Every other role on this site is judged on what they do. A site manager is also judged on what he can show. Warehouse, plant or shop, the question from a client auditor, a preventieadviseur or an inspector is the same: show me this person was instructed, and show me who says so.
In Belgium his name is on the document
This is the sharpest version of the duty, and it is routinely assumed to belong to HR or prevention.
Codex art. I.2-15 requires the employer to organise the onthaal (structured reception and induction) of every worker and to entrust it to a member of the hierarchical line. Art. I.2-11, second paragraph, 9° then sets out what that member has to do: organise the onthaal of every starting worker, designate an experienced worker charged with guiding him, and sign a document under his own name showing that the necessary information and instructions on welfare at work were given.
Three hard elements: every starting worker, a named buddy, a signed document per person. On most sites that member of the hierarchical line is the site manager. He is not a participant in the training system, he is the person carrying the evidence.
In the Netherlands the pressure is supervision
Dutch law prescribes no form of proof. Arbowet art. 8 obliges the employer to inform workers effectively about the work and its risks (lid 1) and to give instruction adapted to their distinct tasks (lid 2), but says nothing about signatures. There is no Dutch signing obligation to point to.
What it adds instead is heavier. Art. 8 lid 4 requires the employer to supervise compliance with the instructions and rules. That is an ongoing duty and it lands on whoever runs the location. Informing once is not it. A toolbox in March is not it. And because no form is prescribed, the practical rule stands: without a record you cannot demonstrate art. 8 at all.
What an auditor asks him for
If the site works under VCA, the questions are already written down. Chapter 3 separates the diploma questions from the instruction questions. Question 3.5 requires a company VGM information and instruction programme, including a reception programme for new and reassigned workers. Question 3.6 requires instruction on internal rules and procedures at clients, including for temporary workers and subcontractors, before work starts on the location, demonstrably, with attendance lists. Both are must questions, and a folder of valid B-VCA diplomas satisfies neither.
Question 4.1 sets the toolboxmeeting floor: four a year for VCA*, ten for VCA** and VCA Petrochemie, spread across the year, covering changes in rules and procedures and findings from incident investigations. The audit asks for the list of dates and topics and the attendance lists. Minimums, not targets.
What he needs to be able to do himself
Running an onthaal that is more than a signature: what has to be covered before someone starts, in what order, and how to tell whether it landed. Briefing the designated experienced colleague on what he is responsible for, because "walk around with him" is not an assignment. Running a toolbox people remember, which mostly means one real change or one real incident instead of a generic topic. Handling temps and contractors, who arrive with the least context and the highest exposure. And reading his own numbers: which roles are behind, which procedure version has not reached the late shift, and who started three weeks ago with nothing signed.
That last point is where most site managers work blind. They can tell you who was in the room, not who is missing.
Aristotl gives the site manager a completion view per site, per role and per version, so a gap is visible before an auditor finds it, with records that export when someone asks. The instruction is built from the documents the site already maintains and runs on the worker's own phone in his own language, which is what makes it realistic to complete before a shift rather than after one.
Bring your onthaal checklist and one site's starter list to a demo, and we will show you what that view looks like on Monday morning.