AA Teccie (Paul)

The Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA) & the Town and Country Planning (Trees) REgs. 1999. There is an exemption under the TPO for 'abatement of a nuisance', whihc would apply equally to trees in a Cons. Area, but the nusinace needs to be 'actionable', incurring a direct loss etc. and I'm sure this probably wouldn't be relevant, more particulrly as the tree cannot, in legal terms, be deemed to be casuing a nusiance to its own property (I thnk!) Hence a Sect. 211 notice and await upto 6 weeks, or sooner if LPA says 'no objections', to remove the branch. (IF you have a very nice, understanding TO, as I was, and it involves minimal works whihc don't significantly affeact the amenity or vitality of the tree, and they have empathy, they may allow you to proceed as 'deminimus works'...trouble is that facility don't exist in the legislation, but it's worth asking.) Good luck.. Paul

Hi there, IF you have already undertaken a level 3 course of study in hortic., and have a reasonable understanding of some arb stuff, it might be worth having a word with 'Treelife' about accessing the new level 4 Arb Certificate / Diploma (the former Tech. Cert. Arb.) See Training for further info. Hope you get summat sorted. Paul PS I know that they have previoulsy had students based in Ireland.

Rob, not usre you'd have got inot such good pruning positions from the MEWP...that is what you menat by no ropes yeah?, ha! Paul

Thanks Ian. Under the 'new' regime we will be reassessing far more frequently, effectively 'every other' year, i.e.: Year 1 FULL criteria reassmt. Year 2 (CHAS only, if applicable) Year 3 PART criteria reassmt. Year 4 (CHAS only, if applicable) Cheers.. Paul

HI Ian, The key factor here is that the previoulsy nominated, and approved, named manager is still in place and, I think, they are still operating from the same premises. However, in part in light of the depth of changes but coincidentally they were due anyway, there is a full reassessment schdeuled for said contractor in a couple of months when ALL standards will be rechecked and the position reviewed (I am positive though!) The '2 climber scenario' you mention is a fundamental change that would trigger the requirement for a reassessment to be undertaken. More often the question posed is that of climbers / staff changing where the manager stays the same, in this case a reassessment would not be undertaken as it is the 'manager's' responsibbility to ensure standards are upheld. Hope this answers your question okay. Cheers.. Paul PS Have to go now but will check back tomorrow so please post back if needed...no worries!

Hi Tully, See here Become an ARB Approved Contractor, scroll down to 'Here to Help', and then select the 'technical standards' (blue link button) which will take you to the Standards, a word doc. (attcahed), scroll up then for the summary. Wish this wuz easier to find.. Good luck. Cheers.. Paul SchemeStandardsUpto5(v2).doc

DN22 thanks for your post. The ArbAC scheme isn't just about a badge, although we do have a very nice one available for 'less than £500 a year' (ha!, sorry I know that's still a lot of money and yes preparation and maintenance of the supporting, albeit now much smaller scale, systems is alos a cost but view this as an investment, afterall most of it you should be doing anyway but no-one ever checks). The scheme is about setting a national benchmark for arb contractors and helping them achieve for the benefit of all, both those who own trees to get the best care and those who assist them...YOU's! NOT to say good acre isn't avaiblae anyway but how does Mrs Miggins choose? (yes, I know, reputation, word of mouth...and price! BUT wouldn't it be good to add national recognition to that list.) In terms of NPTCs, obvioulsy very importnat, but not the 'be all and end all' as we all know. Interestingly we've occasionally had companies assessed who have all the NPTCs going, and they fail (sorry, get deferred) but equally, in relation to CS41, we often see very competnet rigging operations underatken but no NPTC (we can't, unfortunately, award here until it is obtained.) RE - 'lopping and topping', hoepfully not too often, and in fact soem decline on principle, but in tough economic times 'work is work' and you need to earn a crust, hence the ArbAC may also undertake this work BUT after fully informing the client of the consequences (and in writing on the quote ideally) AND offering better alterantives, i.e. fell and replace with a more suitable species, as the tree has often outgrown the site. 'ARBTALK' is absoultely key to sharing knowledge and information, and supporting each other, (and thansk to STeve and all you guys for making this so succesful) BUT sometimes this needs to be more formalised, evidenced based and specific to your business and that's why Jaime is seeking your views on what you need so hopefully we can then deliver. Cheers.. Paul

Hi Timb, See the sub-contractor section at the bottom of the table at Help becoming an ARB Approved Contractor which will (very) soon include the attchaed. ALso don't forget the AFAG leaflets are alos designed for this purpose, i.e. undertaking site audits of a partciulat task or machinery use, that's what the tick boxes in the right hand margins are for and the notes and sign off at the end. The most robust system, I would suggest, would use a combination of the AA generic site inspection alternated with the AFAGs. Hope this is of use. Cheers.. Paul Safety Inspection Record v.3.doc

Hi Ian, thanks for your post and for raising a very good issue (thanks also to Tully for supporting it.) Marketing and awareness of both the AA and the 'ArbAC' scheme, particularly in the domestic sector, is a very big challenge for both the Association and it's members / 'ARB Approved Contractors'. Unlike in the commercial / LA sector the fact we now dual award with the CHAS scheme (and hoepfully soon to do so with SAFEcontractor) has raised awareness and recognition significantly, this means nothing in the 'home owners' world. A medium-long term strategy would be to allow the industry to slowly, or 'fastly', adopt and support the AA & ArbAC such that more and more arborists / contractors made reference to, or displayed logo's of, the Association. Then, I believe, these people would become more aware by simple association, in the same way, I would suggest, that most people are aware of CORGI / Gas Safe...well certainly that's the case with myself. Hence when your prospective client enquired whether 'ArbAC' is a 'Gas Safe' equivalent for tree care, you could have replied by saying yes, in terms of customer care / h&S / work standards and arb knowledge, but it is an industry based scheme, although not regulated by central government like 'Gas Safe' is, it seeks similar objectives and reassures the client. IN terms of "what real weight does the scheme give you?", principally this is about recognition, and accreditation, by a credible industry body that your business is operating in accordnace with industry good practice and regulatory compliance. AS I mentioned elsewhere previoulsy the process of working towards implemneting the standards, and then going through the audit and assessment, improves businesses. Those businesses whihc have a structured and systematic approach to managing H&S are equally likley to do so with other key aspects of businesses management, i.e. finances / marketing / employment stuff etc. and hence make them more robust and 'recession proof'..I believe (and of course less likley to come unstuck if challenged). I wholly agree there are lots of arborist out there doing (very) good work, 'day in / day out', and clearly meeting the work quality standards of the scheme, and, I believe, many would like to have independent approval of such but hold back for reasons unknown. The 'small business' assessment process is very much 'outcome' driven, i.e. competnet and safe work site plus quality tree pruning and planting using well maintained machinery and equipment and with a reasonable level of underpinning knowledge (NOT a formal qualification) and is NOT about deatiled paperwork systems, written policies procedures and documents. Sorry, I'm concious I'm rambling (AGAIN!) so I'll stop and let you post back any more specific comments / concerns. BUT I wholly accept the AA needs to get (much) more savvy when it comes to marketing and promotion. Cheers.. Paul

This looks a great event with good speakers, pity I can't get there as delievring RA training in Oxon. Hope it's well supported...'knowledge' is power remember and these blasted 'P&Ds' are getting ever more difficult to control. Have great day. Paul

'ARBTALK' at it's best, exchanging information and sharing knowledge improves standards across the board. Well done chaps and thanks To Steve B. Cheers.. Paul

What I am princiapply interested in is developing a credible industry benchmark for arboricultural contracting which becomes recognised, accepted, and suported by all (both contractors and clients). With the review, and revisions, of the 'ArbAC' scheme I believe we are getting closer to achieving this. What we now need is industry support whihc, in turn, will give critcial mass and a much 'bigger' voice to pursue these importnat issues. Bottom line, 'violins please', there is only enough income gneerated from the scheme currently to meet the operational cost of running it...just. IF only we could significantly swell numbers, coellctievly, we could do so much more and start to get real results to benefit everyone (and that's in my manifesto for PM....NOT!!!) Sorry to plug it again, and I know it is as much about the principle as the cost, but 'small' businesses can now become 'ArbAC) (&CHAS) for less than £500 (+VAT) per year over the 4 year term of the assessment cycle, AND your business will improve with it...worth a thought me thinks (BUT tis wot u think that matters!) Thanks for reading my 'verbose' posting for those who do/have, hope you're not too knackered! Cheers.. Paul

Hama, Particularly with a small(er) business I believe we take a very pragmatic approach here under the 'ArbAC' scheme. Essentially the assessment is underatken on an 'outcome' based approach. Applying thsi to machinery & equipment, other than the LOLER 'thorough examinations, the assessor(s) will check stuff on site and provided all is legal, in good working order and safe, they will only expect to see 'periodic' recorded checks. The LOLER weekly written need only be a tick box, with comments oportunity alongside and I will shortly be posting a form on the AA web resource page for this purpose. The AIS 30 (Agricultural, or I prefer Arboricultural, Information Sheet no.30), copy below, states: "Arborists should be trained to carry out a daily pre-use check of their lifting equipment and, in the case of items subject to high levels of wear and tear (ie ropes), a written weekly record of inspection should be kept." BUT this is for items of 'high wear and tear' not everything (and it probably assumes it;s in daily use!) However once the business grows, as is often the case after ArbAC attainment, and more machinery & equipment is purchased a more robust, recorded, system is appropriate. Hope this helps. Paul LOLERais30.pdf

See the 'XXXXX@ (major 'orange and white' chainsaw supplier website, the UK one) then just under the green 'Norseman' sign there's a link button to HAVS. See below also: Cheers.. Paul PS DON'T forget 'health surveillance' whihc is mandtory under the regs and, arguably, the most useful piece of data you'll collect (see HSE webiste at Hand arm vibration - Health surveillance and use the 'initial screening' form at the bottom of the page. THIS is so importnat as it takes account of all the varibales you can't measure. ChainsawViboutputs.pdf

'Treemeup' re 'quoting lark'...you and me too! AAC is a process which can (will) improve your business and, potentially, lead to greater success and / or ease some of the burdens and give you well deserved recognitoin. They also check, and reassure you, are working to industry standards, many of whihc are vague and often mis-understood. In so doing it does improve your stance, if challenge, under H&S law and this has been tested on several occasions (anecdotal eveidnce based on many conversation with ArbACs.) It also has the potentail to 'open new doors', business opportunities, but often you too need to work hard on marketing and promoting thsi one too. More tangible there are insurance discounts to be had but, again, you often need to 'haggle' for these (although one supplier does offer a furthre 5% discount on premiums to ArbACs.) In summary 'yes', accreditation can be an a-se covering exercise, BUT actually that is a spin off benefit, business improvement and compliance is the main one. Hope to speak further sometime soon. Cheers.. Paul

Treemeup, THANK YOU for your posts..! In gardening / horticulture, those 'customers' who are a little more engaged are aware of the 'RHS'. Perhaps the equivalent in the tree world is the FC, maybe this is something we should explore further? However I think, well it's certainly the case with me, the reason why consumers know about CORGI (Gas Safe) is through 'association', in that every plumbers/gas installerts van you see carries the logo. Society is flooded with those bright oriange triangular stickers on their vehicles and YPs ads. AN equivalent could be to achieve the same, or similar, position with 'ArbAC', but unlike CORGI it would always be voluntary. (I also think the over-riding factor in the domestic sector is 'word-of-mouth' recommendations, understandibly, and provided 'the price is right' the jobs yours...hopefully!) In relation to your second point 'yes', more particularly since the tie in with CHAS (and hoepfully soon SAFEcontractor), the main gain of 'ArbAC' is in the commercial / LA sector, although not exclusively so. Hopefully, as you say, then filtering down into domestic would be good (just an important point of note here, IF I receive an enquiry about a none 'ArbAC' and whether they are approved I always state the fact they are not does not mean they are not a reputable and competnet business, it just means they haven't joined the voluntary scheme to seek independent accreditation of such!) We do join forces with HSE, and TReevolution, on their SHADs up and down the country (next one in Southend on 22nd March) to raise client awareness of their responsibilities in enaging competnet arb contractors and what they should look for...and consdering 'ArbACs'. The client groups you mention are all invited along. However their is still much work to be done here but time and resources are of the essence. Cheers.. Paul Cheers..

You're very welcomed. Check back in a few weeks when ther should be more..! Cheers.. Paul

Excellent...THANK YOU. Sorry, I'll 'bog off' now and let Jaime take over. Cheers.. Paul

Phew...'live to lie, sorry die, another day", ha! Thanks Hama...as always! Paul

Sorry Jaime, have jumped in here. 'Treemeup', THANKS for the post whihc I'm sure Jaime will consider. However, we have already had talks with people in 'high(ish)' places about direct central government regulation for the industry. Bottom line it just ain't gonna happen I'm afraid. ALthough what we do is very 'hazardous' most of he time it is so but to oursleves, as climbers/chainsaw operators etc., and the actual risk to homeowners / MoPs directly is relatively low...COMPARED to messing about with a very highly explosive, and poisonous, substance INSIDE someones doemstic dwelling / commercial premises, hence the CORGI / GASSAFE scheme whihc is mandatory. I know this sounds like I'm selling the 'ArbAC' scheme, and I probably am coz I belive in it as it (the process) improves businesses, BUT the only viable option is an industry scheme, yes voluntary, but the less repuatble and scrupulous would not achieve approval nor bother to present themslevs as such. Then we would have a scheme setting us apart from those who are not insured, qualified nor reputable. The other stuff you mention is certainly worth exploring further and I'll leave Jaime to feed them into the system. THANKS again for posting...it's important you do! Cheers.. Paul

Hi all, PLEASE support Jaime in his role, he's acting as kinda a 'conduit' between the industry and the AA for those who maybe aren't comfortable to come direct, preferring an indirect approach. This is kinda akin to the employee safety rep who ain't afraid to shout at the boss, well 'approach' the boss (certainly Jaime didn't hold back in the week, n gud'on'im for that!), voicing the concerns of his colleagues on the shop floor. Thanks all and 'well done' Jaime, looking forward to working with you...et al! Cheers.. Paul

'Should', in H&S law, is interpeted as 'shall' which in legal terms means MUST! Not holding NPTC tickets, coz they are the only 'CoC' (certiifctae of competence) awarding body, is in contravention of PUWER 98, the HASWA is the 'Act' they would bosh you with as that contains all the prosecution sections. Point taken about employing a newbie with all the tickets BUT at leats he is legal and you can mold him in your company wyas and 'good' habits. GOOD expereince does count for everything in this industry and many 'newbies' don't have the benefit of good 'on the job' training and good mentoring, something essential to developing true 'competence' and proficiency. I view the NPTC tcikets for a newbie as a 'driving licence' equivalent, hence would you expect them to drive you to the job faultlessly = no, the trouble is too often they beleive they can AND seek top dollar for the privilege...hmmm!!! Hope this clarifies things a bit. Cheers.. Paul

Hi there, I'm sure you'll find the RA workshop useful as it expands (massively) on the info posted and explains the why and how of the process etc....an essential tool for further reducing likelhood of an accident and of course complying with the law in the process. Cheers for the post. Paul

Hama...red (Carnea?) on white (hippo.)? Thanks, sometimes my basics are lapse....oops, shhh! Paul

Sorry, sorry, sorry....NEBOSH H&S nurd here! Either read the AFAG 805 'Training & Certifictaion', OR the ACOP (Approved Code of Practice, a quasi-legal document) to PUWER 98 and in particular Reg. 9 'Training' whihc states: "Chainsaw operators (Sect)191 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 certificate of competence or national competence award, unless they are undergoing such training and are adequately supervised." The ACOP if your inclined (and suffer from insomnia I'd recommend it!) see p.41...enjoy, ha! Paul PUWERacop.pdf