Arb or not to arb?

[Amelanchier]

 

The object of the Charity is to advance the science of arboriculture for the

public benefit

 

1) How are the public "benefiting", from having an "industry" that remains unregulated and unstandardised? An ongoing problem which the AAAC actually contributes to, as opposed to doing everything withinin its powers to rectify?

 

Your question makes assumptions that are not supported. You infer that the AAAC scheme contributes to 'unregulation' and 'unstandardisation'. You also infer that the scheme could do more to prevent these things.

 

Therefore it begs the question, does the AAAC sheme actually do these things? I'd suggest, anecdotes excepted, we don't know if they do.

[Amelanchier]

Tony, i fail to see how anything i have said equates to "the politically motivated practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence."

 

Having spent many years working with contractors up and down the country, including working within and manageing AAACs, i certainly do have evidence and experience to substantiate and "back up" anything to which I lay claim.

 

Yep fair enough. I forgot the smiley

[Amelanchier]

Tony, just to correct your standpoint....... the matter of "slander" was actually raised by another on an alternative thread, relating to the recent publication of the official AAAC consultation response.......

 

And here in this thread.

 

...is implying that those contractors not AAAC approved are NOT proffesional, not also tantamount to slander and therefore poses a further possible breach to 4.23?

[Johny Walker]

has it just become s charity ?? i thought it was a profit organisation !........................................................................

[skyhuck]

has it just become s charity ?? i thought it was a profit organisation !........................................................................

 

Its both.

[Johny Walker]

can any 1, do that ,does it save on tax etc

[skyhuck]

can any 1, do that ,does it save on tax etc

 

No and yes.

[Amelanchier]

Now, in light of a recent off forum PM, and the resultant but now removed thread relating to the quality of LA tree work, you and i both know that to be untrue.

 

"Proof" of this, can also be found straight from the horses mouth as it where, on the same topic on the UKTC LA Tree Pruning Standards

 

The resultant comments within that forum, mostly by LA TOs themselves, make for VERY interesting reading. .

 

Sure. I just wonder why you think that TOs shouldn't enforce the standards of one particular group of contractors. The fact that most TOs haven't got the time or powers to do so isn't relevant.

 

Agreed, no, it doesn't "necesarily" imply the inverse....... on face value!

 

But lets not forget that the AA's own Director, recently publicly denounced the BBC over that "tree o clock" issue, as "failing in it's public duty" blah blah blah, DESPITE the fact that the BBC had sought proffesional tree planting advice from numerous organisations much larger than AA.

 

The point in case being, I have grown very weiry of the "self-gratification" tactics, clearly and continually employed. Passive aggression, is aggression nonetheless. Not qualities i expect from a so called "Leading" organisation.

 

Well I guess they're damned if they do and damned if the don't . IMO interesting parallels can be drawn with the ISA. They're representing tree workers internationally without talking to non members like me (how very dare they!) and they have a certification scheme that could be accused of your inverse slander (You're an Arborist, does than mean I'm not?). Yet curiously they attract very little vitriol.

Edited March 2, 2010 by Amelanchier
sp.

[nailer]

Just out of curiosity Nailer, obviously as you hide behind a pseudonym i have no way of knowing who you are....... are you an AA member? AAAC?? AARC??

 

Andy, I'm not hiding. My website is in my signature. I have never been a member of the Arb Assoc. but I do like the trade show they organise for our industry every year. I hope I haven't offended you with my post. I thought I was making a fair point.

[Andy Clark]

Sure. I just wonder why you think that TOs shouldn't enforce the standards of one particular group of contractors. The fact that most TOs haven't got the time or powers to do so isn't relevant.

 

 

 

Well I guess they're damned if they do and damned if the don't . IMO interesting parallels can be drawn with the ISA. They're representing tree workers internationally without talking to non members like me (how very dare they!) and they have a certification scheme that could be accused of your inverse slander (You're an Arborist, does than mean I'm not?). Yet curiously they attract very little vitriol.

 

I think that the fact that TOs suffer for lack of time is extremelly relevent! Again, drawing from my experience as "proof", of working within and manageing LA tree work contracts, i know of many that wouldn't "police" the contractors....... they'd simply just throw them off contract!

 

So surely adding to the work load of a TO by seeking that they "police" contractors, is exactly just that.... ie, adding to the TOs already stretched resource? Which comes at the expense of the tax payer?

 

Or perhaps you'd like me to share my experience of LA tree work contracts/contractors and little brown envelopes?

 

 

You make the point of the ISA....... again, i'd beg to differ. I'm an Arborist, yes. I'm also an ISA member..... but i'm not an ISA "Certified" Arborist.

 

Consider the differences in the particular organisations terminology........ "Find a Certified Arborist" versus "Find a Proffesional".

 

Of course the other standpoint to consider, is that "does being an AAAC, actually quantify you as a proffesional?" Surely the manor in which you conduct your affairs, is what deems someone as a proffesional, not which particular trade organisation you belong to?

 

 

Perhaps I should also throw this into the mix..... REGISTERED Consultant, APPROVED Contractor.

 

 

I think the point i'm trying to make Tony, is that the english language is an extremely powerfull tool, if used in the right/wrong way........ just ask Derren Brown.

And no matter how many times you say "it doesn't imply this or that", it clearly does, otherwise several people on this thread and others, wouldn't have taken it as such, would they??