Method Statements an insult to intelligence

[Amelanchier]

So why do we do training and qualify if you have to talk step by step through your actions like a complete and utter idiot ??

 

I'd say that its precisely because we've had that training that we can better describe our actions. It takes professional understanding and experience to be able to show that clarity.

[Paul Jenks]

Especially as we would all, as professionals, use a teaspoon to remove the tea bag rather than dip our fingers in to catch the tiny corner poking out of the brew.

[gensetsteve]

I now dont supply ms until I have a purchase order. We have in the past done a site visit to quote the job then second visit to produce ms then suprise suprise someones brother inlaw onsite gets the job. Complete with our instruction manual ( method statement ). The ms statement also gives the big corporates a better idea if they can handle the job in house. We often service generators on the roof of shopping centres and the paper work is getting horrendous.

[Dean Lofthouse]

Basically it,s a bill of quantities and allows them to decide which company they are going to use

ie 1 might say fell it

1 might say dismantle

1 might say use a mewp

I know which of those i would choose

Also if they do not check what your doing and that your qualified and working to Industry guidance ect and something went wrong the guy that authorised the job is in for a right kicking

This is 1 reason we try to avoid contractors as we are responsible for what goes wrong:blushing: even though we are not there:thumbup:

 

I totally agree with Risk Assessments, no problem with that wahtsoever, but this firm asked me to send them a risk assessment of the job a week in advance, so I sent an example and told them my risk assessments are filled in on the day to take into account events or risks that may be there on the day.

 

Surely experience, qualifications and possibly an interview or trial should be the preferred method of appointing contractors.

 

Anyone can fill in a method statement and tick the boxes that the client wants ticking but might be a right div or cowboy

[andyman]

I worked on a government site where somebody spilt a cuppa at her desk. Now rather than banning cups at desks they went into long written discussion about buying Tommy Tippy type cups for all the staff at approx £3.00 each. It was finally decided no action would be taken as the cost was prohibitive. H & S for the boys a total load of bull when people can't take responsibility for drinking a cup of tea or coffee.

 

It's only going to get worse as the people in charge of these decisions have no one to answer to

[Dean Lofthouse]

I'd say that its precisely because we've had that training that we can better describe our actions. It takes professional understanding and experience to be able to show that clarity.

 

I think the point I am trying to make is, if the person who is reading the method statement understands it to the extent that they can say that the way you are carrying out the job is wrong or right then they should be setting the specifications for the job and you quote to those specifications

 

If they dont understand then whats the point, they should be employing someone to do a job that requires the skill, experience and training of the person they are employing

 

What the point of me employing a computor technician to repair my computor and him telling me step by step what he is going to do if I still dont understand because I dont have the training or skill to understand

 

I look at his qualifications, experience and ask for references rather than him write down on a bit of paper what he is going to do and how good he is going to do it and telling me what I want to hear, but not actually being able to do the job

 

Method Statements dont prevent shoddy work

[Frankie Lawrence]

I dont agree with method statements either its all just bum covering stuff because then HSE might have a reason to get monney off you.

 

I dont agree with Risk assesments to be honest were not idiots and im aware that something could make me trip over or that its raining so i may slip i think thats more insulting intelligence yet again designed to cover your arse in the event of an accident

 

What I do agree with is emergencey planning I.E nearest hospital, helicopter landing site, grid reference etc etc they could save you alot of time in an emergencey and could save lifes.

 

I do risk assements but its all crap to me but I do emergency planning because it could save lifes

[Mesterh]

I dont agree with method statements either its all just bum covering stuff because then HSE might have a reason to get monney off you.

 

I dont agree with Risk assesments to be honest were not idiots and im aware that something could make me trip over or that its raining so i may slip i think thats more insulting intelligence yet again designed to cover your arse in the event of an accident

 

What I do agree with is emergencey planning I.E nearest hospital, helicopter landing site, grid reference etc etc they could save you alot of time in an emergencey and could save lifes.

 

I do risk assements but its all crap to me but I do emergency planning because it could save lifes

 

 

Yep same here I think in depth written RA's are just as an insult as a MS.

 

As soon as it starts to spit with rain you are supposed to stop works re-evaluate an make sure everyone is informed.

[Paul Jenks]

I sort of agree with much of the comment on this thread. As an employer we have lots of responsibilities to both our clients and employees. We also have a responsibility to the company. SSRA when used correctly not only highlight hazards and hence risks but engenders a culture of awareness to hazards and how to control them. We all take risks in what is an inherently dangerous arena. I know I do. Also I know there is more risk crossing the road than some tree operations. However I, as an employer, have a legal and moral responsibility to provide a safe environment for my staff to work in. We acheive this by training, safety checks on equipment and vehicles, Safe work practices, adhering to WAH regs etc etc etc. All this is woven into the SSRA so that we do the best we can to protect our guys. A good working document like the SSRA takes years of modification and constant review to maintain its effectivness so it is not a static piece of work. Staff should have a working knowledge of and some input into its development so they understand it and use it.

Yes it does cover the companies arse but it also looks after the companies greatest assets.

Most method statements are just a detailed methodology of what we all do day to day. Once you've written one you just adapt it for the next job that requires it. Every now and then someone helps you get a bit more detail into it or guides you to present the detail in a different way. It keeps the document alive and current which is no bad thing.

[Dean Lofthouse]

Most method statements are just a detailed methodology of what we all do day to day. Once you've written one you just adapt it for the next job that requires it. Every now and then someone helps you get a bit more detail into it or guides you to present the detail in a different way. It keeps the document alive and current which is no bad thing.

 

I agree mostly

 

Dont you think filling in a mundane form will create complacency Paul.

 

They shouldn't be used to insult peoples intelligence by listing the OBVIOUS, they should be used to get the people filling them in to think outside the box.

 

Detailed Risk ass, I think do just that. If you can fill in a MS at home without visiting the site then whats the point of it.

 

The SSRA should cover everything, the methology is down to why we are called proffesionals and go through training.