Assessing climbers for safeness

[Boggle4137]

I got my cs38 around a year ago and I'm trying to get into the industry, I get a chance to cut down the odd tree but not climb (I practice myself in my own time), but honestly if it came to me rescuing someone from a tree I would only have half a clue. I'm competent at first aid but remembering the different methods of rescue and implementing them would be a problem for me and quite a few climbers I would of thought, as it is probably not practiced enough.... As for training i recently seen a climbing refresher course (basically cs38) and all proceeds went to charity (the name of the event eludes me), now if I had a climber under me and i wasn't sure of him/her or thought they could use more experience then I would dip in my pocket and send them on the course. I'm going on a bit here but at some point everyone was a newbie and looked to the "older" guys to teach and mentor them, invest in your staff and they will take care of your company.

[Mullany]

On 30/08/2018 at 16:33, AA Teccie (Paul) said:

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

That is a shame.

Ive often thought that in the arb industry the balance of value between experience and having tickets is tipped toward the latter. Tickets are at best a starting point and by themselves a poor guarantee of competence, by which I mean knowledge/safety/ speed/knowing your limits.

You cant teach expierience but you can structure it and combine it with tickets where necessary. 

In other industries with inherent risk such as mountain leadership or sailing you are expected to keep a log of your experience. This experience is complimented by mentorship and formal training/examination. 

I would love to see somthing like this applied to arb and seems to be similar to what the AA tried to develop. It could move the emphasis back to experience but be structured enough to maintain an industry standard and train out poor or unsafe practice.

Of course any progress in safety will only come if companies and individuals are willing to accept that working in safe manner is somewhat more time consuming than how many currently operate. To elaborate on what I mean there, experienced climbers mentoring newer climbers takes time but of course is nesacary if the industry is to develop competent workers. Another example would be step cutting and snapping pieces off takes more time and skill than cutting and holding but is far safer. 

Job time and therefore prices would have to increase to reflect this safer manner.

Cheers

Another Paul