The great big "Profession/Professional/Professionalism" debate.

[egnsean]

Ok, so add either the Bsc or Msc in Arboriculture and Urban Forestry into that mix, and would you still say that it's a trade?

 

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

 

No i would say thats a profession backed by a degree.

[Jesse]

Who made them the arbiter???

 

At the end of the day its just your choice if that's the route you choose to follow, one other factor ,if your going to start producing reports and inspecting trees at a professional level you need PI insurance and most if not all insurance company's require some bench mark acknowledgment of your ability to provide such a service. The Arb Association nicely provide recognizable levels of achievement, simple to follow and understand, and you can simply progress one level at a time, either as your funds permit or as your brain permits .

[skyhuck]

Does a profession not have to have a governing body, such as the medical council or the sports governing body, with the power to strip its member of their ability to practice or compete??

[Graham]

A profession it's not. You can be professional undertaking work in exchange for money. All the NPTC courses you want will not make you a member of a 'profession' nor will they necessarily make you professional. A consulting arb may have a profession though. Anyone else is a tradesman assuming they have a recognised qualification. Well that's my take on it.

[Liam In The Borders]

It stems from the over-riding principles of a) protecting the public who are not experts in that area, and b) the area has potential to do harm. Generally it's in areas where to do things directly with/to people - not generally things which have a 'knock on' effect.

 

Your legal definition of a professional is that only another person qualified in that profession can assess their work e.g. if a surgeon is investigated then only other surgeons would have the knowledge and skills to carry out the investigation. e.g. if a 'professional' builder did a job on a house which then collapsed then H+S, building regs etc could investigate it - it would not have to be another builder.

 

Other tick boxes are - it's a legal governing body which confers the right to use a title which is protected in law e.g. 'registered general practitioner' and the approves the training and qualification level need for entry onto the register, and it can remove the right to use a title and the right to practise. It's a criminal offence to use a protected title or practise in a regulated area without one.

 

'Chartered' (i.e. Granted Royal Charter) is a professional qualification overseen by the privvy council and designates a level of training - it's not a legal qualification which confers a right to practise. You don't legally need it to work.

 

It's an offence to practise in a protected profession even if you don't use the the title - you could not for instance call yourself a 'human biology practitioner' and do surgery on people.

 

What we do is unregulated so is the next step or two down - as we don't even have Corgi/Hetas equivalent then it may be seen as semi-skilled. Note that you can still be skilled and expert in it! but in the grand scheme of things it may not be viewed as needing a 'high' level of skill. People cut their own trees down but never seen one take out their own appendix!

 

Surgeon - seven years to qualify as a basic medical practitioner then another ten to train up to consultant (or even GP) grade with exams and assessments all the way.

 

Tree people - CS30/31/38/39 - 3 weeks of training with no CPD requirement. Add every CS unit together - how much does it add up to? It isn't seven years!

[skyhuck]

It stems from the over-riding principles of a) protecting the public who are not experts in that area, and b) the area has potential to do harm. Generally it's in areas where to do things directly with/to people - not generally things which have a 'knock on' effect.

 

Your legal definition of a professional is that only another person qualified in that profession can assess their work e.g. if a surgeon is investigated then only other surgeons would have the knowledge and skills to carry out the investigation. e.g. if a 'professional' builder did a job on a house which then collapsed then H+S, building regs etc could investigate it - it would not have to be another builder.

 

Other tick boxes are - it's a legal governing body which confers the right to use a title which is protected in law e.g. 'registered general practitioner' and the approves the training and qualification level need for entry onto the register, and it can remove the right to use a title and the right to practise. It's a criminal offence to use a protected title or practise in a regulated area without one.

 

'Chartered' (i.e. Granted Royal Charter) is a professional qualification overseen by the privvy council and designates a level of training - it's not a legal qualification which confers a right to practise. You don't legally need it to work.

 

It's an offence to practise in a protected profession even if you don't use the the title - you could not for instance call yourself a 'human biology practitioner' and do surgery on people.

 

What we do is unregulated so is the next step or two down - as we don't even have Corgi/Hetas equivalent then it may be seen as semi-skilled. Note that you can still be skilled and expert in it! but in the grand scheme of things it may not be viewed as needing a 'high' level of skill. People cut their own trees down but never seen one take out their own appendix!

 

Surgeon - seven years to qualify as a basic medical practitioner then another ten to train up to consultant (or even GP) grade with exams and assessments all the way.

 

Tree people - CS30/31/38/39 - 3 weeks of training with no CPD requirement. Add every CS unit together - how much does it add up to? It isn't seven years!

 

17 years to become a consultant?? I don't think so, also GP's ARE consultants.

 

Also, you can't be a "Professional builder", there is no such thing as a "Builder", there are brickys, joiner's, plumbers, etc, but no "builders".

[Andy Clark]

At the end of the day its just your choice if that's the route you choose to follow, one other factor ,if your going to start producing reports and inspecting trees at a professional level you need PI insurance and most if not all insurance company's require some bench mark acknowledgment of your ability to provide such a service. The Arb Association nicely provide recognizable levels of achievement, simple to follow and understand, and you can simply progress one level at a time, either as your funds permit or as your brain permits .

 

 

Interesting that you pose the topic of academia as a benchmark of "professional"

 

I'm gonna tell you a story.....

 

In recent years I've delivered a training course to non-arbs on the subject of tree hazard awareness. The 2 day course is designed to get non arbs aware of the potential hazards that trees can pose - a bit of biology, explaining about cell growth and photosynthesis, a bit of shigo, explaining about decay patterns and CODIT, a bit of matthek and explaining about structural deformities and stresses etc...... all so that non-arbs out in the field can look at a tree and at least have a basic understanding of whether they should have any concerns and escalate the tree to me for a full inspection.

 

I deliver the course shoulder to shoulder with a fully fledged external consultant. Degree educated, expert witness, the full shebang - meaning that we deliver the course together. Bouncing off each other over the course of the 2 days. Both in the classroom and out in the field.

 

Every course starts the same way - with an introduction. I'm obviously already known in my organisation, so the intro is me introducing the consultant.

 

Every intro goes the same way - with me explaining, in laymans terms, "what this man doesn't know about trees, isn't worth knowing". .

 

And every time he replies with "Andy is far too kind. I'm scared stiff of heights and just never had the balls to do what he did and learn to climb - I only get to stand on the ground and lookl at trees, but he's got the ability to get up there and see it all up close". .

 

And every time, I blush, humbled by the obvious display that he has as much respect for me, as I have for him.

 

So is it not a question of the age old "jock vs geek" scenario? Should our own individual and personal skillset be the defining boundary of how we are perceived and represented in the industry?

 

Am I any less of a professional arboriculturist, simply because I chose path through the practical side of the industry as opposed to the academic side?

 

No, I don't think so. Granted, I can't stand up in court and give expert witness testimony of my opinion, but by the flip side, the consultant can't get to the top of a big mature Oak and look at a stress fracture up close and personal.

 

So should one even be judged to be better, more professional, than the other?

 

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

[Liam In The Borders]

17 years to become a consultant?? I don't think so, also GP's ARE consultants.

 

Also, you can't be a "Professional builder", there is no such thing as a "Builder", there are brickys, joiner's, plumbers, etc, but no "builders".

 

You can call yourself a professional anything as long as it isn't legally protected by Act of Parliament.

 

I'll rearrange my words - up to ten years. But what else can you expect from someone who isn't a 'professional' writer. Perhaps that should be 'author'? Authors are professional writers, aren't they? Or are they writers?

[Rob D]

I'd say if you've done your NPTC certs, have insurance and it is more or less your full time occupation you can class yourself as a professional tree work.

 

 

Within that there is experience, doing further qualifications etc some who are good at what they do and some that are not so good... but you could go on forever debating all that.

 

 

[Andy Collins]

I put my view across in the othr thread, and that is that I do not view us as a professional level. Semi-skilled labour, on the whole, is a correct (IMO) position. This is not knocking the skills of an adept climber, or groundie (for they can have skills too ) but on average, most tree people are at this level. A few, definitely the minority, have moved on beyond this level, becoming skilled in the use of the Spoken Word, and Writig with a Pen even:stupido: these are still not professionals, just a little bit cleverer than the bloke still grafting on the ground, and they get to sit in the truck out of the rain. Others have far more eloquently described the meaning of a true professional, so I shan't bother.