Posted on: June 8, 2010 Posted by: Diane Swarts Comments: 1

Some SHEQ practitioners oppose the draft construction safety practitioner registration law on the basis of loopholes in the OHS Act, and a lack of relevant training standards.

SA Mint safety manager Ronele Isaacs commented; “How could legal sanction for a scheme and an agenda like this have gone unchallenged? There was no consultation with safety practitioners.

“The legislator had clearly not considered current SAQA qualifications relevant to the Construction Regulations. No practitioners in South Africa could assess my abilities, for example, as a practitioner, against non existing unit standards”, Isaacs said.

“We must speak out against this proposed regulation and strangulation of our profession by a few apparently empowered people. We should not hand over regulatory powers by our silence.

“We do not trust the proposed registration body to dictate the direction the safety profession. I understand that the legislation may offer an opportunity to anyone to set up a registration body, register with Sanas, and start charging fees, but the process was all wrong”, commented Isaacs.

“We do not accept the Construction Regulations amendment draft of 2010. The OHS Act does not outline the role and requirements of safety practitioners”, said Isaacs. “Professional registration must not be sneaked through the back door of the Act by an ill conceived amendment in the Construction Regulations.”

PHOTO; SA Mint safety manager Ronele Isaacs is among the safety practitioners opposing the current format of enforced registration, proposed in the 2010 Construction Regulations amendment draft.

Uncategorized

1 people reacted on this

Leave a Comment