When a boss calls an employee a “competent person,”
\nit is not necessarily a compliment—it is a legal obligation.<\/p>\n
A competent person is an employee who is able to recognize hazards However, OSHA does not have a “It’s a fairly misunderstood Knowledge and Action<\/font><\/b><\/p>\n A competent person should not be chosen lightly, This knowledge can come from a Colleran warned against general Part of that demonstration This is where part of the confusion with the term resides, according to Proper Person<\/font><\/b><\/p>\n Because many For instance, imagine a site where some workers are on a scaffold several A large worksite with different operations going on at the same time also “There is nobody who is all-competent,” he said. “There are many types of This does not have to be the case in every situation, however. If an Additionally, a competent person could be somewhat of a generalist, In some respects, designating a “If you’re aware of the need OSHA Inspection<\/font><\/b><\/p>\n When OSHA visits Colleran suggested employers “The logical answer—if the Key Points<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n <\/UL><\/p>\n SIDEBAR #2<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n Competent Person Versus Qualified In addition to a competent person, some A competent person can identify hazards and has the authority to For example, take a According to Mr. Cannon, “You OSHA\u2019s Requirements for the Term Extend Beyond Simply Designating Someone with the Title<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":[],"featured_media":0,"template":"","categories":[24,21,32],"class_list":["post-6857","articles","type-articles","status-publish","hentry","category-contracting","category-business-managment","category-health-and-safety"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
\nassociated with a particular task, and has the ability to mitigate those
\nhazards. Many Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) construction
\nstandards require someone on site—such as a Foreman, Supervisor, or other
\nemployee—to be designated as a competent person.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nspecific standard regarding a competent person, which has led to some
\nconfusion.<\/p>\n
\nterm,” said Phil Colleran, a Riverside, Illinois-based Safety Consultant
\nspecializing in construction and a former OSHA Compliance Officer. Some people
\nmay believe they can be considered a competent person because they attended a
\nclass, or a boss arbitrarily assigned the title to them—although neither is
\nnecessarily the case, Colleran stated.<\/p>\n
\nexperts say, because he or she needs to be qualified to identify the hazards
\nassociated with a particular operation. For instance, if work is being
\nperformed on scaffolding, the competent person must be knowledgeable about
\nscaffolding hazards.<\/p>\n
\nperson’s skills, experience, and training, according to Kevin Cannon, Director
\nof Safety and Health Services with the Associated General Contractors of
\nAmerica in Arlington, Virginia. Training, which Cannon called key, can provide
\nthe individual with information from particular manufacturers or on various
\nOSHA standards that will help him or her identify hazards.<\/p>\n
\n“competent person training,” and stressed that fitting the description goes
\nbeyond what is learned in a classroom. “Just because you sat through a 10-hour
\ncourse, [that] alone [cannot] determin[e] your competency,” he said.
\n“Competence is demonstrated, not certified.”<\/p>\n
\nentails the competent person being able to immediately correct any hazards that
\nmay appear. If that person is unable to do so, he or she would not fit the
\ndefinition of a competent person, Colleran said.<\/p>\n
\nCannon. “You can have an employee who’s competent but may lack the authority to
\ntake any corrective action,” he said. “Employers need to make sure the employee
\nidentified as a competent person has such authority granted to them.”<\/span><\/p>\n
\ndifferent types of activities can take place on a worksite, a competent person
\nmust either have the authority to make safety-related changes to those
\ndifferent operations, or know who can enforce those changes.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nyards downwind from a mason subcontractor performing cutting work. Because the
\nscaffold workers are being exposed to dust and other potentially hazardous
\ndebris from the masonry work, and the masons are not under direct control of
\nthe competent person for the scaffolding work, the competent person must
\nmitigate the situation by going to the General Contractor.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nmay require more than 1 competent person, Colleran suggested.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nmany competent persons based on the fact [that] there are many specialized
\nactivities out there, and you can’t be competent in all fields.”<\/span><\/p>\n
\nindividual has experience in 2 different types of work being done on
\nsite—trenching and use of ladders, for example—that person could serve as the
\ncompetent person for both tasks, Cannon said.<\/span><\/p>\n
\naccording to Colleran. This person does not need to know all the ins and outs
\nof every OSHA standard on the jobsite, but could be considered a competent
\nperson if he or she is able to recognize when something may present a risk to
\nworkers—such as an unguarded platform—and can act when such a risk is
\nidentified.<\/span><\/p>\n
\ncompetent person is similar to instituting a workplace safety and health
\nprogram. Both have goals of identifying and mitigating hazards. Cannon believes
\nthat employers who have a competent person working likely have already
\nimplemented some type of injury and illness program.<\/p>\n
\n[for] a competent person, it’s not by chance. You understand what your
\nresponsibilities are,” Cannon said.<\/p>\n
\na site, one of the first questions an inspector may ask is who the competent
\nperson is. (If not with those exact words, then by asking who may be in
\ncharge.) The agency inspector may then question that individual about his or
\nher knowledge to ensure the work being performed is done under the oversight of
\na truly “competent” competent person, according to Colleran. The requirement
\nfor being a competent person goes beyond simply designating an individual with
\nthat title, he said.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nensure all employees have the ability to recognize hazards and the knowledge to
\nmitigate them. That way, when OSHA comes knocking and asks who the competent
\nperson is, the employer can respond a little differently.<\/p>\n
\ncompany was really operating consistently with best practices—would be,
\nhopefully, ?everyone,'” Colleran said.<\/p>\n
\nSIDEBAR #1<\/b><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\nonly recognize hazards but be in a position to mitigate them.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nindividual who is competent in many tasks, or to have multiple competent people
\nfor several different tasks.<\/span><\/p>\n
\ntraining is important, others assert that general “competent person training”
\ndoes not exist.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nPerson<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n
\nOSHA standards mandate the designation of a “qualified person.” Experts are
\nquick to point out that although the 2 have some similarities, notable
\ndifferences exist.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nmitigate them. According to OSHA, a qualified person must have a “recognized
\ndegree, certificate, etc., or extensive experience and ability to solve the
\nsubject problems”—including possibly technical or engineering knowledge—for a
\nspecific worksite issue.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n
\ntrenching operation. A competent person must be able to identify hazards within
\nthe operation and solve those issues; a qualified person has the knowledge to
\ndesign the protective system in the trench.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nit is possible for a single individual to be both a qualified person and a
\ncompetent person, but it may not be possible for every situation.<\/span><\/p>\n
\ncan be both, but you must meet the criteria in the definitions to be both,”
\nCannon said. “A competent person may not be a qualified person just because of
\nthe different degree of knowledge and training that’s required” for the latter.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"