Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Arb Assoc's view on freelancers and small businesses.


Joe Newton
 Share

Recommended Posts

This article is worth a read for those interested in hearing how our industry representatives view freelance specialists and small startup businesses:

 

TREES.ORG.UK

<p class= lead brown bold >I like to try to pick up on topical issues in my articles so in the last edition...

 

It's a pretty disappointing read with gross generalisations and hyperbole aplenty.

 

Terms such as bottom feeders and parasites thrown about freely. See for yourself. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Log in or register to remove this advert

Where did I go wrong, I should have stayed working for an aa approved firm (one that pays this guy who wrote the article to do all the paperwork to become arb approved and then on the day of the assessment has to call in a freelance climber to even be able to pass) rather then making a go at earning a decent living with a good work life balance. 

 

If working for an aa approve company was so good why did this guy go and start his own company 🤔

 

 

  • Like 6
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's one person's view and an article which appeared in a previous issue of the Arb Mag.

 

Paul's view (Mr Elcoat) is clearly that arborists would be better employed by businesses directly to relieve the shortage of trained, skilled and experience staff, i.e. in the context of the article, and allow for better work planning and service delivery.

In practice many choose self-employment as their preferred option, and most quite successfully (I think), but we would hope if it doesn't work out for them they would consider re-employment rather than leave the industry which just adds further to the current staffing problem for businesses.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, treevolution said:

 

If working for an aa approve company was so good why did this guy go and start his own company 🤔

 

 

Personal / professional development, and a new challenge, and he's been very successful and helped many businesses to develop and meet their fuller potential (as I see it.)

 

To clarify we're talking about Paul Elcoat here, of Elcoat Ltd., who is an industry based H&S advisor and business management consultant, i.e. he's not a contractor. 

 

(Apologies in advance if I've got the wrong end of the stick here....put it down to post-Covid brain fog :/ ) 

 

Cheers..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AA Teccie (Paul) said:

It's one person's view and an article which appeared in a previous issue of the Arb Mag.

 

Paul's view (Mr Elcoat) is clearly that arborists would be better employed by businesses directly to relieve the shortage of trained, skilled and experience staff, i.e. in the context of the article, and allow for better work planning and service delivery.

In practice many choose self-employment as their preferred option, and most quite successfully (I think), but we would hope if it doesn't work out for them they would consider re-employment rather than leave the industry which just adds further to the current staffing problem for businesses.

 

Nice try Paul, but by publishing it on your website you're not only giving Mr Elcoat's views a platform, but you're endorsing them.

 

Do you agree that the blanket use of terms like I mentioned above (parasites, bottom feeders and tax evaders) is appropriate?

 

Perhaps you'd like to invite the author to justify himself?

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Joe Newton said:

Nice try Paul, but by publishing it on your website you're not only giving Mr Elcoat's views a platform, but you're endorsing them.

 

Do you agree that the blanket use of terms like I mentioned above (parasites, bottom feeders and tax evaders) is appropriate?

 

Perhaps you'd like to invite the author to justify himself?

It wasn't a "try" Joe, I was just stating the facts, and I don't think we have endorsed it but we have published it and thereby given a platform for Paul to 'air his views.'

 

Yes, personally, I do agree some of the terminology used isn't helpful, nor appropriate, but I think it has to be read in context because he does make some very valid points. 

 

I will let Paul know this thread is active.

 

(It's a pity readers didn't write to the Arb Mag editor at the time and perhaps that would have been published in the following edition along with a reply from Paul.)

 

Cheers (and I'm logging off now so will pick any further comments up tomorrow.)

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


  •  

  • Featured Adverts

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.