Chainsaw update training to become mandatory for all operatives from Oct 2013

[JimM]

I like the " they want it so they pay for it" but can you see the forestry commission voluntary paying for it ? Unless of course all the forestry firms say no thanks, and refuse to submit tenders. Which isn't going to happen. Not in this real world.

[combined tree services]

yes, yes, yes, by all means when you get a "job" like windblow that you need to get a "ticket " for upgrade on it, but what about us that have been doing them for years, no two are ever the same, and multiples, where do you start......there is NO better skill than experience on these, just renewing a ticket every so often doesnt mean you have any better skills than the one man band whos been working away and not bothered gathering up qualifications like points on a card, all the "ticket" collectors have been doing is making the various training companies rich. All this rubish started after 1998 when everybody and there dog saw a chance to get rich quick and there was a big rise in reported accidents as numpties were having accidents doing basic things, How many on this site can actually claim to have been active prior to '98 and what difference has it made to there own safety, all I have seen is an increase in cost and paperwork, and less actual "experienced" folk coming up through the pile of wannabes, anybody can do a course, get a bussines card, and call themselves an arborist, lets see them get there arse out onto a remote hillside, clearfell and remove it, in the wind and rain, maybe have to carry your kit in 3 or 4 mile before you start, and get paid only when youve finished, and cleared the site. wouldnt be so many wannabes then. instead of "renewall" of tickets, maybe a check on your actual skill level with a written as well as a practical exam, by a completly independant board, paid for by those that want the paperwork (ie FISA) would be more appropriate. they want it, therefore they pay for it.

 

 

In response to your Questions regarding Pre 98 Cutters i would like to point out that many pre 98 cutters did not have to demonstrate how to take down a hung up tree and neither did they have to talk their way through the correct procedure(s) for taking down a hung up tree , the number of felling cuts were limited and did not take into account dealing with small timber under heavy stress and the correct method for reducing the stress neither was there much in the way of assessing how to deal with tension and compression in various situations, the standard for snedding/de-limbing a tree was far lower and the specific requirements of ppe , the ppe at work reg's and coincidentally this was the year in which the provision and use of work equipment regulations came into force .

 

The question of who would want to walk into a woods lugging their kit 3-4 miles and carry out felling operations is more a question of who is keen on hard work and who is not , even back then you got your fair share of lazy wannabees .

 

I dont hear may people complaining about the advances in technology allowing the equipment that we use to go about our day to day work ! No this is because it suits us - equipment has advanced more than ten times in comparison the the kit that was used in the 90's and this has further brought the need to retrain and refresh as the industry and equipment used within it progresses . I started in the industry at 17 and went down the route of tree surgery and as i progressed i gained more certification which in turn allowed me to advance further this also meant that i wanted to get into the forestry side of the industry and again started at the bottom and as i progressed i in turn i gained more certification , and then came the natural progression to becoming an assessor , this i can assure you was easily the hardest step that i had ever taken within the industry , being constantly assessed by experienced foresters and arborists not to mention the principle verify-er and knowing that you are going to be torn to shreds for the slightest possible flaw in what you have done and often actually having not made a mistake is not something that i thought i would do just as another way to make more money from the poor old hard grafting members of the industry ! It is because i am passionate about that industry and the standards that should be met by all who work within the industry .

 

 

Anyway this is just my thoughts on it and possibly not everyone would agree but hey ho such is life but sadly although im only 30 i do believe there should be a great in Great Britain and this in turn should resonate throughout the various industries within GB

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

yes, yes, yes, by all means when you get a "job" like windblow that you need to get a "ticket " for upgrade on it, but what about us that have been doing them for years, no two are ever the same, and multiples, where do you start......there is NO better skill than experience on these, just renewing a ticket every so often doesnt mean you have any better skills than the one man band whos been working away and not bothered gathering up qualifications like points on a card, all the "ticket" collectors have been doing is making the various training companies rich. All this rubish started after 1998 when everybody and there dog saw a chance to get rich quick and there was a big rise in reported accidents as numpties were having accidents doing basic things, How many on this site can actually claim to have been active prior to '98 and what difference has it made to there own safety, all I have seen is an increase in cost and paperwork, and less actual "experienced" folk coming up through the pile of wannabes, anybody can do a course, get a bussines card, and call themselves an arborist, lets see them get there arse out onto a remote hillside, clearfell and remove it, in the wind and rain, maybe have to carry your kit in 3 or 4 mile before you start, and get paid only when youve finished, and cleared the site. wouldnt be so many wannabes then. instead of "renewall" of tickets, maybe a check on your actual skill level with a written as well as a practical exam, by a completly independant board, paid for by those that want the paperwork (ie FISA) would be more appropriate. they want it, therefore they pay for it.

 

“…there is NO better skill than experience…”

 

Experience is, without question, a truly valuable resource – but for arguments sake, where does “experience” leave you if you’re doing it wrong in the first place? (I don't mean you personally, but there may be people out there relying solely on 'experience' that is not GOOD experience.) It simply perpetuates the ignorance and error. Far better surely, is a renewable measure of skill and knowledge COMBINED with experience.

 

 

“…just renewing a ticket every so often doesn’t mean you have any better skills than the one man band who’s been working away and not bothered gathering up qualifications like points on a card…”

 

Renewing a ticket may not, in itself, mean better skills, but it does provide a measure by which one may be confident that industry best practice, safety and effectiveness is assured.

 

‘Gathering up qual’s like points’ on a card is pretty disparaging attitude towards those that are entering the industry, no offence taken!

 

“…all the "ticket" collectors have been doing is making the various training companies rich…”

 

I’ve no doubt training companies have made their living, I don’t begrudge them that, without them, I couldn’t make mine!

 

“…How many on this site can actually claim to have been active prior to '98…”

 

I prefer to look forward rather than backwards, change is the only constant.

 

“…and less actual "experienced" folk coming up through the pile of wannabes, anybody can do a course, get a bussines card, and call themselves an arborist, lets see them get there arse out onto a remote hillside, clearfell and remove it, in the wind and rain, maybe have to carry your kit in 3 or 4 mile before you start…”

 

Not sure how you’d think anybody could gain the experience without being a lowly ‘wannabe.’

 

I would have to disagree if you honestly think ‘anybody’ can do a course… and call themselves an arborist. Maybe the entry level tickets, but as you progress through the higher level tickets, PTI, etc – it takes financial commitment, intelligence, determination, ability, capacity and no short measure of guts.

 

Maybe for another thread but are you confusing arborist for forester?

 

“…instead of "renewall" of tickets, maybe a check on your actual skill level with a written as well as a practical exam…”

 

Bit confused by this statement…. It seems to be advocating all that you’ve argued so eloquently against??

[agrimog]

Im not arguing against qualifications, just the way they want to keep trying to force the renewal issue on us, ultimatly at the end of the day there is no legal requirement for any ticket, only the fact that certain goverment bodies would like you to have them......no puwer, loler , and all the rest DO NOT SPECIFCLY STATE YOU MUST HAVE A CERTAIN TICKET, just be qualified , and recommend certain ticket issuing bodies, until the training and certifing of this industry becomes legislated like car driving there will always be those trying to take advantage of the training side of it. At the moment there are too many variables to a std of training , yes its written down what you must do, but different instructors and assesors have different ideas of how it should be applied. an instructor should have at least 10 years cutting experience before he starts training, and an assesor, have a couple of years as an instructor as well. Ive seen too many instructors still wet behind the ears passing on "skills" they've learned out of a book, many a time while collecting timber in various woods I've seen some "iffy" practices being taught as being the right way. Having over 30 years of cutting everything from willow stalks to very large trees all over the world, it galls me to sometimes having a youngster with little or no "real world" experience trying to tell me "thats wrong, youve got to do it this way"....no im not an old wont listen to new ideas, I was taught "your never to old to learn", and yes I will listen to new ideas and ways, but safety and issues thereof have not changed, and I doubt they ever will

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

The big problem is unless your a commercial operation this makes the game very unfair.

 

The decent guy goes and does all the courses and the refreshers out of pocket and lost time.

 

The other guy never bothers with tickets, steals the work when your on your course and offers cheaper prices because they dont have to recoup thousands of pounds in training etc.

 

There will be no checks made and even when the rogue has an accident they can just up and go.

 

This is a big waste of time unless they will maintain a system like gas safe. And customers must demand to see your qualifciations.

 

But our industry is led by our customers wanting a cheap price and willing to use anyone willing to do the job for a bob ;D

 

I believe in training and certification only if it is enforced across the board !.

 

Agreed! In an already "uneven playing field" there is no quality assurance (other than reputation) to encourage the private customer to engage a qualified/competent operator.

 

This even extends to parish councils it seems. I recently tendered for a PC job. They needed 3 quotes, mine & 1 other were very similar, the 3rd was only 16% of the price myself & other had quoted. PC jumped at the cheapest quote.

 

Simple common sense should have rang alarm bells - it simply wasn't possible to even cover costs at that price, I even explained that to them.

 

I knew when the work was due so I went for a look at the outcome.

 

The WRONG TREE had been butchered creating a hazard over the highway and a play park, the timber had been free dropped onto the Tarmac damaging the road surface, the chippings were fly tipped on the verge adjacent to a culvert creating a flood risk hazard and the hazard tree (as identified in the County council inspection report) remained untouched! All of this was done over the highway with no application for traffic management.

 

Then it all became clear... The idiot/incompetent operator was a local guy who is a parish councillor!

 

What hope is there for "ticketed", insured, conscientious and aspiring professionals where price appears to be the only driver?

[horselogger]

FISA is a wolf in sheep's clothing. In theory the idea of its existence is a good thing. The reality of its existence is very different. Chainsaw refresher training is a recommendation and not mandatory in law - it is probably good practice though. Also given the nature of the equipment and work we do with it, for those who are properly trained and qualified, accidents are thankfully very rare - they usually happen to unskilled and untrained operators who appear on the stats as 'self-employed'.

 

What is alarming though is that no one can see what is happening here. FISA is a body of self-appointed, self interested individuals who have been allowed to hi-jack the industry and we have all let it happen.

 

From October - if you want to have a FC contract you need FISA update training provided by a FISA trainer. To be a FISA trainer you have to be 'proposed' by an existing FISA trainer as apparently all the rest the chainsaw trainers out there who deliver chainsaw training under the auspices of LANTRA or the NPTC are clearly not good enough to do it and regulated, approved courses run by the awarding organisations are not good enough either. That this band can dictate who can and cannot deliver training which ultimately affects the grant of government contracts is not only unbelievable but also probably illegal (transparency, fairness and all that!)

 

That they are being allowed to get away with this is unbelievable - the NPTC and LANTRA, irrespective of your views on them, are regulated training bodies controlled by OFQUAL. FISA are a group of unregulated, self-appointed money grabbers who have seen an opportunity to fleece the rest of the industry and hold it to ransom - hiding under the shield of 'safety'. by creating their own 'special' little courses you have to pay for if you want to work in the industry.

 

The only member of FISA who spoke up was unceremoniously sacked for his actions.

 

FISA as an organisation is clearly not fit for purpose. Those who hold office in FISA and who are party to these restrictive and probably illegal practices are not fit to hold office and certainly not fit to represent the 'safety concerns' of the industry as they are clearly acting to their own ends.

 

If you pay for a FISA course you are paying to line the pockets of people delivering unregulated training to suit their own ends. If the industry standard courses are not adequate then they can and should be changed - I do believe they are adequate as they have been evolved over years.

 

Everyone in the industry needs to open their eyes to this and soon - or we will all be paying the price - literally and you can all say goodbye to FC work as a subby or otherwise unless you pay FISA dearly for the privilege. At the end of the day - who are they to be dictating who does and does not get government contracts! Here endeth my rant - but mark my words!

[agrimog]

well said horselogger, you hit the nail right on the head, fisa has been set up by a few, who are out to try and dictate who will or will not work in the forestry industry, there are enough off us out there to tell them to go take a running jump, If we all stick together and tell them we are not going to jump through there hoops and nobody cuts for them, they will have to back down

[treequip]

well said horselogger, you hit the nail right on the head, fisa has been set up by a few, who are out to try and dictate who will or will not work in the forestry industry, there are enough off us out there to tell them to go take a running jump, If we all stick together and tell them we are not going to jump through there hoops and nobody cuts for them, they will have to back down

 

I stand to be corrected but I thought this move was HSE lead, i.e. the HSE told the forestry industry that they needed to kill less people and this is their answer.

 

If that is the case there will be no back down

[Yorkshireman]

I stand to be corrected but I thought this move was HSE lead, i.e. the HSE told the forestry industry that they needed to kill less people and this is their answer.

 

If that is the case there will be no back down

 

Correct .... HSe said you either regulate an industry with high accidents rates or ... !

 

as in the background [ EU ] there are already calls [ from some lobbyists ] for Chainsaws to be banned

 

re the above mentioned concerns over Fisa [perceived - purported strangle hold on contractors ],

I also understand from Lantra awards that they are pro actively moving on this .

 

Iain

Edited August 13, 2013 by Yorkshireman

[horselogger]

You are right - this was the response to an HSE directive to sort it out in-house or the HSE would do it for us.

 

I am sure however, that the HSE never intended that those trusted with setting it all up should have the neck to create a self-serving monopoly run by themselves to act for their own financial gain! Perhaps we should have let the HSE do it!!!

 

By the way did I also mention that their plan is that ALL chainsaw courses from 1st Oct (including first-time certifications) must be taught by a 'FISA Approved' trainer or you don't get the job! If there are any LANTRA/NPTC trainers or assessors out there you really ought to be finding out what these organisations are doing about this as it is completely undermining everything they stand for and creating a monopoly that you can only join by 'being proposed' by an existing trainer

 

(Irrespective of your personal views on these organisations they are the properly regulated industry training and certification lead bodies!)

 

FISA have immediately homed in on a money making scam - if you look at injury stats for forestry, actually how many were down to improper use of chainsaws by an operator who holds the correct competencies for what they were doing - not many. Most involve falling wood.trees or machinery (usually during maintenance by unqualified people).

 

What will save more lives - proper supervision. Having crew supervisors helping and mentoring the less experienced instead of demanding higher productivity. Also clients taking a bit of responsibility for what is going on on their land. When was the last time anyone from the Council, FC or whoever came along to a site and actually challenged the site manager to prove the people on site are actually those they submitted 'qualification details' at the tender process for and asked individual cutters for their NPTC cards or asked to see the written emergency procedures and made sure people knew them? Why can't the client walk the site and look at the standard of cutters - if they have any concerns then they can do something about it. That will improve safety better than any retraining.

 

A carte-blanche to proclaim yourselves as the only ones entitled to make money or else deny honest people work is nothing short of criminal