Jump to content

AA Teccie (Paul)

Member
  • Content Count

    3,434
  • Joined

  • Last visited

4 Followers

About AA Teccie (Paul)

  • Rank
    Senior Member, Raffle Sponsor 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Both the Forestry industry sector, and IRATA (I think / presume) are structured differently to the arb industry are they not, in that arb has many more small/micro businesses, and a large self-employed fraternity, where it would be much more difficult to implement log books and sign offs ect. effectively (if you have a direct supervisor, and manager, as with larger businesses this is easier to achieve.) Previously, there was a proposal to introduce something like the Forestry proposed system called 'R2' (Register of Tree Work Operatives) but industry in general, other than some larger employers (who have implemented a version of it internally in some cases) didn't 'buy-in'...maybe a lack of awareness / information was the problem but it's currently shelved.
  2. Not quite sure what to say here, I'm sorry you feel we let you, and the industry, down so badly but it really wasn't for the want of trying but the HSE [email protected] experts were adamant 2nd line was required (hence the IRATA reference / comparison) and we did manage to get a concession for use of a backup system as it was demonstrated that in some situations insisting on 2 ropes wasn't suitable. HSE are supposed to be monitoring accidents in the industry closer than previously and it will be interesting to see what the stats show (or don't show) going forward. Thanks for your post and I couldn't agree more with your last few sentences. Paul
  3. AA Safety Guide 1 (SG1) Sect. 10 - Descent (see below), gives some insight but you need TG1 for the full picture Arboricultural Association - Technical Guide 1: Tree Climbing & Aerial Rescue WWW.TREES.ORG.UK A source of publications, guidance notes and leaflets for arboriculturists. Competitively priced available to members... Safety-Guide-1-Form.pdf
  4. Before I join in I've not read the final paperwork but I was lead to believe that on first ascent and final decent both lines had to reach the floor, once in the canopy a 2nd short line would suffice. Did I miss something that got changed? I can't recall "when" all the changes that occurred did so but if you read the current TG1 (Dec. 2020) at various sections, including 6.6e / 10.1 / 14.5.3d, it makes reference to the 'primary system' being able to reach the ground, it doesn't mention the same of the 'backup system' at all (BUT it is a good idea of course, in general terms dependent upon the system used.) Cheers Paul
  5. Nope, only one system needs to reach the ground...unless you include a second system that does so, preferentially, but it is not required as such.
  6. The "backup system" in this situation would likely be your flip line (in addition to your climbing line.)
  7. The question is whether the HSE will be open to review...and I think very unlikely tbh. The expectation(?) is that with new climbers coming through the system", learning on '2 ropes', i.e. "climbing with a backup system in place", that it will become the norm.
  8. AFAG 401 has been superceded by TG1 / SG1 (the Safety Guide.) I don;t know numbers of TG1 sold but my feeling is yes, a big seller, certainly initially.
  9. Employed, or engaged, i.e. sub-contractors (LOSC, although this usually only applies to the climber, not 'bona-fide' businesses, although this can / does happen within the Utility scheme and alongside employed teams.) We are aware of the claims of the 'all stars' crew but I'm convinced this is not the case in practice. Bartletts 12/13 depots are all subject to individual assessments for the ARB Approval (the SSIP 'H&S compliance' aspect is a Head Office based activity which covers the whole business...but the depots, individually, still need to show they understand the compliance systems and demo them in action, so to speak.)
  10. As a matter of interest did you 'sub' for the companies prior to the AA approval? If so, then that's fine as some businesses do 'sub-in' expertise as they need it...it's about managing that effectively. Also, respectfully, and whilst the climber clearly has an important role to play, there is a lot more involved, including on the worksite and other operatives work activities and knowledge etc. The assessment system is effective, on the whole, and more robust than previously and that will hopefully become even more so going forward.
  11. If this came to our attention, and with good evidence / supporting statements etc., we would investigate it robustly and take action as appropriate.
  12. Just a quick one to say, as anticipated, and certainly in the short-medium term (relatively, meaning 5-10 yrs maybe), we are aware, anecdotally, the industry hasn't embraced / engaged with the '2 rope working' (which, AAMOI is one option in achieving the use of a back-up system...but others are available) in the whole. HSE, as the regulator, have insisted on this, they actually wanted '2 ropes' at all times so other options equating to a backup system is a concession that we pushed for and that's what's written into the industry ICOP and TG1. Simplistically they saw IRATA as setting then benchmark and require us as an industry, collectively, to reach a comparable safe system of working...in their eyes. I don't climb these days but I do understand the resistance, and the rationale / reasons, I really do, but equally I have seen contractors / climbers who've embraced it and work effectively and efficiently, okay maybe a little slower but arguably a lot safer...arguably. AA TG1 is a priced publication, some claw-back for the funds invested in writing it, and the ICOP, but the associated Safety Guide (AFAG 401 / 401 replacement) which gives some insight is a free download Arboricultural Association - Arboricultural Association Safety Guides WWW.TREES.ORG.UK A range of tree related help and advice for members of the public as well as tree surgeons. ATB and 1, 2 ..or 7 ropes, keep safe. Cheers Paul
  13. FWIW, my technical critique would be: - not to BS3998 / 'rule of thirds' / target pruning accuracy (generally) - height reduction 'heavier' than lateral reduction - lateral reduction unbalanced The above said, Sycamore, being 'opposite buds', is always more difficult to CR than some other species, e.g. Beech, and we don't know what the specification was. Cheers, Paul
  14. What 'KateH' says above, and try to go residential for the 2-3 days if possible / feasible so you can spend time reading and digesting the course material and discussions from the day in the evenings. Good luck, Paul

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.