OHS Canada Magazine

Raising the Bar

Construction sites are dangerous workplaces with some of the highest on-the-job injuries and fatalities. The National Construction Safety Officer program, administered by provincial construction-safety associations, certifies individuals who have practical knowledge in various construction-related health- and safety-management skills. But some are questioning the credibility of this entry-level certification and whether it undermines the overall standard of the safety profession.

One of the key concerns surrounding the National Construction Safety Officer (NCSO) program is whether the training offered, combined with an individual’s field experience, is rigorous enough to equip safety officers with practical knowledge to identify and tackle hazards on a work site.

Dave Rebbitt, president and owner of Rarebit Consulting in Fort McMurray, Alberta, claims that until recently, the Alberta Construction Safety Association (ACSA) was promoting the view that its NCSO designation was a premier certification on par with that of the Canadian Registered Safety Professional (CRSP). Thanks to a recent change in leadership, he says, the association is starting to examine its standards.

“This whole thing is about businesses demanding safety professionals we just can’t produce,” Rebbitt says. “The demand for safety has far outstripped the ability of any college or professional designation to supply it. Their effectiveness is being questioned, because their training is so rudimentary.”

But those in the line of fire maintain that the NCSO designation is simply a starting point for those who want to get a foothold in the safety profession and not meant to compete with higher-standard credentials like the CRSP. “The NCSO is an entry-level point for safety professionals,” says Dan MacLennan, executive director with the ACSA in Edmonton. “We have thousands take our training every month just to be up on safety.”

Edmonton-based safety consultant Keith Adams agrees. “Compared to an NCSO, the CRSP is like a Master’s degree.”


The CRSP designation is considered a benchmark in the oh&s profession and the designation of choice for safety professionals in Canada. Many employers prefer or require applicants of workplace safety positions to hold the CRSP designation, particularly for mid-career and senior positions, notes information from the Board of Canadian Registered Safety Professionals (BCRSP) in Mississauga, Ontario.

The ACSA, which bestows the highest number of NCSO certifications in Canada, offers the NCSO program and other safety training to roughly 20 classes of students a day at eight locations across the province. “To compare to the CRSP designation is not something we do,” says Tammy Hawkins, ACSA’s learning services director. “We don’t see them as the same thing.”

She clarifies that the criticism levelled against the NCSO title is largely a result of confusion around the designations among those who are hiring — not the associations offering the courses.

“If you are working in the industry, you will see job ads all the time advertising for someone with an NCSO or CRSP designation,” explains Hawkins, who holds both designations, in addition to the Canadian Construction Association’s (CCA) Gold Seal and an oh&s certificate from the University of Alberta. “I know they are worlds apart, and so does anyone who has pursued either or both of them. But the person advertising potentially doesn’t, so this is where we get into trouble.”

Paul Casey, vice-president of programs and strategic development with the Infrastructure Health and Safety Association (IHSA) in Mississauga, Ontario, thinks that criticisms against the NCSO and similar accreditations are misguided. “It is blaming the program for an outcome related more to poor hiring practices,” Casey says. “In any hiring practice, you would validate knowledge and expectations of the role — that would be my first response to any of this. I wouldn’t take their word on a resume.”


The Genesis

Alberta is the birthplace of the NCSO designation, which was developed in the early ’90s to provide general safety knowledge to those who were employed in the construction sector. An NCSO certification allows one to work as a safety officer anywhere in Canada, and candidates must have at least three years of field experience in the construction industry.

For certification purposes, field experience is defined as experience gained through employment as a construction worker, foreman, health and safety coordinator or any individual who actively works in construction on a full-time basis. Fulfillment of the experience requirement must be verified by a letter from a current or past employer or a construction-related trade union.

Candidates of the NCSO program are required to complete 13 courses, comprising 11 compulsory courses and two electives. The compulsory courses include classes in principles of health and safety management, leadership for safety excellence, construction safety administration and first aid. Elective courses encompass alcohol, drugs and safety, back-injury prevention, construction environmental awareness, fall-protection planning and hazard management, according to information from the ACSA.

Following NCSO certification, safety practitioners could pursue a certificate program in a university, followed by a diploma program, which is a two-year degree. The CRSP is the highest national designation for safety generalists.

Bruce Collins, executive director of the Nova Scotia Construction Safety Association in Dartmouth, points out that two decades ago, professional safety certifications were few and far between. “Now there is a market and demand, because laws have changed and put greater onus on workers and owners.”


Quantity or Quality

According to Statistics Canada, the construction sector accounted for nearly seven per cent of Canada’s total workforce between 2000 and 2010, yet data collected by Rebbitt show that it was responsible for nearly 31.5 per cent of traumatic workplace fatalities over the same period. In 2010, that number rose to more than 38 per cent.

Most Canadian provinces offer construction safety-related certifications other than the NCSO. They include the Construction Health and Safety Officer certification by the IHSA and the Construction Safety Coordinator credential offered by the CCA’s Gold Seal certification program, notes Don Sayers, chief executive officer and oh&s team leader at Don Sayers and Associates in Fredericton, New Brunswick — a consulting firm that provides safety management and training solutions.

Other professional designations include those for nurses, hygienists, ergonomists and more. All these professions require minimum post-secondary schooling, on top of a mandatory professional examination administered by the respective professional association, which is a separate entity from the training provider.

A few years ago, Rebbitt decided to study if the rapid growth in safety practitioners was having a positive effect on workplace safety in North America and the United Kingdom. The findings of his 2012 Master of Business Administration thesis, entitled The Value Proposition of the Safety Professional, were quite puzzling: workplace fatalities were statistically flat, or rising in cases like the construction industry, although there were more safety practitioners than ever before.

From 2000 to 2010, the number of Canadian workers in health and safety doubled to nearly 32,000. In Alberta, there were 21 construction fatalities in 2000 (excluding occupational illness and diseases); by 2013, that number had climbed to 26. Yet Alberta has the highest density of people working in health and safety in North America, with approximately 339 safety practitioners per 100,000 workers in 2011. Of those workers, just one in 17 is a CRSP, compared to the national average of one in eight.

“CRSPs are less effective in preventing traumatic fatalities in Alberta, perhaps because they are so grossly outnumbered by practitioners with little formal training at a ratio of 17 practitioners for every CRSP working in a frontline safety role,” Rebbitt suggests.

On the other hand, Ontario’s density of safety professionals is in the middle of the pack, but shows the strongest correlation between the number of safety practitioners and reduction in workplace fatalities.

“British Columbia has one of the lowest densities of CRSPs, but has the second-highest fatality rate in Canada,” Rebbitt notes, adding that raising the number of CRSPs would help reduce workplace fatalities in that province.

Citing two high-profile cases in Ontario — the 2012 cave-in of a mall’s roof in Elliot Lake and the 2009 Christmas Eve scaffolding collapse in Toronto — that have prompted lawsuits against the provincial labour ministry over the competence of safety officers, Rebbitt thinks that legal action may give rise to a trend in which the public increasingly questions the competence of safety inspectors.

“Those who are supposed to be the gatekeepers, in many cases, may not be demonstrably competent in a way that would satisfy any court. This situation is in large part attributable to the large number of ‘certifications’ being given out by safety associations and others looking to make a buck, coupled with employers who do not know any better,” he suggests. “It is difficult to demonstrate competence to anyone when all you can say is, ‘I took some seminars,’ or ‘I have a lot of experience.’ Imagine if your airline pilot told you that.”


Voices of Dissent

Critics of the NCSO program say the fact that the certification body is typically the same organization that administers the certification and conducts the training presents a conflict of interest, which takes a toll on the certification’s credibility. “You are buying a credential from someone selling it,” Sayers contends.

But Collins questions that line of argument. “That would be the same as going to Dalhousie University and getting an education degree and being upset, because Dalhousie teaches and administers the degree,” he illustrates. “As a complaint, it is not logical.”

Collins says the NCSO certification is designed for foremen and supervisors responsible for safety in the construction sector, in addition to other responsibilities. “It is meant to supplement a supervisor’s skills. Not every employer in the world has more than 20 employees. There are more employers that employ 19 or less and a whole range that employ 10 or less, so they are not likely to have a safety officer on staff.” As a result, owners or supervisors in these firms often wear the safety hats themselves.

Another bone of contention regarding provincial safety-designation programs stems from the fact that participants in many of these programs are not required to write final exams at the end of their multi-course programs, which include mandatory and elective courses averaging around two weeks each.

The remuneration of NCSOs also comes into play. A 2013 BCRSP salary report shows that the median salary for CRSPs hovers in the $80,000 range, and nearly 50 per cent of respondents reported salaries above $100,000. On the other hand, NCSOs can earn $30 to $60 an hour. Factor in overtime and shift premiums, and an NCSO can easily command a pay cheque of $80,000 or more per year in Alberta upon obtaining certification.

But unlike in other parts of Canada, such as the Atlantic provinces, economics drives employers’ preference for NCSOs. “Employers are saying, ‘I want to hire an NCSO,’” Sayers says. “They are thinking, ‘Why would I pay big bucks for a CRSP generalist when I can get an NCSO for less?’”

Add to that the fact that some employers have difficulty differentiating an NCSO from a CRSP, and “this is one of the biggest issues facing the profession today,” Rebbitt says.

Sayers thinks that most practising safety professionals working in a pan-Canadian context regard the NCSO designation as in the same league as that of a construction safety officer (CSO) or a construction safety specialist and other similar provincial credentials.

“Virtually every province now has a construction safety association, and they all recognize the cash flow available from creating their own ‘unique’ construction safety moniker,” Sayers suggests. “Alberta has had the deepest pockets and has therefore built a broader curriculum,” he comments, “but not necessarily deeper. And by attaching the preface ‘national’ to the ‘construction safety officer’ title, they have created the mythology that their offering is somehow truly pan-Canadian.”

But Collins takes exception to the criticism that provincially-designated safety programs, such as those offered in Nova Scotia, are profit-driven. “My job is not to get up in the morning and train more people than I trained yesterday.” Rather, it is to ensure that the association’s member employers have access to province-wide services at a reasonable and fair cost, he says.

Darryl Braaten, managing director with Xi Safety Inc. in Calgary, Alberta, points to the pressures of the province’s booming economy as a motivating force behind some workers’ misrepresentation of their construction experience, embellishment of the breadth and length of their experience, or both. “I have seen kids who were slopping pizza, and they have someone fabricate their construction experience and then get their diploma with little or no understanding of what they are faced with when they get in the industry.”

Braaten thinks that the NCSO title needs to be redefined as a trade-safety certification to appropriately reflect it as an entry-level credential. Unlike electricians who must complete a fixed number of hours before getting their journeyman’s tickets, “we are cranking kids out in 14 days in the NCSO,” he cautions. “All it does is give you enough information to make you dangerous.”


Substance Matters

Braaten’s observation of inexperienced safety practitioners being thrown in the middle of a construction site with experienced tradespersons is not uncommon. Private consultants say this often results in more experienced tradespersons disregarding the advice — right or wrong — of the less experienced safety practitioner.

Scott Casano, senior health and safety consultant with Casco Safety Consulting Services in Vancouver, relates an incident on a job site last spring in northern British Columbia where an NCSO misidentified a piece of equipment, causing management to arrive at the wrong area of the job site. Upon describing the location at which management was supposed to show up, the NCSO said, “It is near those big diggy things,” in reference to 100,000-pound excavators.

Like Braaten, Casano believes that the NCSO title is a misnomer, implying that the person holding the designation is a full-on safety expert.

Edmonton-based safety consultant Keith Adams notes that he would like to see NCSO-like programs revised to be more in line with three- and four-year journeyman programs for tradespersons, such as electricians and pipefitters. “It needs to be changed because as it stands now, we are hurting as many today as we were five years ago,” Adams says. “Green workers are sent out to the field, and they are not fully prepared, and that has a lot to do with the fast pace of work we are into now.”

Bruce Stevens, regional manager for the Applied Science Technologists and Technicians of British Columbia (ASTTBC) in Surrey, could not agree more. The ASTTBC offers a three-tiered certification program that allows members to work towards a career in construction safety. All new certification holders begin as “provisional” to ensure that they understand the difference between belonging to an industry association and belonging to a professional association in which they are held accountable. By accumulating experience and meeting annual continuing-education requirements, members can apply to be reclassified as a full CSO and, eventually, hold the senior title of a registered CSO.

As the only professional association governed under provincial statute in Canada that awards a construction safety certification, the ASTTBC is independent of any industry or construction association. Construction safety practitioners awarded certification by the ASTTBC must meet clear and defined academic-competency and learning-outcome standards in 35 subject areas from a CSO training course, delivered by trainers accredited and audited by the ASTTBC.

“If I am an employer, I want to engage a safety officer who is not only up-to-date and involved in continual learning, but also is committed to what ethical practice means,” Stevens says. “Also, I want the safety person I hire to have the added risk-protection insurances if working on a contract basis.”

He recommends that employers in British Columbia looking to fill CSO positions check candidates’ current certification identification cards issued by the ASTTBC. “If they produce it, then that person is a CSO. If they do not, they will not bring with them those critical elements only available via membership in a professional association. The issue of credibility is distinctly clear.”

For Hawkins, the criticism that the ACSA and other provincial associations are in the business of turning profits on the backs of students and industry members is nothing short of hurtful. “It could cause people who would benefit from our extremely affordable training to not pursue it. We partner with industry in our common goal of better protecting the health and safety of our workers. Our one-day cost is $60 for members and $75 for associate members,” she says, claiming that she knows of private companies charging much higher fees than provincial associations.

Hawkins reports that the ACSA is looking at implementing more stringent standards in both evaluation and experience requirements. One of the options being considered is changing the NCSO title to that of an advisor. The association is also exploring the idea of adding a final exam and a general level of field competency to demonstrate that participants have the required experience. But the struggle lies in balancing improvements to the program and keeping it accessible.

“The NCSO should not be accessible to everyone,” Hawkins says, “but something that says, yes, you gained information from courses you took with us.”


Testing the Water
It is estimated that as many as 200 to 300 certifications and designations in Canada fall under the occupational health, safety and environment domain, says Nikki Wright, executive director of the Board of Canadian Registered Safety Professionals in Mississauga, Ontario. As employers and government organizations rely on the certification process to hire employees and award contracts, the following are among the considerations when evaluating the quality of a certification:

  • Valid and reliable examinations;
  • High-quality questions in certification exams;
  • Passing scores (which indicate whether a candidate meets a minimum level of competence);
  • Transparency (a certification program should publish documents that clearly define the certification responsibilities of the organization);
  • Third-party accreditation;
  • Recertification (to ensure that certified individuals continue to advance their knowledge and skills); and
  • Recognition (to determine to what extent the certification program is recognized by employers and organizations).

“When selecting an oh&s certification, it is imperative to review the quality of the certification using the above criteria,” Wright advises. “An oh&s certification that does not meet these standards may waste time, effort and money.”


Kelly Putter is a writer in Beamsville, Ontario.

Follow us on Twitter @OHSCanada

Print this page



22 Comments » for Raising the Bar
  1. Aaron says:

    Good article. Would you consider a profile of the NEBOSH certificate and its role in terms of raising the bar? It would be a good follow up piece to this.

  2. Kelly says:

    Great article, couldn’t agree more. I have been through the course and have seen firsthand what it entails. More stringent guidelines are needed, such as a final exam, more thorough professional background check and a probationary period before allowing them to receive a professional designation, would be a start.

  3. I couldn’t agree with the author more. Safety in Alberta is about making money, not about providing the skills, competence, coaching, assessment, independent verification and credible certification to ensure that workplaces and processes are safe for workers to be free from harm. Even the Certificate of Recognition (COR) programme is of questionable value and in all, I despair at the ‘backwardness’ of the approach taken to safety in Alberta. Presidents, CEOs and those ‘responsible’ for safety in companies here are a large part of the problem too, with some very ‘primitive’ approaches to safety and safety culture. A seminar is not the solution!

  4. Vicki says:

    I am an NCSO in Alberta, one course away from my OHS certification and working toward my CRSP. I have always been baffled by the ads that state NCSO or CRSP, as if they were equivalent! In my opinion, the courses offered at Alberta Construction Safety Association (ACSA) do a good job of communicating the importance of safety, and sometimes, they give a good overview of a particular area. I also see them as being impossible to fail. Some NCSOs do their job really well, but many just want the initials and the associated paycheque. A clearer idea of what each designation means would be great, and a name change for NCSO is probably in order.

  5. Larry says:

    I am new to the professional safety world. I have work experience, taken a university program (CHSEP) and 16 construction safety courses. What am I? The problem in safety lies within its own organization. If the professionals cannot agree to determine and clearly communicate the levels of safety, then why would you expect a labourer to follow or an employer to hire someone who cannot substantiate a standard? Many who take construction courses are there because their bosses have sent them – not because they want to be. Let’s face it: you cannot be two things or do two things at once (project manager/safety officer); one will suffer for the other.
    In the article, you speak of certification and who can certify. And in your example, you use a teacher – do not forget that a teacher passes all their required courses and are not licensed to teach until they pass a provincial exam – this is what certifies them. Instead of printing an article with the divided lines, why don’t you print one that shows what title sets what level of standard for safety, how they get certified and what the entitlement allows you to do?
    Finally I have to ask, why no one lobbied the government on their new Apprentice Program to include safety professionals? After all, we are an important trade in the construction industry. Perhaps it is because we have no structure or apprentice program. This document is everything safety leadership shouldn’t be.

  6. John says:

    The title of “safety officer” in itself is sending the wrong message. The idea of a safety professional being a safety cop policing the field went out decades ago. Time to move ahead to the 21st century where safety professionals provide advisory support to the “line” or construction who own, and are accountable for, safety performance in the field.

  7. CRSP-CHSC Safety Pro says:

    As a sidebar note to the principal discussion of the value proposition when comparing the CRSP to the NCSO, the author appears to have limited the research for the portion of the article that identified safety professional designations. The statement, “The CRSP is the highest national designation for safety generalists” is not accurate.
    The CRSP is the nationally-accepted designation for ‘technical’ safety knowledge for safety generalists. The Canadian Society of Safety Engineering’s “Certified Health and Safety Consultant” (CHSC) professional designation is the nationally-accepted designation for the “management” of safety.
    The CHSC-CRSP educational and experiential enhancements to a safety career are not in competition; both have distinctly different purposes and are complimentary within a professional career.
    The educational requirements to apply for both designations are parallel, as is the requirement for ongoing mandatory maintenance. It is true that the CHSC work-experience application requirements are more onerous than those of the CRSP, but that supports the remarks made by a number of the professionals interviewed by the author – that related work experience within the safety industry is a critical element that hiring companies must verify to establish the true fit of the applicant to the job opening.
    As safety professionals transition in their career progression from field activities to becoming an integral part of an organization’s management team, skills in the management of safety become as valuable to a career as being able to develop and apply a technical safety solution.

  8. HSE Manager says:

    I have been in safety for 15 years now, and there is certainly a serious problem with all the certifications and courses that are available in general. Once upon a time, I was a member of the CSSE and paid a ridiculous price to attend the annual conference – twice. Both times, I left with the terrible realization that the CSSE was nothing more than a money-grab, and the people attending seemed to only be interested in dredging up work for themselves.
    The conference material was most often a service/sales pitch for whoever was presenting. And all the safety consultants are more than eager to hand out their business cards and talk about their experience and why they are better than you and probably everyone else here. Now, there were a couple sessions that were informative, but nothing that was groundbreaking or outside of what most construction-safety professionals deal with in our line of work anyways. I terminated my membership after the second conference letdown.
    I personally liked the mention of making safety a “trade” in its own right. You can read all the books in the world, but transferring a two-week or a one-year course into the field just doesn’t work. Experience and an understanding of the trades are key. The author should consider also looking at the trades’ perspective and the unfortunate poor perception they have of the majority of aafety professionals/advisors out there and why. There is a reason for this. And since the article really slagged the NCSO/CSO designations, I have met plenty of CRSP’s who are terrible safety people and are hired just because of the designation.
    Regurgitating information for the purpose of a passing grade is one thing, but actually having the ability to speak to individuals on a personal level and engage the trades is a whole different set of skills that a lot of people in our field seem to lack. All of the safety world has turned into a money-grab – not just the CSA’s of Canada.
    Furthermore, just having an increased presence of safety professionals in the field does not automatically equate to less incidents. Don’t forget, companies and managers play a massive role in the effectiveness of any safety program on any site anywhere in the world. People who gasp and laugh at Third World countries, where workers are wearing sandals and paper-cutout face shields, assume it is the workers’ fault. Even safety people do this, but no one goes to work looking to get hurt. In all my overseas experience, it has been the company and the supervisors/managers who are at fault for the lack of safety on site. The workers make do with what they have available, but with no one on their side and management thinking they are too uneducated to even understand – then what hope do they have?
    On another note regarding provincial oh&s officers, if you want better, more qualified personnel filling those roles, you are going to have to up the pay. The postings I see for those positions seem to max out at 80K, and although I have a love/hate relationship with my career, I certainly don’t want to take that big a pay cut, when private industry pays so much more. A few years ago, when I was working a project in Saskatchewan, I was having one of my routine meetings with our provincial oh&s officer and invited him again for a tour of our large site, when he finally agreed and asked if he could bring the new manager for oh&s who just started. I happily agreed, as I go out of my way to work with oh&s and develop a good relationship with them on every site I was mobilized to.
    But what I didn’t expect was his response: “Great! She has never seen a construction site before…” I probably gave a complete deer-in-headlights look. She did just finish an oh&s certificate program and a CSO designation…

    • HSE Manager-NCSO says:

      I wholeheartedly agree with the points that both CRSP-CHSC Safety Pro and HSE Manager have made with respect to training levels and safety professional knowledge and skill sets. I have been working in safety more than 30 years and have seen all designated levels (CRSP’s, NCSO’s, CSO’s, CHSC’s) come and go. I have worked on both large and small sites alike and have seen first hand how operational management can and must play a key role in the safety of their workforce. Without their involvement, the safety professional doesn’t stand a chance in making a significant difference as laid out in the comment Dave Rebbitt made in his Quantity vs Quality study. Without other management and supervisory training and assistance, any safety-related position, regardless of their level of training, is set up to fail; they simply cannot make that great a difference on their own. I would be interested to see a study done on companies that wholeheartedly buy into the safety aspect of their line of work versus those who rely on the HSE manager/rep to keep them all safe.

  9. Safety dude says:

    As a new NCSO (three years) and having to deal with these “college kids” and their CRSPs etc., what I have found is that most have no practical work experience. Before I entered the world of safety, at least I had many years of working in the industry. By far, that is what should be most important. Leave the NCSO program alone; it works well and not every company can afford a fancy, university, book-taught know-it-all who does not know the meaning of three-point contact.

    • CRSP says:

      That’s funny, because in order to qualify for a CRSP exam, one has to have at least 3 years of practical experience as well as “fancy, book-taught” education in form of at least a 1-year program. I’ve seen too many unskilled labourers come through with their 2-week NCSO certificate in hand and proceed to teach us, university-educated professionals, how to do our jobs.

  10. Safety in Alberta says:

    I have been a safety professional in Alberta for over ten years. In that time span, I have seen real professional safety advisors with different designations – a couple with experience only. The designation behind the name is not what counts; it is the person who holds the designation. Some NSCO are very good, some are terrible. Same with CRSPs – I have come across some who are very smart people, but cannot relate with the people in the field. If you work with tradespeople and they know that you are there to help them, you will almost always get buy-in to the program. It is all about the approach, because no matter what course you take, you can’t remember everything, but you need to know where and how to get the information. Once you have it, you need to get it to the people in the field in a way that matters to them. At the end of the day, safety benefits everyone.

  11. Robert Butchike says:

    I agree…it is not the designation, but a combination of soft skills, practical experience and knowledge application combined with research capabilities.

    However, the HR department is the one to blame. They put so much emphasis on designations… This NCSO program was created to educate people and help them make and promote safe processes. The NCSO designation in itself does not change behaviour, but rather points out the map on how to do that.

    Many companies are still promoting compliance instead of behaviour-based and corroborative safety approach. In my current line of work, toolbox or tailgate meetings are not the safety guy’s job, but everyone’s responsibility.

    I have personally changed our safety approach and assigned the task of researching, reviewing and facilitation of tailgate messages to the workers themselves. I assign the equipment operators topics related to the equipment they operate and they present it to the entire crew. This counts as our safety meeting and I have received tremendous positive feedback and volunteers to conduct the meetings. I can personally say that I have taken on the role of a coach and I allow my team put the game play into action.

    Does the safety person need to “know” every equipment out there? No. However, knowing about it and where to find information in relation to that equipment is key. My equipment operators have taught me more about heavy construction equipment than I would ever learn from a school.

    My recommendation here is that let us view the NCSO and other designations as a foundation to safety and seek to obtain further knowledge. The CRSP is not my ultimate goal, but rather the ability to communicate with the workers effectively. Further education in risk management, mental health, project management and conflict resolution would be a good compliment to anyone seeking to continue in the safety industry.

    Remember: people won’t be safe until after they feel safe, so educate your workforce rather than placing the safety of your workforce in the hands of CRSP or other safety designations.

  12. NCSO/OH&S says:

    I am a NCSO and Oh&S, and I have also worked in construction for 15 years. I have to agree with some of the comments that have been made. However, what I have been observing in my profession are individuals who say they have all this training and have nothing substantial to back it up. I feel nowadays, it is not what training or designation you hold — it is all about who you know. There are many safety advisors who are working in the safety field and have a NCSO or Oh&s certificate, but do not have any clue about construction. I feel that if you are going to be in the safety field, you should at least know what is going on in construction. ACSA turns out an awful lot of CSOs, and quite a few of them do not have a clue about construction; all that seem to matter to them is the big money that they think safety professionals are making.

  13. Sandy McIntosh says:

    I have worked as an instructor for the ACSA, and I think some points have been missed.
    That comment about the “big diggy thingy” is just bad writing. One comment, by one person, somewhere in BC says nothing about thousands of professionals.
    The NCSO has three valuable roles: It’s a gateway to a career in safety, it informs administrators and supervisors who have another career, and it trains trainers. I am narrowly specialized in training, with good credentials, and I often had CRSPs in my classes at the ACSA, to qualify as trainers for TDG and the new WHMIS 2015. That was a valuable service outside of the NCSO stream.
    Maybe some things need to be defined better.

  14. Sue Cloutier says:

    I am a HSA with my NCSO designation pending. I also have a college certificate from Olds College/Women Building Futures in Heavy Equipment Operator and have 4 yrs experience in civil construction as labourer then HEO. The two certificates combined have proved invaluable as I branch into safety.
    I will be furthering my education and will be applying to ACSA for a scholarship to do just that at UofA.
    I am not regretting the educational path I am taking in becoming a safety advisor and know I will do very well in bringing workers onboard with safety.
    I am finding all the comments extremely interesting

  15. Chris NCSO says:

    I’m a fresh graduate from the ACSA with the NCSO and I find some of the comments here mis/uninformed. One of the prerequisites to get admitted in the NCSO is being with a minimum of 3 yrs solid practical work experience in the construction industry. Having said that, how could one call an excavator a shinggy dingy? All the men and women I studied with were very comfortable with the construction technicalities and would stimulate the professor and class whenever they would point out different hazards characteristics because we all come from different construction fields to one single class. By different construction fields, I mean fields such as; oil and gas, roads, high rise condos, nuclear power plants, residentials, mining, forestry, the military, railway, tunnels etc. The knowledge shared in the ACSA classes is more of a valuable substance than a university degree plus the CRSP. I attended classes with safety managers from various organizations, and I can only imagine why they chose ACSA when they already had their degrees and diplomas. NCSO is a great package, that’s all you need to know.

  16. J A C says:

    Alberta – COHS
    I have worked in safety across Canada for 12 years. I once worked with a girl who worked at a jewelry store before getting her NCSO. She had her father, who owned an electrical company, vouch that she had spent three years on the construction site. Unfortunately for her and for the workers she was advising, her lack of construction experience led to the workers having no respect for her. She was terrified to walk around on the site and spent most of her time in the smoke pit.
    There are ways to get around the “three years solid practical work experience”. It is called misrepresentation and unfortunately, there are many who have done this. I agree with stronger requirements for the NCSO program. I agree that the “officer” designation perpetuates safety personnel that are safety cops.

  17. Homer Simpson says:

    CRSP is a joke. They select who is eligible. Stupid is Smart essentially. I have not met a CRSP with any brains in their big heads. Holding a CRSP only means that the person(s) had been able to pass a 200 question multiple-choice exam.

    The safety field has become a joke. Most safety professionals are just like used car salespeople. I had been a committed safety professional completing NCSO, COHS, DOHS & multiple other designations holding HSE Manager positions with strong reference letters from each all to be turned down from BCRSP while people with half the qualifications get the designation CRSP IS A JOKE & SO ARE THE PEOPLE WHO HOLD IT.

    Because a person holds a CRSP still does not make the person qualified & competent, legally this is a balance of education & experience. Most CRSP’ s need to pull their heads out of their a****.

    If you are a safety professional who has any trouble trying to find a job you will understand this.

    Because of the way I was treated by the safety community I have no respect for safety people especially CRSP’s & I will seriously consider making any CRSP dig ditched on any of my project sites. SCREW YOUR BCSRP & ITS MEMBERS.

  18. Dusti says:

    I somewhat like Homer’s reply. I have no cso training whatsoever. I held my OFA-3 for 3 years and OFA-2 for 2 years, and I’ve worked as a full on CSO at more than a couple sites. The thing that separates myself from people holding these “papers” is that I got my knowledge and experience the old fashioned way, I worked my ass off and earned it, in the real world. I started as a first aid attendant and soaked up all the Information I could. I took a short coarse in construction and got a first aid job on a site that with my overkill OFA-3 they were willing to transition me to CSO and there I was able to gain a ton of information and experience. I have no issue getting a CSO position and have the luxury of choosing the job I want. Here’s the thing, all the info they teach you in these coarses, is actually freely available to anyone who chooses to seek it out. From there, it’s what you choose to do with that information. A good construction company can weed out a bad CSO in a matter of days. So, it’s really not always about what certifications you hold, but what you do with the information you possess.

  19. Cody L. says:

    The CRSP designation seems to be given to those who should not hold it. Many CRSP is lead by ego. The CRSP is known as the Canadian Remedial Safety Professional now. I have never met a smart CRSP, mostly all ego-driven boneheads. A CRSP designation only means the person was able to pass a 200 question multiple-choice exam and if the person is on the bell curve used for grading then they will get the designation. I have encountered people who have passed the CRSP with a 60% that should not hold this designation. I have also met others well deserving of the opportunity to write the exam and they do not qualify to write the exam.
    CRSP is a joke these days

  20. Cody L. says:

    People should not be able to hold any safety designations especially a CRSP without being a journeyman tradesperson red seal endorsement in a trade so they have a sound understanding of what’s going on.

    CRSP’s are a complete joke and spend most of their time picking low hanging fruit and in most cases dole out wrong advice continually. CRSP’s take your (edited to remove foul language) credential and pound sand.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *