Register of Tree Work Operatives

[Andy Collins]

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.

 

I like this way of thinking, I think it's something we've chatted about several times in the past. I am one of the "senior" people in this job, with basically just NPTCs to show my "experience" in this job. How can this be quantified under the current system we have? What take into consideration the considerable years on the tools I have, if I wished to sell myself to a company? I think done properly, this is a good thing for the trade.

A concern for me is that this job is one that is based on the survival of the fittest, nothing more nothing less. Very few companies have the room or the structure to keep on those who are not at the peak of physical fitness, regardless of knowledge and skills. I look at myself as an example here. The spirit is willing, the knowledge of years and years of accumulated experience is there, but physically I am not up to par, and I doubt I shall return to my former self (i wouldnt employ me!!) I'm ok for now, I can find enough to keep ticking over, but many are not as fortunate. They will leave the industry, go and finish their years elsewhere.

[JonnyVine]

I'm having difficulty understanding all this, sorry.

 

I was, or at least have been under the impression that there is more opportunity for further learning than most of the hands-on, breetches-arse grafty type occupations?

There already exists recognised learning by the AA and ISA not to mention the vast array of independents like TreeLife etc, offering levell 4/6 diplomas, PTI etc, all industry recognised and understood as requiring a degree of professionalism to pass them.

 

Imagine being a builder of plasterer etc.

 

Or have I completely missed the point?

[jaime bray]

I'm having difficulty understanding all this, sorry.

 

I was, or at least have been under the impression that there is more opportunity for further learning than most of the hands-on, breetches-arse grafty type occupations?

There already exists recognised learning by the AA and ISA not to mention the vast array of independents like TreeLife etc, offering levell 4/6 diplomas, PTI etc, all industry recognised and understood as requiring a degree of professionalism to pass them.

 

Imagine being a builder of plasterer etc.

 

Or have I completely missed the point?

 

Jonny,

 

It is intended that the scheme will recognise all of the above, but; and possibly more importantly, also quantify and recognise experience within the industry.

[jaime bray]

I like this way of thinking, I think it's something we've chatted about several times in the past. I am one of the "senior" people in this job, with basically just NPTCs to show my "experience" in this job. How can this be quantified under the current system we have? What take into consideration the considerable years on the tools I have, if I wished to sell myself to a company? I think done properly, this is a good thing for the trade.

A concern for me is that this job is one that is based on the survival of the fittest, nothing more nothing less. Very few companies have the room or the structure to keep on those who are not at the peak of physical fitness, regardless of knowledge and skills. I look at myself as an example here. The spirit is willing, the knowledge of years and years of accumulated experience is there, but physically I am not up to par, and I doubt I shall return to my former self (i wouldnt employ me!!) I'm ok for now, I can find enough to keep ticking over, but many are not as fortunate. They will leave the industry, go and finish their years elsewhere.

 

So if the scheme can recognise and quantify the value of the years served it may enable them, through industry adoption of the scheme, to be able to go to employers that offer supervisory roles and say i am the man for the job.

[Andy Collins]

IME there are very very few supervisory roles available throughout the nation, this is and always has been a very hands on job, and hereby lies a reason why the worn out, industry served senior has to leave. Those who are fortunate will have set up their own business, and employ the younger more physically able to continue their business, I suspect the majority will leave and become jobbing gardeners etc, or join their local college on the training teams.

Having said all this, it's good IMO to see a focus group heading in this direction.

[jaime bray]

IME there are very very few supervisory roles available throughout the nation, this is and always has been a very hands on job, and hereby lies a reason why the worn out, industry served senior has to leave. Those who are fortunate will have set up their own business, and employ the younger more physically able to continue their business, I suspect the majority will leave and become jobbing gardeners etc, or join their local college on the training teams.

Having said all this, it's good IMO to see a focus group heading in this direction.

 

Andy,

Bearing in mind that it is the 'worn out climbers' that are often the ones that teach the people, that take their jobs in the long run, how to do the job when we are learning, i feel that as an industry we have duty to re-adddress the issue of people dropping out the industry at this valuable time of their career, and try and sustain their employment in arboriculture.

 

We need to start somewhere i guess.

[Minotaur]

So if the scheme can recognise and quantify the value of the years served it may enable them, through industry adoption of the scheme, to be able to go to employers that offer supervisory roles and say i am the man for the job.

 

Sorry, but I don't think this is going to happen, no disrespect to anyone, but if a company has a choice between an experienced and physically able individual and one less physically so, then they are going to choose the one who can put in the graft. Just makes common sense.

Perhaps you should be looking to use the skills of these more mature individuals as Surveyors, trainers and /or Consultants. Or perhaps the AA can employ them!!

We live in a competitive world, survival of the fittest!

I want to make it clear that I am not a younster at all, turner 47 last week, so know what its like! I have been fit and able all my life, bar a stint at 19 when I had an aggressive Cancer, survived that and have got on with my life, but I am starting to age - don't recover as quickly as I used to from a haed days work, eye sights not 20/20 anymore, etc, etc!

The worlds not 'fair', or a level playing field, you just have to work haed and make the most of all the opportunities that come your way.

 

Chris Coombs

Edited January 22, 2013 by Minotaur
Correcting mistakes

[jaime bray]

Sorry, but I don't think this is going to happen, no disrespect to anyone, but if a company has a choice between an experienced and physically able individual and one less physically so, then they are going to choose the one who can put in the graft. Just makes common sense.

Perhaps you should be looking to use the skills of these more mature individuals as Surveyors, trainers and /or Consultants. Or perhaps the AA can employ them!!

We live in a competitive world, survival of the fittest!

I want to make it clear that I am not a younster at all, turner 47 last week, so know what its like! I have been fit and able all my life, bar a stint at 19 when I had an aggressive Cancer, survived that and have got on with my life, but I am starting to age - don't recover as quickly as I used to from a haed days work, eye sights not 20/20 anymore, etc, etc!

The worlds not 'fair', or a level playing field, you just have to work haed and make the most of all the opportunities that come your way.

 

Chris Coombs

 

I would imagine that each case would be different but the loss of skills and amount of people commenting about hiring people who claim to be everything but are not needs addressing, if experience and skills could be assessed it may assist.

 

Thanks for the comments by the way

[Andy Clark]

This is a VERY interesting thread, and, as Andy has already pointed out, a topic that several of us from the length and breadth of the industry and its different sectors explored and penned out several years ago.

 

The framework model in itself is quite simple really - at least in terms of negating the opportunity for interpretation; and thus negating the liability of "recomending" contractors.

 

For staff, in short, you simply "Go back to the begining", and define the baseline and benchmarkable level of quals that each of us should (in theory) already hold in respect of the individual jobs. For example - a registered Groundsman would need to hold a qual in Manual Handling, and NPTC unit 45. A registered Climber would need to hold a comprehensive list of NPTC quals that reflect the work they do. A registered lead Climber would need to add in an accademic qual to that.

 

In terms of companies, you simply expand that principle to reflect you undertakings - for example a registered company would have all its employees benchmarked at the relative level; plus hold a benchmarked set of H&S docs and policies and the structure in place to ensure they are adheared to.

 

The magic of keeping it simple and going back to defining that grass-roots level, means that you still allow for free progress. You still allow for people to expand with new ideas and improvements to working practices - but you also ensure that they are at least doing it properly in the first place.

 

The other factor to throw into the mix is that that principle can be expanded to all other relative sectors of the industry - registered colleges; those that ensure all their Arb students are taught to the same definable criteria; registered suppliers would be those that only sell kit to those whom hold the relative quals in order to use the kit they're buying.

 

The whooooole shooting match in turn creates the level playing field that is so sorely missing from the industry, by doing nothing more than making sure those who are already doing the job, are qualified to do the job.

 

 

From the buisness angle, the sky's the limit really, as the model can work for individuals such as those who choose to remain as freelance, to multi million pound contracting companies. All by ensuring that everyone is just simply benchmarked against a that same defineable criteria.

 

Easy peasy.

 

 

[Andy Collins]

Thinking along the training lines, without wishing to derail this thread too much, how many more trainers are needed? My local college has several, they have been there around five years a piece, they are relatively young so will not be retiring any time soon. So these vacancies will simply not arise, for the foreseeable future. The industry in inundated, or flooded, with new fresh faced college leavers, every term, how many more trainers are needed anyway, if there are so few jobs for the trainees to go onto?

I'm deliberately thinking up obstacles here. I am not cutout to be a trainer, I don't the patience and tolerance. I don't want to stand around "supervising" or pushing paper around a desk to meet that latest criteria for this and that membership.

One thing I do think this trade does need is Mentors, on the job common sense instruction in real world environments, people who think around the problems that can be thrown in the face of the oherwise inexperienced. Do most businesses have the space for this? I think they already do have this person, generally. So do we need to "badge" him/her? Is a new qualification needed to say that this person meets this kind of criteria? If you run a small business, you already have your trusted side kick/ foreman, you don't need him to be certificated as such. He may need the piece of paper more than you need him to have it, for his future.

So IMO it needs to be readily affordable for an employer to pay for it, not another one of these tickets that take 5 days of sitting through monotonous repetition, but maybe a presentation of NPTC units, other CPD that may have been acquired, and references of his abilities in a Senior Arb Techie role out on site. Sorry for the ramble.