Conduct of Audits by IOs

[nearlythere]

I have been advised by an IO that when an audit is being undertaken IOs will not allow the employer or person with responsibilities to have anyone to speak on their behalf.
What do we think of this?

If the RP, or over here the AP, is permitted by the regulations to have a competent person assist with his duties then surely this would include assistance during an audit?

[Midland Retty]

If that is what the IO said then I'm afraid they are talking utter piffle.

It is perfectly reasonable and acceptable for the RP to nominate anyone they so wish to escort the InspO around the premises during an inspection and to field questions from the InspO.

It would be different if you are taking legal action against the RP, but we aren't talking about legal action here, we are talking about a routine inspection.

If you were to believe your InspO it would mean the Chief Executive of Sainsburys would have to be present everytime one of his or her stores were inspected just to answer the InspO's questions!

[SeaBass]

That might be feasible for a small establishment, but it won’t work for a large organisation. Try getting the RP at HBOS, ICI, Kodak, Honda etcetera  to talk to an IO. Ain’t gonna happen without a court summons. And even then you’d struggle.

[nearlythere]

I agree entirely chaps that it is "piffle"(very polite).
I would however expect it reasonable that the manager to be there not necessarily the employer.

If it came to it that this is the way it is done the RP or AP could quite justifiably say that he is not competent to answer the question as he was not competent to carry out the assessment and had to get assistance which was his right under the law.

However, I suppose it reasonable for the RP to be able to answer questions on the management of fire safety whereas the fire safety measures put in place might need answers of a more technical nature.

The more I think of it the more I think it piffle, or another word to that effect.

[Midland Retty]

It is desirable to try and get a local manager to escort the Inpector around.

But even then, the RP is not lawfully compelled to make a local manager available to an inspector.

[Phoenix]

I think it's firmly established that the IO you spoke to was wrong.  Maybe he's inexperienced; I could have spouted loads of piffle when I started in fire safety but I had the sense to keep my mouth shut most of the time.  When I opened it........piffle.  Anyway..........we all talk piffle occasionally (maybe I am now).  Nothing wrong with a bit of piffle - it all helps the world go round - promotes discussion - teases out conflicts - examines nuances.

Stu

[Dinnertime Dave]

I have been advised by an IO that when an audit is being undertaken IOs will not allow the employer or person with responsibilities to have anyone to speak on their behalf.
What do we think of this?

So when the IO turns up to meet you and you have your consultant or head of H&S with you what will the IO do? Do a runner or get on with it?

I have to admit that when I have carried out audits and the RP brings his consultant I do prefer to get some of the answers from the RP just to show some understanding of his responsibilities.