Arbtalk.co.uk | Discussion Forum for Arborists

I subscribe to the UKTC and get a lot of good information from it. I don't post but I read it all. A recent thread discussed the creation of an extra membership class by the AA to credit those with technical skills. Some important points were brought up but later on the issue of industry division was raised.

It really seemed to me that there was a "them and us" attitude, (although not from all the posters). That those involved in management, planning and consultancy looked down, not across, at the chaps on the tools.

But as I thought about it later on, I realised that the opposite is probably also true. I'm guilty myself of lumping all the guys in suits as useless pen-pushers

As someone trying to keep a foot in both camps, it worries me that our industry just can't move forward for the group benefit.

Where does the future of arb lie?
Are we looking at greater division or increasingy unity?
Where does the division lie? On-the-tools / Off-the-tools?

funny that Tony
I saw the same although thread I did comment however

I know and you pretty much covered everything I would have said only far more eloquently. Just thought I'd bring it up to see what the response of the 'other half' would be.

there was an enightening post from a TO who said that whilst employed in his role he often looked at practioners & thought bet he could do my job, he realised that he may not be able to recipricate.

letters after your name are important however if we all just talked about great tree work without being able to carry out the task
Shag all would get done

fair point

I dont know wether I do my self any favours really when I enter those AA type debates , I do see the same problems as yourself, I'm just to gobby for my own good ( its my yorkshire trates creeping to the fore ) ..

it would be interesting to see a joined up industry though , although I wonder if to much has gone before for the AA to pull it off . hope not but ... eh

I also subscribe to the UKTC, and read much of it. IMO The trouble with many of the pen pushers/TO's is there are too many out who have been to college have have done lots of learning but don't live in the real world. Why else when I apply to reduce a protected tree 20% and only get permission to reduce it 17%..? Do they think I use a ruler and work it out... I'm going to do what I think is best for the tree any how.

They also generally think the worst of us guys on the tools, probably because most guys (I'm sure any gals are better respected) on the tools, do know very little about tree biology. We are trying to earn a living by cutting trees so if a customer wants to fell a tree we get say OK. If they want to butcher it we can try to give advice but our income comes from satisfying the customer not the treescape.

There are some good TO's out there, but I rekon most of them will have worked on the tools first..

Isn't this the same in all industries? I don't think it will ever change and I don't think it really matters - we've managed so far:wave:

i think thats probably right

I subscribe to the camp that fully supports the idea that the only way for future Industry harmony & developement is for a core group of transitioners remaining with an occasional sturdy foot in the harness, however that personally manifests itself.

Fading memory should not be the only way to interact and communicate job specs and policy with those who are at the proverbial coal face.

So, is the AA's technicain membership grade a step in the right direction towards filling a gap? Offering a technical post nominal - Tech.Arbor.A?

Will it encourage more guys on the tools to join up to a professional organisation?