We will have to disagree then, am I right in thinking you don't work for a "big" company? Where are you making this judgement?
Agree to disagree it is then.My judgement comes from personal experience (I've worked for bigger companies and have also 'gone it alone') It is also based on discussions I have with risk assessors from all kinds backgrounds in the industry on a regular basis. But anyway we digress. Back to the main argument.
There seems to be mixed concensus with regard to accreditation.Some say its good, others say it is bad.
So what I'd like to know is where does this leave the RP? How on earth do they know how to pick a decent, pukka, competent Risk Assessor or Consultant ?
Ive never said third party accrediation is a good thing, it doesn't really mean that an accredited person is better than a non accredited person or that it offers any form of guarantee (although it should).
But why is it then I would select a a Gas Safe Engineer or NIC EIC Electrician to work on my gas / electrics and not just Joe Bloggs the handy man, down the road who has been recommended to me?
Its a mixed bag especially when there are a number of different accreditation schemes and my personal opinion (although others may agree) is that they have set the bar at different levels.
You would hope a business should be used to analysing a companies worth by looking for things like ISO, insurance? proof of trading history, example work, references and 3rd party accred along with that lot.
It is strange though that you can have an electrician do certain works that require part P but they can then get the work signed off by a part P registered tech. So I can do the wiring in my house myself but just pay sparky ltd to come along and vouch for it.
Does this mean that fast forward a few years, this could happen to FRA?
I agree with you (
) when you say about it being a mixed consensus, i'm a sit on the fence person. I see no reason why its not a good thing but its not all of the thing.
