLI, NIX.
        It is okay to say from August 2015, nobody without a degree can enter the profession, but what about those who has been working all this time?
        I bet you my last dime that by the end of 2016, there will be the same amount of fatalities in the Construction Industry in South Africa – 75. (Save this post).
        Registration will NOT solve the problem – EDUCATION will.
        But tell that to the Rays, the Saai-osse and the DOL – they do not want to hear it.
        I can fully understand why Rudy and NIOCCSA is pulling out of this game. But I can tell you one thing, they may not have support amongst you guys, but the DOL listens to them. The last time they posted something here, a day or two later the DOL issued an exemption (which has still not been gazetted). So let us wait for the next show stopper!

  9. Sorry, just had an argument with one of your morons on why a a sole proprietor cannot have a 16(2) appointment on site. As he is one of the “team”, the team has to take it.
    Unless the “I” specialist want to disagree?

  10. And where is that gynecologist of safety? Would you be able to register with all your lights on the bakkie? blue, green, amber and red? SAPS and ER services not part of the criteria you know. Still space on the roof? I see armed response can use “white” lights, but that is probably not allowed due to your EE policy.

  11. Geesh Danny, not holding back punches does not refer to ass whipping.
    But you are right to some extent. The sad part is that all those in favor of this process does not have to spend their own money to get there. Their employers will have to fork out the costs. They cannot fend for themselves. They need a father figure to bail them out.
    Just look at the difference between “Saamtrekkers” fees and the Professional fees in the application process.
    Register them and declare them Compitant (And teach them how to use spell-check too). And put Brinky and the Pain in charge – they wear the SAQA skirt.

  12. Ten reasons why I say safety officers is dom.
    Some of the questions they ask…
    1. What course do I need to go on to manage the Health and Safety of both Contractors and construction sites including inductions and inspections…
    2. What will help my employee get compensation?
    3. How many contractors have to be on site to have a health and safety rep and a first aider?
    4. Hi, When I have a contractor doing work on my premises and his safety file is in place, the responsible person (appointed 16.2 by his CEO) from that contractor, as what do I appoint him on my site? Is it as a supervisor or is the 37.2 agreement enought. I don’t think that I can appoint him as a 16.2 on my site although he is an “employee” of mine as soon as he enters my premises to do work. Help needed!!
    5. Hi, How can I create a health and safety file?
    6. I need to improve my health and safety programme, it’s just not effective. What can I do?
    7. Are there any guidelines I can use to protect my employees?
    8. What should I do to prevent serious accidents which could hurt or kill my employees?
    9. Is there something I can give my employees to protect their eyes?
    10. I’m scared my employees are going end up causing a serious accident because they’re not working safely and my safety officer isn’t correcting this. How can I check if my safety officer is doing his job and ensuring my employees work properly?

    Surely, they do not need training. They need registration.
    There are many other questions you can read. But in all fairness, it is fictitious characters asking questions so that the producers can sell the “solutions”.
    A member of the public however might not know this, and think what I am thinking.
    They are stupid.

  13. I agree 100% that a proper AND valid degree is the first step in getting this right. Irrelevant of whether this health and safety construction registration is going ahead. I have to be honest, when I left school I didn’t even know that SHEQ existed and that there were degrees or BTech diploma’s in this field! I had to work my way up – sometimes being nominated as the first aider / fire fighter / SHE Rep without really even knowing what the hell I was doing. Assuming that the one day course here and there would deem me competent… In some way I blame my employer – it’s obvious that they also didn’t understand what Health and Safety was all about and what the OHS Act and any other regulations require from the employer… I’m in my 30’s and only now have the opportunity to go and study (again) and get a proper degree behind my name. But now finding an institution that can accommodate a working person….

  14. Make the registration for free with the necessary qualifications, and leave the interview board. Or scrap the registration at all. To many conflict of interest and another money make scheme. Not interested to pay any money for things I have already learned for and paid for. You either want Health and Safety on your side or not. Stop this registration bullshit.

  15. You all have this wrong you may have all the certificates that the world offers but field experience is more important than your stupid degrees you cant even spot a hazard if it smacks you in the face because you only look at what the book teach you not at the real problem so scrap this registration and hire people with work experience of the relevant industry’s.

  16. In all seriousness,I agree do not scrap registration,but ensure registration of all suitably capable and competent HSE practitioners takes place, but make it affordable for all and ensure that those who are registered get something positive in return for their subscriptions not just the right to say, “Eerrr well yes I am registered”

    The stigma or suggestion that others, some private individuals are getting rich and making money off this scheme needs to be sorted out just like SANRAL.

    Such a process needs the support of government,the DOL and those that advocate it not only because they can make MONEY out of it or influence the organizations,dept or government stance on HSE but because they are seriously concerned,interested and passionate for the success of the profession.

    Not for who they can impress or how many people they can scam, mislead and make money from. I bet they would not be doing anything if they were not being financially compensated or rewarded now would they.

  17. We are a small consultancy firm. Registration of our two Consultants will have a massive financial impact on our institution. I definitely support scrapping this process or drastically cutting the costs.

    1. Like Jan, we are also a small consultancy firm and the financial impact that registering our people (including myself) will have on the business would be severe. There is also always the risk that the employees that you then register as an employer will not stay with the company, which then means you will have to replace those employees with ones that already have their registrations in place.
      These guys would then want a colossal package which in turn would mean that your service rates will have to increase, resulting in a loss of business as clients always want to cut us to the bone. I don’t have a problem to establish a registering body to assess whether or not people are ‘competent’, but then it needs to be at least a little easier than it currently is. There are numerous guys in the field that only hold short courses, but they can teach a lot of ‘competent’ people with their degrees a few things in Occupational Health and Safety. I also agree with Willem to hire specifically relevant experience.

  18. I asked a Safety Officer with a Diploma why he was doing this job, his response was he needed money to set up a plot so he can run a braai and bar in the township.
    Working in this environment for some years, I am always amazed at the qualified, educated people who come back and ask for practical experience. All who want to kick out the so-called un-educated safety offers, good luck, if they are out, welcome to site for your long shifts and late nights, doing the work without the so-called stupid people to do it for you.
    I do not agree with registration, rather educate managers and owners and force them to attend the training required, as most of the time the problem does not lie with the safety officers but with management who does not want to support the efforts of the safety officer.

  19. Hazard = High number of unqualified(uneducated) Health&Safety people.
    Risk = Injuries&fatalities not prevented.
    Control = Will registration fix the problem? Don’t know, can’t say, maybe indirectly?
    Are there more direct approaches? Yes, more education facilities and methods of learning as mentioned above.

    Hazard = Lack of Engineering on slabs/structures
    Risk = Slab collapse and multiple fatalities & Finger pointing/scape-goat at Health&Safety industry
    Control = Don’t blame the Health&Safety person, He/She is not responsible for the design of the structure (you can’t H&S-register away Engineering incompetence)
    Are there better controls? Yes, employ competent Consulting Engineers.

    Hazard = I’m right and everyone is wrong
    Risk = Throwing out the baby with the bath water.
    Control = Take in everything and spit out the bones, in some instances/scenarios are correct. Lets look at the Best Available Technology&Methods by looking abroad seeing what works&what doesn’t, what proposals we can make. Keep our Government institutions Public and our Business institutions Private but enter into Dialogue.
    All I know is that I do not have all the answers, only one or two.

  20. In the UK there is no legal requirement to have any qualifications to work as a safety practitioner, but there is a legal requirement for employers to have suitably competent people managing health and safety on their sites. There is also an effective enforcement agency keeping most people in line.

    There is a lot of debate in the earlier comments about the need for a degree to be considered a true professional. This seems odd as most health and safety practitioners come into their career much later than the other professions mentioned. It is a simple fact that very few, if any, people leave school and choose to study for a career in health and safety management.

    In the UK our qualifications are split into academic, vocational and vocationally related qualifications for this reason. Academic qualifications include school qualifications and degrees etc and teach people the theory of the subject so they can commence a career; vocational qualifications or NVQs focus on proving competence, not teaching so they work for people that are competent but lack qualifications; and vocationally related qualifications (VRQs) are between the other two and focus on enhancing knowledge and skills in a particular career.

    VRQs elevate current knowledge to a recognised and externally accredited level. As a result some people can complete them very quickly and others take several years.

    A Level 6 VRQ in the UK is recognised at the same level of the Qualifications and Credit Framework (our NQF) as a Bachelors degree (BSc, BA etc), but can be completed alongside full time work and in as little as 12 months. The reason that it can be recognised at the same level is that the assessment is regulated to ensure that it is every bit as challenging as those in an equivalent degree.

    VRQs do not set a requirement on study time, they simply require you to be capable of passing the assessment. The assessment is based on clearly defined unit standards so that you can be sure that the qualification covers all relevant topics.

    VRQs are widely seen as the preferred choice, over and above a degree, for employers looking for their ‘suitably competent people’ in the UK. However, in SA it seems that if you have not studied for at least 2,800 hours your qualification cannot be accepted at a high level, regardless of how good the assessment may be. To my mind this disadvantages health & safety practitioners who simply don’t have the time to study that number of hours alongside their work and family commitments.

    I generally agree with Peter, Koos and Danny in the earlier comments. The health and safety industry needs to become more professional (globally) and improving the range and quality of qualifications available should be the priority.

    1. Very good comments Tim, and summation of the educational offering for OHS in the UK. I agree there should be a number of streams that allow persons to achieve a similar level. I did not mention the NVQ simply because similar to the NQF in South Africa, I personally do not place a lot of value on those types of qualifications.
      On my Masters programme, a fellow a student had already completed the NVQ level required to progress to CMIOSH and had expressed disatisfaction with the learning experience and what he actually derived from the qualifcation.
      I have worked with people from many backgrounds and education levels in HS – and generally, combined with good experience, the NEBOSH Diploma, or a Degree or Masters, are premier qualifications.

      ==== Editor notes; Some of the South African licensed versions of Nebosh, use the term ‘diploma’ loosely. HR people know the difference.
      About real diplomas, the Unisa intake is limited, and changing to a BCom. Some Sheq practitioners should follow this hint, study managerial subjects, and change career. We should all specialise after She Rep level, in either OH health, hygiene, safety, environment, quality, project management, management, or engineering. There is no Sheq ‘profession’. Some engineers and managers will add OHS modules to their training to become OHS Agents, starting in construction. Let engineers decide whether they accept SACPCMP registration, or whether they will add an OHS Agent designation to their bodies. Sheq generalism will slowly phase out, and continue to be exploited by employers and the state. But we will not agree to pay useless fees for the privilege.

      1. Thank you Koos. I suspect that your fellow student had been miss sold the NVQ. It is not, and has never been, a learning process. It is designed to ‘prove’ current competence.

        Ed – NEBOSH use the term Diploma as it is applied in the UK. It simply indicates that the required study period is above the 15 day threshold. This falls a very long way short of the study hours required to be a Diploma in SA (as would almost all UK ‘Diplomas’). This is a situation which I find bizarre.

        I agree with your comments regarding SHE specialisation. Everyone in every organisation is responsible for SHE management. In the UK quite a lot of people reject the title SHE Manager in favour of SHE Advisor. This is a better indication of the actual role, which is to advise management on how to keep their people safe.

        I think think there is a SHEQ profession though. Lawyers and accountants which work within organisations are still part of their professions and SHEQ practitioners should be recognised in the same way…if they are suitably qualified etc.

      2. Let me just clarify – the NEBOSH diploma takes a lot of time and unless you can absorb information like an idiot savant requires quite a bit of study as the exam questions require a precise form of answering – tell us Ed, how many okes do you know wif de NEBOSH diploma? Let me tell you. It is a premier qualification.

        Ok Tim, I hear what you are saying, but I will say that the NVQ then is not for those who do not have sufficient experience as they won’t learn anything. I will still maintain, I can take my Masters versus your NVQ and get way more attention internationally. A University qualification is so much easier to translate. But, I agree too that this does not make up for a lack of experience.

        Now, to the oke who is saying registration will block disadvantaged people – I saw – WHAT TWAK. Come on man, next you will say disadvantaged people must be given a free pass through medical school so they can earn the big bucks as doctors – no my friend – the only way to uplift disadvantaged people is to help them get a good base education which means they can then go onto study perhaps with help of bursary – but if standards are set, they must be so for a good reason and H&S as other professions cannot afford any longer for SHE Rep / SAMTRAC level people to be “advising” – give them a clipboard and checklist and they can tick box to their hearts content- but they must have the knowledge before they can start advising on strategy – critical thinking skills are an imperative.

  21. The main reason we became Safety Professionals is that we wanted to preserve life and make sure that all employees returned home safely after a day’s work, that should be our top priority. I was taught that together as a TEAM anything is possible, we are a TEAM and therefore should be there for one another and help each other out, instead we insult each other and bicker over registration procedures, sad to say that registration process will probably go on, and it should be our focus to help and encourage each other.
    I must agree with Jana Britz, most of the time our employers either don’t know anything about the OHS Act or don’t care. To most employers or 16.2 appointees, safety gets in the way of production and the only reason they have a safety department is because it is a contractual obligation from their clients.
    Now with the new Construction Regulations and registration, employers are forced to know what the OHS Act and its Regulations say. In order to comply, employers on bigger projects will probably pay for registration in order to conform to their client’s requirements and since it is a reasonable price that must be paid to the SACPCMP, employers will now take the time to get more involved. I see this as a positive thing as I believe it will get more people involved into taking SAFETY seriously and not just a requirement.Every accomplishment starts with the decision to try.

    ==== Editor notes; SACPCMP registration does not apply to the legal knowledge of employers. It does not raise levels of knowledge or skills of practitioners, it only recognises and confirms knowledge and skills, by testing some elements of the minima. It is not training or experience itself.

  22. This process is like crazy and a waste of money, I even doubt if this is going to last. By August next year they are probably gonna appoint another body. We have spent time money and doing diploma and worked for years and now we have to pay so much MONEY just to be registered in such a long process.
    One must come with the solution to end this. Government must just recognise a formal qualification, a Degree or Diploma from the university and STOP this. Students should be registered by their institution direct to government upon completion of their qualification.
    We are tired of many short courses one after another, one company want SAMTRAC, anpther want NEbosh, incident investigation, and the list is endless. How much money are we gonna spend in this course and then spend on this so-called professional SACPCMP registration?

  23. I support NIOCCSA due to the following reasons:
    1. SACPCMP’s registration process is sabotaging 90% of competent Safety Practitioners who are currently preventing injuries at the workplace, who do not have a National Diploma, and less than 10 years experience.
    2. It discourages young disadvantaged people who want to join the profession.
    3. Regisration is unaffordable to the job seekers.

  24. I do not believe that registration, per se, is a bad thing – otherwise I would not be registered with two engineering bodies, two risk management bodies, three OHS bodies and the HPCSA.
    I do believe, though, that the SACPCMP registration costs are somewhat excessive – I will have personally forked out a little under R10,000 by the time I am registered as a CHS Agent. But since I see the need, I will persevere with the process.
    As to the relative merits of various qualifications, the SACPCMP registration is a new process and logic dictates that they consider all the possible variants to allow all the game players a crack at the registration whip. Both Engineering bodies I belong to recognised this possible shortcoming and allowed for “grandfather” clauses for a certain window period for registration.
    One would hope that over a period, entry to the hallowed ranks would be only by degree but one cannot throw out the baby with the bathwater and merely say that a person without a degree but having 20 or 30 years experience is a nincompoop. IOSH will not allow me to register as a Graduate because my degree is so ancient (1972) that it makes no specific reference to H&S – in those days, that was just the way we worked! But there are Chartered members with no degree who got in on the grandfather clause. It’s frustrating but I can accept it.
    So, yes to registration, yes to acceptance of “substandard” qualifications accompanied by adequate, relevant experience and no to high fees for the privilege.

  25. It is my professional opinion, that the issue with saving lives does not lie with the competence of H&S officers.
    I think the DOL should regulate and “register” employers as was done in the General Safety Regulations before it was amended. Employers should be registered based on their own competence, risks, and scope of work, the CEO responsible and the managers appointed. The DOL can then assess which companies require a H&S practitioner to “Help” them.
    For those long enough in the field of H&S, the Annexure 4 “Registration Form” may ring some bells.
    If the “Construction companies (And clients) are registered, the need for “agents” can be better monitored.
    The DOL as regulator should perform this function, and not anybody else.
    Repeal the “approval” of the SACPCMP as “registrar”. Even the President of the country believes the DPW is corrupt and have asked for an investigation into their affairs. Who manages the SACPCMP????? The DPW!!!

  26. Lots of interesting comments – way forward we should have a registration process for safety professionals.If the current process has gaps then lets address these professionaly and not blame and point at individuals, I have not been involved in the SACPCMP process however feel that we have a beginning, rather than saying scrap the system lets work together to address the gaps and ensure that we stand together to ensure that have success and development of the profession.

Comments are closed.

Facebook IconLinkedInLinkedInLinkedIn
error: Contact the Cygma Group for Copyright licence.