Section 14(1) of the OH&S Regulations here in Alberta contains a brief reference to the concept of competency:

"A worker who is not competent to perform work that may endanger the worker or others must not perform the work except under the direct supervision of a worker who is competent to perform the work."

The OH&S Code defines a "competent" worker as "adequately qualified, suitably trained and with sufficient experience to safely perform work without supervision or with only a minimal degree of supervision."

[Editor's note:  This definition is very loose, and as a result, has led to differing interpretations.  Most safety professionals key on the word "trained", as it is the easiest of the concepts to prove.  Most competency checklists that I've seen look eerily identical to a training spreadsheet.  I'd hate to go to court with that defense.]

There are three take-aways that I pull from the OH&S teasers:
    1.   Employers should create a set of qualifications, or performance criteria, for each type of work.
    2.   A competent individual must supervise the worker while initially performing those duties.
    3.   Once the supervisor/mentor determines that the worker satisfies the requirements, the successful assessment should be documented.

At the request of a couple of customers, we are planning on launching a Competency component within SafetySync in the coming months.  If you have a functioning competency system in your organization and can provide insight into what works and what doesn't please let me know.

I do know of three other systems that were developed a generation ago:  AXIA, UTRAC/Quicktest, and TRACCESS.  I've looked into each and they seem unnecessarily complex and lacking usability.  Perhaps users of these past systems might shed some light on their successful implementations, shortcomings, or general suggestions?

Lastly, if you are a safety professional and you interpret the OH&S references to competency differently than I have, please share your thoughts!