Assessing climbers for safeness

[Khriss]

Definitely need to assess skills through n through,  some climbers Are better at dismantling than pruning / reduction. Hopefully mentoring is available and If Not - Why Not ? Cos yr staff are yr money maker not how shiny yr 4×4 is. K

[Joe Newton]

53 minutes ago, aspenarb said:

 

I think you can tell what a climber is all about by the time they have got their kit on and are standing at the bottom of a tree. There is an air of confidence about someone thats good at their job, its not to be confused with just being cocky.

 

Bob

 This. A lot of climbers who tell you how many massive trees they've boshed out are like that tough guy down the pub who goes on about how many bouncers he's knocked out with one punch. 

[john p]

 This. A lot of climbers who tell you how many massive trees they've boshed out are like that tough guy down the pub who goes on about how many bouncers he's knocked out with one punch. 

Pretty sure I told you about the 300ft oak that overhung the orphanage that I rigged the 4 ton top out of?

[john p]

Before morning brew time

[Joe Newton]

47 minutes ago, john p said:

Pretty sure I told you about the 300ft oak that overhung the orphanage that I rigged the 4 ton top out of?

 Pussy, that could have been cut and chucked in under an hour.

[Khriss]

...an yr gravel sandwich you bitched over cos there were too much mayo in it k

[AHPP]

 
I think you can tell what a climber is all about by the time they have got their kit on and are standing at the bottom of a tree. There is an air of confidence about someone thats good at their job, its not to be confused with just being cocky.
 
Bob

Even before that, you can tell a lot from how they stoke their pipe.

[geoffrey]

Many could(and should) be weeded out by the colleges, but that won't give them the pass rates they want would it.

 

Speaking of which, the aerial rescue unit is a joke.  All they have to do is tick some boxes and are then apparently competent.  At the minimum there should be a maximum time frame applied.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

28 minutes ago, geoffrey said:

Many could(and should) be weeded out by the colleges, but that won't give them the pass rates they want would it.

 

Speaking of which, the aerial rescue unit is a joke.  All they have to do is tick some boxes and are then apparently competent.  At the minimum there should be a maximum time frame applied.

I don't think most colleges offer assessments these days so "pass rates" are actually more related to student nos. = "bums on seats" = income.

 

Regarding the term 'competence', that isn't used any more being replaced by qualification or 'licence to practice' and thereafter, in the workplace, skills will be practices and honed and maybe after a 2 year period someone will have attained a level of competency...and maybe 2-3 years later they'll be a proficient operator (an ICoP term.)

The Association did develop a system to take account of a whole range of facets associated with operator development from trainee arborist - master arborist, and several in between, which included training / quals / experience / time served / knowledge etc., all of which had to be validated / signed-off by an authorized person, e.g the employer.

 

Sadly the industry never really bought into it and hence it has been shelved   

 

Cheers,

Paul

[Steve Bullman]

i'd forgot about that.  Shame it didn't come off