Register of Tree Work Operatives

[jaime bray]

I,m not sure I follow. It's not just a register but also a grading progression based on attributed prior learning as scored not by people with landbased assessing awards but by people with tree/arb knowledge. The criteria will be passed to them to score against, they could be moderated and standard set on a regular basis and will award as they see fit based on their take on the individual and as set against the criteria.

 

If there is no awarding body, but someone must set a standard - will it be the each of the participants in the setting up who owns the "register"

 

The experience aspect will be looked at by the use of recorded occasions when particular jobs that are undertaken are logged and used to recognise the experience and the professionalism that the task was carried out in. Most professional arborists know when a job has been done well, and would say that a job had been carried out professionally.

 

It is envisaged that the register will be reviewed by a group of people from as many sectors of arboriculture as possible, this group will develop as the scheme does, and industry adoption will highlight the direction the scheme moves in, with the final outcome being that the scheme continually assists in the industrys development and professionalisation

[Minotaur]

I am very cynical about these self appointed organisations. As I see it this is another group of self appointed organisations/companies/individuals/etc, creating 'their' industry standard, that will benefit them more than any other and bring them income, but cost the Tree Operatives in member fees, training fees, CPD fees, etc, etc.

 

If this is for Utility Contracts, LA Contractors etc, thats one thing, but to enforce this upon the industry as a whole, ie domestic and small companies, at this time - when so many can't find work, pay bills, etc, etc, etc. Is wrong

 

Whats the benefit to TWO? I just see this as an extra cost, most of the 'bad apples' will carry on as they please, because its not worth the time of the authorities - HSE, Police, Legal system etc, to do anything about them.

 

Also who is going to pay all these peers to come along and assess individuals?

 

My opinion, but if one of the steering group members can explain all the ways this would benefit us then I am happy to be persuaded.

Edited January 22, 2013 by Minotaur
Grammar

[Pete Mctree]

Thanks for the comments. It may be the case that if the scheme assists in the professionalisation of the industry it may help clients to recognise the skilll base of arborists they employ.

 

It is not solely about academic learning, it also considers experience. It is continually mentioned that the industry needs professionalising, and if people that have vasts amount of experience can stay in the industry longer as their professional skills and experience are recognised within an industry career framework, then they may be more inclined to stay in the industry and not seek alternative work, therefore minimising a total loss of operator skills and experience form arboriculture.

 

There, realistically are very few jobs for ageing & physically less than capable people within the industry. The industry is shrinking & just because an individual is better qualified & experienced will not keep them employed if they can't maintain the often intense workload.

I see this as a ill timed waste of time & money. It may be a better time to teach companies to streamline & optimise operations, no burden them with further audits, fees & time consuming paperwork

[treequip]

By the R2 steering group

 

Enlighten us Jamie, who are the R2 steering group

[Tony Lane]

I am new to the forum so be gentle!

 

The idea is have a register operated by the industry for the industry. We have been careful to make sure that we avoid vested interests from any one of the main industry organisations be they membership, awarding or commercial. In essence the register will try to get us away from a 'ticket culture' towards something which is more representative of the skills and experience operatives have.

 

For those who are not interested in stepwise progression that is fine, they should still find a place on the register where they can sit and at least be acknowledged for their 'competency' based on experience, time served and training/quals.

 

We won't fix this overnight and we will never fix it if we don't try.

[jaime bray]

There, realistically are very few jobs for ageing & physically less than capable people within the industry. The industry is shrinking & just because an individual is better qualified & experienced will not keep them employed if they can't maintain the often intense workload.

I see this as a ill timed waste of time & money. It may be a better time to teach companies to streamline & optimise operations, no burden them with further audits, fees & time consuming paperwork

 

Pete, Do you think that if people who have always been on the tools and have no educational qualifications but have a huge amount of valuable industry experience that was recognised, were able to have this experienced somehow quantified, then maybe they could find themselves going for supervisory roles within larger organisations where at the moment they may struggle to get the interview.

 

It wont be the company solely that has to do the auditing, there will be an impetus for the individual to use the system to progress through there careeer with clearer pathways identified and acknowledgment of their particular experiences along the way.

[jaime bray]

Enlighten us Jamie, who are the R2 steering group

 

Treequip

 

The committee consists of reps from the ISA,AA,Landex (college sector) Bartletts, Glendale, Tony lane, Lantra and myself as an independant contractor.

[jaime bray]

I am very cynical about these self appointed organisations. As I see it this is another group of self appointed organisations/companies/individuals/etc, creating 'their' industry standard, that will benefit them more than any other and bring them income, but cost the Tree Operatives in member fees, training fees, CPD fees, etc, etc.

 

If this is for Utility Contracts, LA Contractors etc, thats one thing, but to enforce this upon the industry as a whole, ie domestic and small companies, at this time - when so many can't find work, pay bills, etc, etc, etc. Is wrong

 

Whats the benefit to TWO? I just see this as an extra cost, most of the 'bad apples' will carry on as they please, because its not worth the time of the authorities - HSE, Police, Legal system etc, to do anything about them.

 

Also who is going to pay all these peers to come along and assess individuals?

 

My opinion, but if one of the steering group members can explain all the ways this would benefit us then I am happy to be persuaded.

 

Minotaur,

 

Regarding bringing in money to the people on the committee, that is certainly not the case. Any funds raised will be directed back into the system to enable enhancements, cover marketing initiatives and meeting costs and assist in keeping the system up to date.

[jaime bray]

I am very cynical about these self appointed organisations. As I see it this is another group of self appointed organisations/companies/individuals/etc, creating 'their' industry standard, that will benefit them more than any other and bring them income, but cost the Tree Operatives in member fees, training fees, CPD fees, etc, etc.

 

If this is for Utility Contracts, LA Contractors etc, thats one thing, but to enforce this upon the industry as a whole, ie domestic and small companies, at this time - when so many can't find work, pay bills, etc, etc, etc. Is wrong

 

Whats the benefit to TWO? I just see this as an extra cost, most of the 'bad apples' will carry on as they please, because its not worth the time of the authorities - HSE, Police, Legal system etc, to do anything about them.

 

Also who is going to pay all these peers to come along and assess individuals?

 

My opinion, but if one of the steering group members can explain all the ways this would benefit us then I am happy to be persuaded.

 

Minotaur,

 

Regards to benefiting me the scheme will not be of benefit in the way I think you mean, I run a small two man company, I care very much about this industry and when i hear other industries developing professional standards framework and gaining the professional recognition for it it makes me want to try and help professionalise it.

 

When i say other industry i refer to schemes set up by the pig and also the poultry industry. If those industries can professionalise then im sure arboriculture can.

[jaime bray]

I am very cynical about these self appointed organisations. As I see it this is another group of self appointed organisations/companies/individuals/etc, creating 'their' industry standard, that will benefit them more than any other and bring them income, but cost the Tree Operatives in member fees, training fees, CPD fees, etc, etc.

 

If this is for Utility Contracts, LA Contractors etc, thats one thing, but to enforce this upon the industry as a whole, ie domestic and small companies, at this time - when so many can't find work, pay bills, etc, etc, etc. Is wrong

 

Whats the benefit to TWO? I just see this as an extra cost, most of the 'bad apples' will carry on as they please, because its not worth the time of the authorities - HSE, Police, Legal system etc, to do anything about them.

 

Also who is going to pay all these peers to come along and assess individuals?

 

My opinion, but if one of the steering group members can explain all the ways this would benefit us then I am happy to be persuaded.

 

I was very sceptical and analytical of the scheme when i first got asked to give an opinion, but at the last meeting i was shown the software that is being used to run the scheme and and how it is used and it has changed my mind.