Welcome & thank you for visiting us!

[Andy Collins]

I merely believe that if you had more AAAC's at whatever level it would generate more income, which in turn could then benefit the Aa and its members. Surely a grading system for AAAC would not confuse the public, but would be instantly recognisable amongst its ranks, all would be AAAC, but say Grade 1 (entry level) to Grade 5 (highest level) dependent on affordability. if my turnover is say 35k, yet I attain the same standard as a 300k business, why should I not become AAAC, yet the price should be pro rata based on turnover, and graded as such. Perhaps more could then justify the step towards AAAC, both financially and taking time to get systems in place? Sorry f I'm rambling, but I keep popping in and thinking of new bits to say:001_smile:

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

I merely believe that if you had more AAAC's at whatever level it would generate more income, which in turn could then benefit the Aa and its members. Surely a grading system for AAAC would not confuse the public, but would be instantly recognisable amongst its ranks, all would be AAAC, but say Grade 1 (entry level) to Grade 5 (highest level) dependent on affordability. if my turnover is say 35k, yet I attain the same standard as a 300k business, why should I not become AAAC, yet the price should be pro rata based on turnover, and graded as such. Perhaps more could then justify the step towards AAAC, both financially and taking time to get systems in place? Sorry f I'm rambling, but I keep popping in and thinking of new bits to say:001_smile:

 

Take it you've finished the 'Cherry' tree..?

 

Not rambling at all, that's my domain, it's good positive stuff you're suggesting and I'm all ears (literally, to some extent!)

 

I fully acknowledgde your point about 'pro-rata' fees based on turn over BUT this is more important in respect of the bigger the company = the more staff = the requirement for longer duration assessment = increased cost, and of course with a need to ensure the accreditation carries adequate 'value' to warrant this expenditure. This is addressed in the recent AAAC consultation document.

 

As I mentioned somewhere(?) in a previous posting, there may be scope to develop an interim award to act as a stepping stone to full AAAC status, IF firms want that or they can stay at the first stop if they so wish.

 

"Off the top...", my initial concern about grading in the way you suggest is that it won't be seen as a staged approach but more of a scoring mechanism, kinda like Distinction, Merit & Pass in exams (not a great analogy, sorry, but I hope it explains what I mean. If not I'll try this, in a fomer life I was a trainee driving instructor (now that is a stressful job!) and once you've passed you get graded based on your performance, anything from Grade 1 - Grade 6, and you have to be Grade 4 or above to practice).

 

Please keep the thoughts/ideas coming...thank you!

regards..

Paul

[Albedo]

Hi paul, that was me with the cherry tree (in arb or not to arb), nice little job in the sun. Took my time over it and got a couple more jobs out of it from passing neighbours etc.

 

And yes mostly by silky as you asked:thumbup1: By blunt silkie too, I keep mine blunt as the sharp ones frighten me.

 

Don't blame you getting confused over who said what at the moment. I think your'e doing an amazing job of answering this innitial onslaught from us lot, I'm sure it will settle to a more day to day comfortable level soon.

 

I like andy's idea of graded entry, regarding your response to that. How about one standard of tree work for all levels, and all the H&S C**P graded from 1 to 1 million

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Hi paul, that was me with the cherry tree (in arb or not to arb), nice little job in the sun. Took my time over it and got a couple more jobs out of it from passing neighbours etc.

 

And yes mostly by silky as you asked:thumbup1: By blunt silkie too, I keep mine blunt as the sharp ones frighten me.

 

Don't blame you getting confused over who said what at the moment. I think your'e doing an amazing job of answering this innitial onslaught from us lot, I'm sure it will settle to a more day to day comfortable level soon.

 

I like andy's idea of graded entry, regarding your response to that. How about one standard of tree work for all levels, and all the H&S C**P graded from 1 to 1 million

 

CONFUSED???...I don't get confused at all....just ask 'Matron'???!!!

 

Glad the cheery (?) Cherry tree got it's haircut and in the sunshine too eh....foooooond memories, ah well!

 

I do feel a bit bombarded at the moment but hey I was never naive enough to think I wouldn't be but you (all) tricked me initially by giving me a easy intro...still, as long as summat better than 'where we are' / 'what we've got' comes out of it I don't mind a few more grey hairs!

 

I totaly agree that stanadrds of tree work quality must be a 'common' standard throughout coz if we can't get that right ("yeah, yeah, I know what your thinking everyone!) then there's not much point continuing.

 

I think you got your H&S abbreviations mixed up as 'ACOP' doesn't have any *s in it...ha!

 

Thanks for the post Andy, Tony, Fred, 'PAUL'...!!!!

 

Cheers..

Paul

[Mesterh]

I dont see why it cant adopt a multi-tiered system of approval, without watering down the AAAC status, so the smaller company could start off at an entry level, then as it grows could escalate to the heady heights of full approval. In this tight economy, we all have to look at our budgets, the AA included, and surely to gain more Approved contractors would boost the coffers, as well as its standing in the Arb community that it supports. Adapt and survive.

 

 

I'll second that:thumbup1:

 

IIRC() there is a big difference between how big companies(over 5 employees) have to operate by law compared to small 2-3 man bands(I guess the majority of us on here)

 

I would therefore expect the AA to differentiate between the small and large in there pricing, assessment and reassessment strategies or something more appropriate in what you do ie strategies is probably the completely wrong word but hopefully you understand what I mean:confused1:

 

This I think would help the smaller companies get AAAC approval and keep a bit of a tighter check on the larger companies, improving the industry for all camps.

[skyhuck]

I dont see why it cant adopt a multi-tiered system of approval, without watering down the AAAC status, so the smaller company could start off at an entry level, then as it grows could escalate to the heady heights of full approval. In this tight economy, we all have to look at our budgets, the AA included, and surely to gain more Approved contractors would boost the coffers, as well as its standing in the Arb community that it supports. Adapt and survive.

 

Good call Andy!!!

 

Its funny I was thinking the very same thing today, it could be a sort of star system, like hotels have.

 

The way I see things is the whole industry needs to start traveling in the same direction. If we think of the AA as a train at the moment there are only first class tickets available, but we could have business class and standard tickets available too, then at least more can get on board and start traveling in the same direction.

 

If I was a 1star AAAC and a client said they could give me more work if a became 2star I would have a real incentive to make the move.

[arb culture]

Good call Andy!!!

 

Its funny I was thinking the very same thing today, it could be a sort of star system, like hotels have.

 

The way I see things is the whole industry needs to start traveling in the same direction. If we think of the AA as a train at the moment there are only first class tickets available, but we could have business class and standard tickets available too, then at least more can get on board and start traveling in the same direction.

 

If I was a 1star AAAC and a client said they could give me more work if a became 2star I would have a real incentive to make the move.

 

I think Andy and Skyhuck are on to something here.

 

[Andy Collins]

I'm not even a member, and I take it Dave isnt either, yet we sit here and came up with a simple plan in 5mins. The trouble with many organisations is that they are tied up in petty beurocracy which slows the wheels to a grinding halt. What I do know, gleaned from the hallowed pages of Arbtalk, is that many are disillusioned with the AA, and have been for some time. This would say to me that they need a radical shake-up, and change for the 21st century, clean off the rose-tinted specs and listen to the public. Without change, the AA would become just another dinosaur, top-heavy and feeble little limbs!

I know Paul has had a trial by fire here, from various corners, and that was to be expected tbh, but I for one welcome his refreshing approach to the issues, and hope he can help instill the changes that will make us all wish to be a part of the AA.

[Tom D]

Hi Paul, we had a chat via email a few years ago re the AAAC scheme, and like many others I decided against it on the grounds that it would cost me too much in relation to what it could earn me. I also mentioned at the time that I dont think public awarness of the scheme is high enough either. I think that Andy and Huck have hit the nail on the head with a graded system, I think for the vast majority if tree surgeons out there, to join the scheme would be to run before they can walk, an entry level option with some sort of CPD would be a big step forward IMO.

[Amelanchier]

AA registered contractors?