puwer

Sorry I should have said the highest level ticket that contains chainsaw use.

Yes you will.

One day ROLO course, CITB H&S touch screen test (most people do operative level) and then submit your application to BALI for a blue skilled CSCS/LISS operator card. The reverse of your card contains your occupation title, which is a reflection of the “tickets” you have. For example (please don’t quote me exactly on this) for the card to say ground based chainsaw operator you would need something like maintenance, crosscutting and felling small trees.

As the fell small trees is the highest level ticket within that occupation title, it will need to be less than five years old or accompanied by evidence of Lantra Awards or FISA refresher training.

Enjoyed reading that Steve and glad to have been part of the journey. CC-A

Freeworker Fachhandel für Baumpflege und Seilklettertechnik » Rope Wrench zertifiziert!

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

I am sure Paul will provide input as required [emoji106].

The AA standards do not specifically stipulate how a company manages and records customer Enquiries. The standards state "suitable for the size of business and a logical system to ensure that all get a response".

What this means in reality is that a very small company owner may record Enquiries in a diary and then strike through them as they are dealt with, through to a full CRM (client relationship manager) system that a larger company may use.

It is very often very easy to assess this element through questioning with a company owner or administrator and simply observing the records a company may make.

No requirement for a documented enquiry process/procedure, however where a company holds iSO9001 and has such a process, an assessor may ask to see it and simply ask the company to demonstrate how it complies with its own procedure.

Without derailing the thread and just to provide a little food for thought, a large part of the assessment process is about asking a company to demonstrate what it says it is going to do. Particularly for smaller companies, concise risk assessments and policies that are then implemented will be far more effective than reams of paperwork.

And lastly for me the scheme is a little bit of a three pronged approach, demonstrating legislative compliance, good practice compliance and consumer protection. A small company having something in place to make sure the people who call them get a return phone call isn't that unreasonable is it, and I would suggest might be one of the reasons a consumer would choose an ArbAC.

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

Thankyou Colin for reiterating my point as per my previous post:

Quote: "This requirment for a certficate or award applies to people working with chainsaws on or in trees on agricultural holdings. UNLESS it is done as part of agricultural operations (for example hedging, clearing fallen branches, or pruning trees to maintain clearance for machines, etc) by the occupier or his employees and they have used a chainsaw before 5th December 1998.

If therefore your chainsaw work is part of agricultural operations AND the work is being done by the land occupier or their employees; AND they have used a chainsaw before the 5th December 1998 then as you say you will not need a ticket."

What you need to make sure you understand is the AND part of the exemptions, the fact that you have used a saw before 5/12/98 is not a stand alone reason for not achieving a relevant cert or award.

All workers who use a chainsaw should be competent to do so. before using a chainsaw to carry out work on or in a tree, a worker should have received appropriate training and obtained a relevant certficate of competence or national comptence award, unless they are undergoing such training and are adequately supervised. However, in the agricultural sector, this requirment only applies to first-time users of a chainsaw.

This requirment for a certficate or award applies to people working with chainsaws on or in trees on agricultural holdings. UNLESS it is done as part of agricultural operations (for example hedging, clearing fallen branches, or pruning trees to maintain clearance for machines, etc) by the occupier or his employees and they have used a chainsaw before 5th December 1998.

If therefore your chainsaw work is part of agricultural operations AND the work is being done by the land occupier or their employees; AND they have used a chainsaw before the 5th December 1998 then as you say you will not need a ticket.

I don't know your working circumstances and if all the above exemptions apply then we are on a winner, if not then just because you have been using a saw before 5/12/98 doesn't mean you don't need to comply to the requirements of having a certficate or award.

Owing to the fact that you do have relevant certficates or awards, and let's say the exemptions do not apply to you then i would argue that you are actually meeting the provisions of PUWER 98, and not in fact going above and beyond the requirements of the law.

Let me know your thoughts, appears to be an often confused situation.

Regards

Sorry i don't follow; just because you did your tickets prior to 1998 how does that make you sorted for life?

Guidance notes:

No1 - Trees and bats

No3 - Planting and managing amenity woodlands

No4, No6 and No7 etc

General guides: Tree work, choosing your arborist, a guide to qualifications and careers in arboriculture.

Examainers, invigilators, question writers Tech Cert.

http://www.totalarb.com/content/cm000192.htm

Original GTGCP (1999) Aerial Rescue Guidance Notes (1997)

Peer review group members:

Safe working methods with top handled chainsaws

Karabiner safety in the arboriculture industry

Determination of rope access and work positioning techniques in arboriculture

http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/crr_pdf/2001/crr01364.pdf

For those that require a little bed time reading Page 36.

Heartwood cutting or face boring is utilised as most have said to relieve tension in the heart of the trunk, removal via heartwood cutting prevents wood fibres being pulled. General rules of thumb (species, grain direction, lean etc etc need to be considered) once a heartwood is used, remaining hinge should be at least 6" either side and approx 50mm wide.

Generally heartwood cuts are placed at the same level or just above (25-50mm approx) the sink level, your back cut would also go in at this height so the cuts would all marry up in alignment/levels.

Humboldt sinks, use of ears, heartwood cuts etc. all help reduce the chances of "barber chair, splits, shakes" all good techniques for us to know whether it be felling on the deck or limb removal in the tree!

Edenarb - spot on.

Without splitting hairs, the letterbox cut would refer to the removal of the centre of the hinge when the tree has hung up leaving two supporting pegs either side.

A heartwood cut would be introduced from the front of the sink as posted fanning out the centre of the hinge, the remaining hinge would be approximately 50mm thick leaving a min of 6" either side of the fan.

Same meat, different gravy we have our lingo!

Edenarb - used to be Cs38 (Cs= Chainsaw), unit does not include the use of a chainsaw hence the name change to "Level 2 certificate of competence to climb trees and perform aerial rescue"

A candidate completing the current CT&PAR, must undertake at least two aerial rescues. Compulsory rescue method A that all candidates must demonstrate is a rescue of a casualty with an undamaged rope long enough to descend on. The candidate carries out an aerial rescue of the casualty using both climbing systems to descend.

The candidate must then carry out a second rescue of a casualty using a different technique. The assessor selects a second rescue method to be demonstrated , this rescue must be from one of the following scenarios:

a. Where the casualty's rope is either damaged, trapped or too short to descend on (2 person team)

b. Where the casualty's rope is either damaged, trapped or too short to descend on (3 person team)

c. Rescue from a 'pole' (standing stem) using climbing irons (spikes) (2 or 3 person team).

Shabz,

NVQs/apprentic i thought might be a suggestion. The HSE consultation on certification in tree work attracetd a comment from a very respected trainer assssor commenting on how the apprec/NVQ route suited the training needs of our industry very well.

IMO NVQs or at least work based learning may well be the way forward - maybe a rename and rebrand is what is needed, NVQs, well at least the title seem to have a real stigma to them.

A reduction in number of units?

Turn the emphasis away from forestry?

JPB - i will look more into the process in germany and see what i can find out.

The idea of three simple units may be the way forward, as ever content is key.

I think we need to move away from the idea that an sort of expiry on your CoC would mean an automatic re-test, it does not have to be like that and i for one certianly would not want to see that. But is CPD for an arborist not important? For chainsaw operators CPD could include trade shows, updates, forums, seminar attendance, demos, dealer days etc. The difficulty would be determining what is acceptable and at what level.

We also must not loose track of what the concept of the CoC are, i would hope that any arborist knows more than when they went through their original tickets. That is what competence is all about, Knowledge, Ability, Training and Experience (KATE). But surely we all need to come off the starting blocks at some point. What we are trying to determine is what level that should be, what skills that arborist should possess when they obtain their certifcate of safety (it is not a CoC - how can it be!).

Regards

zzr1200 - Candidates must also hold a suitable competence certificate in operating the MEWP that is going to be used for the assessment. This

could be the “NPTC Level 2 Certificate of Competence in the Safe Use and Operation of Mobile Elevated Work Platforms” or an

alternative nationally recognised certificate. Assessors must have sight of this prior to commencing assessment. Candidates who cannot

demonstrate this should arrange to be assessed in the NPTC MEWP qualification by an approved NPTC assessor, at the same time as

this unit.

I am unsure where you got the information from that says you must have an NPTC qual as a pre-requiste for cs47, hope the info above helps.

Big A - could this approach be alined with a tiered type system, arborist completes level one (eg. cs30/31/32), has to complete a CPD log, hours worked log etc then can move onto level 2 eg. Cs38/39 etc?

Could we end up with groundworker, level one and level two arborist?

Treediver - a major push is a move towards the reduction of number of units and vastly improve content.

Jpbeaver - do you have any idea what the content of these three courses is? Are candidates assessed?

Edenarb - is it a possible idea to return to the previous assessment system, where the trainer also assessed the candidates? ITA? (Intergrated training and assessment)

Interesting thoughts.

I can envisage that an expiry will be set on certifcates of competence (CoC) for new operators under any new scheme. This however does not mean that it has to be a complete re-assessment, could a CPD log work? or submission of refresher training submitted to the awarding body? (How do we determine what refresher/update training would be acceptable eg. would it have to be completed by a Lantra Awards instructor and a certificate of attendance issued? or maybe if a candidate completed another element of the certificates of competence scheme? (I am avoiding simply writing "get another unit').

Iain, course duration, ratio of workshop time and saw time would all be born from whatever the training requirments will be to complete any new CoC. I have no doubt you are aware, trainee to instructor ratios are discussed in INDIG317 (rev) HSE Chainsaws at work - but as ever enforcement is key.

We already have a Cs45 groundworker, so would an option be to keep the exisiting unit, add maybe Cs30 (maintain and operate the chainsaw), and add additional assesment criteria, such as those you suggest?

Interesting you suggest a possible move away from the forestry side of things. How do we cater for that industry sector? Could we go back in time to when the units FTC10-16 were for forestry and 20,21,22 for arb - do we create a divide for industry sectors?

Dear All,

I have noticed a few threads on the forum relating to the NPTC qualifications framework. Earlier this year NPTC launced the Certificate of Competence in Chainsaw and Related Operations Review Consultation.

To keep this simple the whole scheme is up for a re-vamp. This could be as simple as re-wording content or adding additonal assessment criteria, or as radical as scrapping mulitple felling units or introducing a tiered arboricultural training and assessment scheme (similar to IRATA)

(I have just put these down to give you an idea of the scope of approach).

So far the reponse to the consultation has been slow and those who have contributed have in most cases been trainers or assessors.

NPTC have engaged a consultant to work on the project and it is my own personal opinion that we should be engaging the views of employers, employees, sub contractors, sole traders etc etc.

I thought members of the forum might like to comment and even though NPTC do have an official response form, it may be easy for people to simply post any thoughts, ideas or comments they have and i can point the consultant towards the forum.

I fully appreciate the current scheme has it problems, most of us know them and their seems little point in going over old ground. Lets keep it positive, simple and workable/effective for the end user/employer. Don't be afraid of posting the ideas you have. This may be the last opportunity we have to input into the scheme for the next five years!

http://www.nptc.org.uk/archived-news/

Matt,

Sorry for delay in responding - no we don't. I can provide a contact if you need one?

Kev,

If you want to look into this, make contact with your local authority in the first instance. They will need to provide you with the paperwork to complete, including road closure request. (They will charge for admin and advertising - road closures have to be advertisied).

The courses referred to: NRSWA (New Road and Street Works Act)

Operative courses are for those of you who will be manually carrying out the work. Supervisors are trained to insure that the operatives carry out the work correctly.

If i am putting anyone through i make sure the issue of the streetwork card (registration onto the street works register) is included.

The main purpose of the Register is to maintain the national database of supervisors and operatives currently practicing street works, and issue a valid identity card that may be requested by authorised persons or organisations, such as highway and street works inspectors

NRSWA Operative Course

Unit 2 - Signing, Lighting and Guarding

NRSWA Supervisor Course

Unit 10 - Monitoring, Signing, Lighting and Guarding.