Andy Clark

I don't think it's so much about the insurance validity/come-back from YOUR insurers, moreso the liability come-back on those who have employed you in the first place. Yes, in terms of "contract" work, normal duty of care to employ appropriately skilled/qualified/competent persons etc is both required and expected, in order to mitigate against the resultant inherent liability, BUT surely that same principle filters down the ranks into the small jobs too?? On a Civil vs Statute basis, is the law really THAT diferent if a business employs the services of a business, to when Joe Public employs the services of a business?? In principal no, not really, IMO I don't think it is...... I think it's just more enforceable, and much higher profile when it's business to business contract, thanks to things like HSWA, MHSWA etc... But when is a job NOT a contract?? Even a written £50 quote for pruning Mrs Miggins Apple tree, is STILL a contract, and surely Joe Public would still be deemed in Law (in principal) as an employer, therefore charged with duty of care obligations of only employing appropriately skilled/qualified/competent persons? And if so, your insurance would only primarily come into play if at any time Mrs Miggins made any direct claim against you, but what about any claim filed against Mrs Miggins by a third party? She COULD still surely be held accountable under "duty of care" principles associated with the long list of "other" relevant statutes.... Occupiers liability Acts etc? Therefore, your insurance would again only really come into play, if Mrs Miggins were to ever make a counter-claim against you.

Mr H, Any idea of time-frame?? Like I said to Iain et al when I withdrew, i'd still be keen as a fee paying member.

Who knows, Meep.. If i'd have had a response, then maybe i'd have been able to answer that.

I used to be the Senior Foreman at the Bedford office, up until roughly 4-5 years ago..... I've applied for these jobs through both the attached e-mail address, AND to the Bedford office direct..... Never even got the courtesy of a returned call, or a replied to e-mail. Seem like such a big waste, especially as i tick every box on your criteria AND THEN SOME!

No, the NPTC certs are THE way of PROVING competence! In just the same way, that an MOT PROVES your car is road worthy. (without getting into the realms of splitting hairs over the "only on day of certification" issue) And at the end of the day, that's what it boils down to... if you re ever prosecuted and have to stand up in court, you must be defensible! If you have a **** hot training policy, then yeah... that's a step in the right direction towards arse covering..... BUT.... that policy WILL be ripped appart by lawyers and benchmarked against industry standards. Which are??? NPTCs! (some LANTRA) Soooooooooooo........ in order to PROVE competency, get certified!

What?? Public Liability insurance is not required?? Chap, i would go and kick your brokers arse if i were you. ANY business trading in this country MUST have public liability cover.

Gimmer.... To steer this thread back on track, you may want to turn your attentions to this little beauty... http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/training-education/9118-do-students-learn-any-thing.html

Bet you never expected this kind of response when you posted the ad?? Seriously though.... don't take it personally. To be totally honest with you, i had exactly the same moral dilema when i packed it in. I come from a very long Scouting background.... 25+ years on the service crew at our local campsite, activity instructor for the past 2 of those, and for me, it was a very similar mentality that drew me to teaching. I loved it, i loved the whole mentality of giving something back, and watching and helping all those struggling up and coming students to grow and achieve... it was great, and i do still very much miss it! BUT.... I love my industry more! And for me, there was no way on god's green earth, that i was gonna compound the problems that lie within this industry, by being part of something that watered it down. But that's just my story.

Of course, the other point to consider in this, is the work expectation.... regardless of salary. Can you really and trully see a Tech Cert qualed individual, working as, and carrying out the day to day duties of a Technician?? (What basically boils down to a classroom assistant) Making sure saws are ready and that there's enough fuel in the store for the days use. Making sure climbing kit's are pre-organised, and if need be (dependant on the session) pre-installing climbing lines. Collecting fungi/branch/twig samples for ident sessions. Don't get me wrong Gimmer, this isn't particularly a rant about the college or your advert........ but has the Tech Cert (or that level of qual) REALLY been reduced to THIS level???

No.... i'm not that Andy Clark. Sorry.

Here Here!!! But then that's the WHOOOOOOOOOLE problem, isn't it..... I had 17 years experience when i started teaching..... the moment i found out what, who and how i was expected to teach, i resigned! After one term! As a matter of principal! It's also the same reason why i turned down the recent Sparsholt lecturer job (despite the £30k ish salary), when i was approached by a recruitment company. IMO, You'd be hard pressed to find anyone with the knowledge level of Tech Cert and with any decent amount of time served in the industry, (regardless of salary) that would stick at a college job.

You'd think so, wouldn't ya. Told ya (and as has been covered on that Sparsholt thread)... Bums on seats.

Should have subbed him out as a circus acrobat!! You'd have coined it in.

I never mentioned anything about NPTCs.... just 'relevant quals'. The downside of it is though, with the acedemic quals the way they are, what other way than a certificate of competency (licence as you call it), PROVES competency and therefore covers the liability?? And currently what are the competency certs that the industry recognises...... ?? NPT what??

Do you know what course he did?? What qual he came away with??

Strangely enough, i think the fight concerning this topic is taking place on another thread.... http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/employment/9159-instructor-technician-sparsholt-college.html Seconds out... round 2!

If that's the case then, why was the recent lecturers job wage (and i quote from the job spec) 'increased to reflect current market factors' to somewhere iro £30k per annum?? And surely, the annual £10k ish drop in wages that a Tech Cert qualified person would be taking, would more than cover the costs of putting themselves through LOLER inspector or NPTC assessor training?? Don't get me wrong Gimmer, i used to be a lecturer myself (on £24k/annum) so I know where you're coming from, but the pure and simple fact is..... well, it speaks for itself.

Well no, not really THAT very..... I mean, long and short of it comes down to liability. If you employ person/persons without the necessary and relevant quals for the job in hand and something goes wrong, you're liable..... and open for prosecution under the H&SWA. Simple!

I think 'Crap' is a bit harsh Steve...... I mean, i'm not trying to put anyone off or owt..... But the way in which some are run, and everything that goes on behind the scenes, definitely gets in the way of teaching students "the right way". Take Mr Hancocks comments regarding apprenticeships.... yeah SPOT ON!! Apprenticeships are great and are becoming more and more popular, as more colleges take on board and reflect the true needs of the industry that it feeds into..... and my advice to any up-and coming newby would be to follow that very path. Either through a recognised scheme, or with 2-3 years industry experience first (as a stick dragging dogsbody), THEN go to college. But there is definitely no excuse (and i do speak from experience!) for colleges expecting students to be taught to climb using 9 year old kit, just because 'funds don't allow' for replacement!! Honestly, i could tell you things that'd make your toes curl.

Smart ar5e!

By implication (sort of), the H&SWA. Although from a more inadvertent "arse covering" perspective, than a "thou shalt do X.Y and Z" perspective.

Well P+D was never my strong point, so i'm more than happy to hold hands above head and say it was an "educated guess", based on "opening gob before engaging brain" syndrome. Besides, i'd just written war and peace on the 'do students learn anything' thread, so i think perhaps that i may have been somewhat distracted. But the brown powdery rot, does look very much like.....

You've gotta admit though Mr H, at first glance..... ?? No?

I'll get me coat.