Register of Tree Work Operatives

[jaime bray]

Apologies but as i try to decypher from your post a point that you may be were trying to make, would you like me to convey to the comittee that you feel that what you reference within your post is excessive?

 

Thanks for your opinion, much appreciated.

 

In relation to the groundsmen.

[jaime bray]

Who (apart from those in the R2 steering group) actually wants this for the industry?

 

I have had 1 person off arbtalk show support via a pm and four other people show support via email in the last three days relating to their support for the scheme. That is not to be taken as me saying the whole industry, just purely highlighting thats all.

 

I can not remember the details but there was a questionaire/survey carried out two years ago if i remember correctly.

 

As to who was surveyed i am unable to remember at this moment in time.

Edited January 31, 2013 by jaime bray

[Andy Clark]

Admittedly that report is two years old now, the scheme has changed significantly in the last week, let alone the last two years!

 

 

Not sure I understand the relevance of your comment Jaime.

 

The idea of the scheme dates back to circa 2007, and predates the Lantra report.

 

The report was conducted by Lantra et al as an appraisal of the current size etc of the trees and timber industry, and the scheme is something that, ok, started as an idea back in 07, but has been revisited as a result of one of the outcomes of the report.

 

Not sure how changes to the scheme within the last few weeks, are therefore relative to the 2 year age of the report.

 

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

[Andy Clark]

In relation to the groundsmen.

 

 

Are you asking me if I think 5 different grades for a groundsman is excessive?

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

[jaime bray]

Not sure I understand the relevance of your comment Jaime.

 

The idea of the scheme dates back to circa 2007, and predates the Lantra report.

 

The report was conducted by Lantra et al as an appraisal of the current size etc of the trees and timber industry, and the scheme is something that, ok, started as an idea back in 07, but has been revisited as a result of one of the outcomes of the report.

 

Not sure how changes to the scheme within the last few weeks, are therefore relative to the 2 year age of the report.

 

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

 

No worries, point taken. You enjoying the report?

[Yorkshireman]

Hi Jamie

 

I have a vast array of knowledge , from areas outside of the tree world ,

 

I see the frustration of many

 

I see the brillant work done by many

 

I know the heart breaking feeling of failure of those who aspire only to have their and their empollyees dreams smashed

 

I see the injustice done by the current system

 

where the rogues profit , when the good fail beacuse they have too many hurdles to clear . legislation is great when it a level playing field

 

but when schools & the like can & do employ bloke in a white van using rigger boots, jeans and top handled saws on the ground when these public funded bodies can get away with it

 

then the altruist goals we all share... mean sod all ,,

as it costs money to stay in business , to do all those things that are required to give oppurtunity to those who ,like us love this way of life

 

I have no axe to grind, I am happy to help and as a lantra awards Arb sector training provider probably would gain from a focus on personal skills however ,

I am a simple man who 13 years ago set up a tree businees with a 5,000 loan and built on that with a load of pain , joy frustration and happiness.

 

I see this from many sides as the contractor as the employers as the aspiring new business owner, as a training provider as an Nptc assessor many many roles ,,

 

I write as a realistic take on what is proposed.. some you will agree with others you will disregard and thats you choice ,, but please remember there are more people in this industry other than those who can articulate their feelings & thoughts and in additon to those who will express their held opinions

and are perhaps different to those who are in the steering groups

especially where those consultees may be the same people merely wearing a different hat sat on a different chair..

 

will can all perhaps be guilty of believing that we are doing is the right and proper thing for the right and proper reasons.

BUT if it doesnt make sense or doesnt gain industry approval [and that does not solely mean the big boys ,, this industry is as was idnetified the lantra study document Andy clark posted are of 1-4 employees]

 

.as those business owners cant afford the luxury or even want it ,,>? as they already make these decisions day in week out , as if they didnt their business would faiil and their house would be repossesed.

 

As I have said thorughout I support a positive

 

but if that is being imposed from the top down with a dog matic approach it will get exactly what it deserves...

I arent saying that this is what you are trying to do but I offer that as a truthful assessment of settiment of rank file arbo's out there

 

I had hoped to attend stonleigh to contribute ,,, but I live in the north country far from where proper arborists live and it would have incurred too much cost burden for an altruistic event where my input may not have been worth the expenditure

Edited January 31, 2013 by Yorkshireman

[Andy Clark]

 

I can not remember the details but there was a questionaire/survey carried out two years ago if i remember correctly.

 

As to who was surveyed i am unable to remember at this moment in time.

 

 

I have already attached a link to the Lantra report Jaime.

 

All the details of the questionnaire/survey are contained within.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

[jaime bray]

And from what I've digested from the background docs. so far, that's exactly the outcome of what this will produce.

 

Appreciated, the way the industry finds itself currently it is extremely dispersed and would undoubtedly be like herding cats in trying to culminate all that into one centralised focal point........

 

But 5 different grades for a groundsman???

 

Surely that sort of mentality is only ever going to work to exacerbate the problem, not improve it?

 

 

I'm still going with the 2011 Lantra report, so will come back to this when I've fully grasped the in's and out's.

 

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

 

No, i am asking as to whether or not you wish for me to take from a post you made that 5 groundsmen grades will exacerbate a problem, as i take from the manner of your text an incinuation that it is excessive..

 

If you feel that 5 is great then I must have mis-interpreted your post. Apologies

[jaime bray]

I have already attached a link to the Lantra report Jaime.

 

All the details of the questionnaire/survey are contained within.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

 

Many thanks for that, much appreciated.

[Andy Clark]

No worries, point taken. You enjoying the report?

 

 

I have no "point" Jaime. I was replying to your post as quoted, and questioning what you had written.

 

From what I've read of all of the background paperwork so far, I'm "enjoying" putting this all in to context and actually finding out all of the relevant details that seem lacking within this thread.

 

I refer to my earlier post in questioning why this level of info was not freely provided by those seeking support for the scheme when faced with the questions asked.

 

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk