The Competency Dilemma: Determining Competency for Construction Health and Safety and Designations Outlined in the Construction Regulations (2014)

Yaseen Francis…A question of judgement.

Introduction
There are substantial ambiguities and debates about the definition of a “Competent Person” when assigning legal appointments and responsibilities for supervision, oversight, and management of key tasks. These are outlined in the Construction Regulations (2014) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act of (1993). Various key appointments in several sections of the Regulations refer to a Competent Person but do not explicitly outline the experience, training, knowledge, or educational criteria necessary to determine competence. This lack of detail leaves the requirement open to interpretation. As a result, there are continuous debates and contractual disputes. It also affects the adequacy of supervision and oversight on construction projects. However, these requirements may have been clearly outlined within the functional criteria set during the pre-qualification tender stages.

The lack of rescripttiveness in wording may be deliberate for several reasons discussed below. This leaves interpretation open to clients, contractors, and health and safety agents. Overly prescriptive legislation may limit best practice and innovation in applying controls. It can also introduce associated liabilities. The lack of detailed requirements around competency may reflect the varying complexity of construction projects. A “one size fits all” approach may not be practical or possible and could be limiting in some situations.
Perhaps the legislation requires clients, contractors, and health and safety agents to adopt a risk-based approach tailored to project complexity. This approach helps establish both functional and competency parameters. However, interpretation and biases can influence the setting of these parameters. This sometimes leads to the appointment of unqualified individuals as a result of an “employer’s self-assessment” of their competency. Therefore, comprehensive coverage and clear guidelines are necessary.

The following table outlines the relevant construction regulations that refer to or call for the appointment of a Competent Person (not limited to):

The Dilemma
The dilemma centers on the absence of clear parameters, tools, frameworks, or mechanisms for determining competency, which creates a significant gap and a missed opportunity to positively influence project outcomes. Using a risk-based approach aligned with project complexity allows for setting specific evaluation criteria and understanding varying risk perceptions. Self-regulation can be compared to assessing one’s own driving skills. Additionally, clients, contractors, and health and safety agents may not always be aware of the qualifications or training required to fully meet the definition of competency for a task.

The Definition of Competency
To respond to this challenge, the construction regulations define a “Competent Person,” as follows:
“A ‘Competent Person’ means person who, (a) has in respect of the work the or task to be performed the required knowledge, training, and experience and where applicable qualifications, specific to that work or task: Provided that where appropriate qualifications and training are registered in terms of the provisions of National Qualifications Framework Act, 2000 (67 of 2000), those qualifications and training must be regarded as the required qualifications and training” (Construction Regulations, 2014, p.4)

Competent Person Definition Parameters. Shifting Toward the Full Spectrum of Competency.

 This definition offers a guideline for assessing competency. It should be applied in consideration of project complexity, with specific evaluation criteria such as relevant post-qualification experience and registration that are appropriate to the scope of work. Clients, contractors, and health and safety agents must exercise professional judgment in addition to using established evaluation criteria. Without due diligence, there is a risk of appointing someone who is not adequately qualified or who operates outside their area of expertise, which can impact project outcomes such as safety, cost, time and quality.

Project Complexity Vs Competency Requirements

Conclusions
Competency evaluations must fully conform to the provided definition. Assessment should include prequalification factors linked to project complexity, size, and required skills, not just experience and qualifications. Clients, contractors, and health and safety agents should recognise the limitations of self-assessment and employer declarations if not supported by mechanisms to properly evaluate competency.

References:
Occupational Health and Safety Act: Construction Regulations | South African Government. (n.d.). https://www.gov.za/documents/notices/occupational-health-and-safety-act-construction-regulations-29-aug-2014