Have to renew all NPTC units every 5 years

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Hi Paul,

 

Can you (the AA), or HSE, NPTC and LANTRA prove a definite link between a higher accident rate and the lack of refresher training?

 

You say our accident rate is high, high compared with what? Are there more accidents now than 20 years ago? Are there more accidents in treework than the offshore oil industry?

 

Hi Tim, hope you're well.

 

A definite 'causal' link, probably not to be honest, but training in some context, i.e. none / insufficient / of poor quality / a long time ago, is often cited as a contributory factor in tree work accidents / incidents. Hence the refresher training argument carries some relevance.

 

HSE have some figures, and admittedly they do include 'none industry specialists, just as will be the case for construction, and pro-rata, i.e. per 1,000 workers, we are very close. Offshore oil industry is a different thing all together I would suggest and accepted as being exceptional in terms of high risk activity.

 

Cheers..

Paul

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Forestry is bringing in FISA (Forestry Industry Safety Accord) - it means everyone in forestry will have to update training every 5 years. The HSE have pushed it through the industry - once forestry has it implemented it will move on to Arb. Most people in the industry not that happy with the way it's being done.

 

That's not my understanding, i.e. that HSE have "pushed it through", it has, in effect, come from the industry itself through FISA.

 

Hence it will be for the 'Arb' industry to decide whether to follow suit but the difference is the landowners / main contractors sway is different as many work in the domestic sector. If, for instance, the Local Authority network nationally endorsed it, then it might happen...to some extent.

 

Nonetheless it does raise awareness and sets a precedent...perhaps, so worth giving it some thought. I would suggest looking at the key areas where there have been changes in the last 5-10 years, i.e. tree climbing / aerial rescue / rigging and concentrate there in the first instance. After that update your CS31 (as was, now felling upto 380mm dia.) to CS32/CS33 (as was, now felling in excess of 380mm) then onto windblow perhaps. Hence you're deffo learning new stuff along the way which makes it more interesting...and fun!

 

Cheers..

Paul

[ward.S]

As a contract climber I'm sure my work will dry up instantly if I do not do a refresher even tho after 9 years I have had only 1 small accident( not even bade nought to take a day off), maby the original test needs to be made harder so that "the cowboys" that hurt them selfs are not in the industry to start with?

Not saying that all accidents are caused by cowboys but I'm positive the majority are , pause for thought?

 

 

Sent using Arbtalk Mobile App

[Goaty]

I think the training is over priced. You loose the days earnings whilst on the course. They charge a rate that should be one to one tuition. Whereas a group learn together Then you have to provide all the gear. Even the packed lunch with some trainers.

 

Meanwhile the trainers earn thousands a week I assume, unless there is lardy layabouts to subsidise in offices DVLA style)

I'd like to see what of the fees goes where. If a subby climber is earning £150 a day, how can it cost £300-£400 to teach him for 2 days? A few sheets of paper a little electric, toliet/washroom facilities, insurance. Is admin so expensive? Most of us have that down as business costs yet charge less for some days work! Including a lot more wear/tear and fuels.

[foresterg]

Hi, - perhaps 'pushed it through' is the wrong term but the way I understand it is HSE said either the industry does it or they will - exactly what happened with construction. Once it has come in HSE will come and look at Arb - there's more chainsaw users in Arb than forestry and probably more accidents. I'm not against refresher training but this is just a scatter gun with no reference to an individuals or companies safety record. I dont think they've even though about the type of accident - ie if all the accidents are relating to say the tree felling element then that's what they should concentrate on at refreshers - instead of just repeating the training course.

[DN22 Gardening]

I think the training is over priced. You loose the days earnings whilst on the course. They charge a rate that should be one to one tuition. Whereas a group learn together Then you have to provide all the gear. Even the packed lunch with some trainers.

 

Meanwhile the trainers earn thousands a week I assume, unless there is lardy layabouts to subsidise in offices DVLA style)

I'd like to see what of the fees goes where. If a subby climber is earning £150 a day, how can it cost £300-£400 to teach him for 2 days? A few sheets of paper a little electric, toliet/washroom facilities, insurance. Is admin so expensive? Most of us have that down as business costs yet charge less for some days work! Including a lot more wear/tear and fuels.

 

Had to do my SSSTC (Site Supervisors Safety Training Course) (part of CSCS) earlier this year.

 

There were 24 of us in a room for two days, each paying £550+Vat

 

Now i don't doubt the trainer had overheads etc, but earning around £14K for two days work sounds pretty good to me.

 

I just couldnt manage to sit in a classroom full time

[Spruce Pirate]

Sorry, and I'm sure there's loadsa good stuff here but please try to embrace 'refresher training', never easy I know and partic when "forced" on you, but it is in your interest and our accident rate is high.

 

The essence of effective refresher training is to both refresh and advance, wherever possible i.e. new techniques / technologies, and of course to knock off those bad habits you've picked up

 

Not sure that simply redoing your NPTCs / competence certificates / licence to practice, will achieve this.

 

Cheers..

Paul

 

Hi Paul,

 

I understand what you mean, but my original post was written some months ago when information on this was scarce, and was in reference to someone being told that they had to re-sit all their existing tickets.

 

I actually do think there is some merit in refresher training, even if it is foisted upon us. I will reserve judgement on whether the refresher being offered by FISA has any merit until I've done it. At least it is only one day per unit, and reasonably cheap (at least by training standards), but it is the content that counts. The traffic light system they are employing does seem to have some merit, but we'll see how the whole thing pans out.

 

I still think that if you roll up to an assessment, without the training, and pass it you are fine. I appreciate you might miss out on a few of the modern thoughts picked up on a course, but fundamentally if you can pass the assessment you are deemed to be competent to use a saw.

 

Willing to discuss further, but don't want to turn this into too much of a rant.

[Goaty]

Had to do my SSSTC (Site Supervisors Safety Training Course) (part of CSCS) earlier this year.

 

There were 24 of us in a room for two days, each paying £550+Vat

 

Now i don't doubt the trainer had overheads etc, but earning around £14K for two days work sounds pretty good to me.

 

I just couldnt manage to sit in a classroom full time

 

ANSWER:- 3 classes a year and fantastic long holidays. I reckon.

[scotspine1]

 

A definite 'causal' link, probably not to be honest

 

didn't think so

 

but training in some context, i.e. none / insufficient / of poor quality / a long time ago, is often cited as a contributory factor in tree work accidents / incidents.

 

how often is 'training done a long time ago' cited as the main contributing factor in an accident/incident? any examples?

 

Hence the refresher training argument carries some relevance.

 

From what I can see it doesn't carry enough relevance to justify the introduction of refresher/update training.

 

The training providers will like it though, more cash for them.

[Spruce Pirate]

From what I can see it doesn't carry enough relevance to justify the introduction of refresher/update training.

 

The training providers will like it though, more cash for them.

 

While I do think there is some merit to refresher training, I do also, to a degree, agree with this sentiment.

 

The introduction of refresher, however, does pacify HSE and get them off our back, as "we" (the forest industry) are seen to be addressing the issue ourselves. In my opinion this is preferable to HSE stepping in and legislating, which appears to be the other option.

 

If, in 5 or 10 years time, refresher has not made the slightest little bit of difference to the accident rate we will have to look for other ways to improve our safety. I'm sure we all have ideas how to do that.