AA Teccie (Paul)

As a benchmark, EL insurance is a requirement for ARB Approved even for Sole Traders regardless of how they engage their staff as the HSE guidance is massively "open to interpretation." Certain employers/clients will also look favourably on you holding the insurance. Hence I would strongly advise having it. Cheers.. Paul

Hi Mike, Is it worth reminding people, and me , of the insurance implications here, i.e. that one of them can come back on you if it goes wrong...is that 'contract lift'? Cheers, Paul

Hi Kevin, Ideally the preference is to book directly at this link Safety & Health Awareness Day for Arboricultural Contractors albeit it may not have been 'up' when you tried to book. I'll check with Tiff n get back to you. Apologies.. Paul

Just tryin the Friday philosophical approach to quell the high level of emotions here. You're right in what you say but not everyone has the bottle to stand up to an employer n say "I'm not using that coz it's dangerous" n that's perhaps where H&S reps / advisors / AA / HSE can help give them a voice. Dunno, don't shoot the messenger tho TTFN.. Paul

Tree worker in court after father and son suffer hand injuries | Media centre - HSE ...perhaps it's time to reflect. Cheers, n for goodness sake "take care out there..!" Paul

Ed, thank you, very succinct. Paul

I would sincerely hope so as, effectively, you're both refreshing and 'up-skilling' in tree felling operations. Might be different if you were going from CS32(/33) to CS34 Windblow as its different, stating the obvious, and they (FISA) may not accept that. We would certainly accept it for the ArbAC Scheme. May be worth pre-empting any problems and contacting whomever if offering the job/contract...or maybe not. Cheers.. Paul

Treework is inherently dangerous, a point we all acknowledge. Getting it right at the sharp-end, forgive the pun, is the essence of 'applied' safety. By choosing the right people/employees n having a healthy respect for what we do goes a long way to achieving safety, NOT forgetting (good) experience of course, and these are often the behavioural aspects that prevail. Hence, IME, it's often not the 'operational' safety aspects that are failing but perhaps more the 'health' aspects, HAVS / NIHL (Workplace Deafness) / MSDs etc., AND, more often, the 'compliance' aspects of the business. This, i.e. 'compliance', often controls access to commercial work, in particular, and that's the primary benefit perhaps that H&S advisors and accreditation can therefore bring. Along with protecting you as the employer in the (unlikely) event of an accident / incident having the necessary stuff in place can also serve to reassure your insurers you are doing what you need to / should be. SORRY, sounding like a sales pitch now , BUT please do think it through carefully. Cheers all.. Paul (the AA "pen-pusher" )

Hi Shane, I applaud your approach here. Whilst having a 'retained' H&S Advisor can improve safety performance and H&S compliance, and indeed serve you well in the (unlikely) event of an accident / incident, so too can having an accredited business, e.g. ARB Approved. Also both can potentially bring commercial benefits, or certainly more easily satisfy certain contractual requirements for 'competent H&S advice' etc. Should you wish to know more please give me a call. However, this feels like I'm 'hi-jacking' someone else's post (apologies Steve) so I'll depart n say n'more. Cheers.. Paul

Hi Steve, as a matter of interest, I would interpret 'modern safety' as a measure of compliance with current regs and safety guidance etc., e.g. FISA / AFAG / HSE leaflets and, for instance, ensuring that your planning process for tree work at height complies, SFARP, with the W@H Regs. Your 'on-site' technology using smart phones / I-pads etc. is more 'modern (IT) technology' is it not...there's nothing new, or modern, about risk assessment which has been around since 1992. Sorry, I'm Paul (Smith) and I manage the Arbor. Association's "Approved Contractor" Scheme, an 'industry specific' business accreditation opportunity, and I too deal with H&S...and whilst I'm not Chartered IOSH I am industry based. I look forward to reading the replies here. Good luck with your new venture Paul PS what do mean by those "awkward crown reduction plans"?

Also, if you speak to any marketing expert they'll tell you to promote your 'USP' (unique selling point) as a business, in other words WHY should they use you over and above someone else...trouble is often identifying a suitable 'USP'. Perhaps being local, perhaps offering the full tree service inc. stump grinding, perhaps offering a FREE quote (altho most do anyway), perhaps being qualified AND accredited , perhaps all of these...and more, or some. Good luck.. Paul

Nope...this is the guidance for trees in Con. Areas When must replacement trees be planted? If a tree in a conservation area is removed, uprooted or destroyed in contravention of section 211 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the landowner has a duty to plant another tree of an appropriate size and species at the same place as soon as he or she reasonably can. The same duty applies if a tree in a conservation area is removed because it is dead or presents an immediate risk of serious harm. The duty attaches to subsequent owners of the land.

Hi all, just thought it might be useful to clarify things here (mainly for my benefit of course ) The Regs. covering Conservation Areas are Reg. 15 BUT refer in the first instance to 'exceptions' for TPO'd trees detailed in Reg. 14, hence: What are the exceptions for work on dead trees and branches? Unless work is urgently necessary because there is an immediate risk of serious harm, five working days prior written notice must be given to the authority before cutting down or carrying out other work on a dead tree. The authority’s consent for such work is not required. The exceptions allow removal of dead branches from a living tree without prior notice or consent. Also of interest: What is the exception for work on dangerous trees and branches? Where a tree presents an immediate risk of serious harm and work is urgently needed to remove that risk, tree owners or their agents must give written notice to the authority as soon as practicable after that work becomes necessary. Work should only be carried out to the extent that it is necessary to remove the risk. Hopping this is useful Cheers all.. Paul PS The above is applicable in England ONLY. PPS Why now 'exceptions' rather than as previously 'exemptions'? The best answer I can get is it helps to differentiate the 'new' Regs from the old....reasonable perhaps (albeit everyone still refers to exemptions...ah well.)

Fair comment, I guess it depends, to some extent, on the degree of 'deadness' and your local LPA TO preferences. The '5 day notice' might be an alternative under certain circumstances possibly Cheers, n hope you're well. Paul

Assuming your tree is in England as the current 2012 Regs. only apply there. If in Wales they still operate the 1999 Regs but whilst dead-wooding is generally accepted to be an exempt activity its worth confirming such with the LPA. Skyhuck, can't you also remove a (clearly) 'dead tree' without notification, albeit obliged to replace? Cheers.. Paul

Kevin, very astute! It's been a long day here and my initially misinterpreting the post kinda swayed my subsequent comments. I'll go now n leave it to the 'experts' Hope you're well.. Paul

Apologies, I misinterpreted that the owner was the Local Authority (LA)....DOOH! I would suggest still emailing the LA then and giving them an intended start date for the works "as previously discussed" etc. and confirming to them your understanding that there are no planning restrictions, e.g. TPO / Con. Area, preventing the works from proceeding. It does sound like someone from the LA is covering all angles, just in case. Hence, for complete 'belt n braces' you may wish to get written (email) confirmation from the LPA, i.e. LA Planning Dept, that there are no protections in place. Sorry, I'm waffling a bit and, of course, adopting the "proceed with caution" approach Cheers.. Paul

Perhaps, to cover yourself, put in an application / specification to whomever is instructing you by email and await their reply before proceeding. Whilst the tree(s) may not be TPO'd they are, presumably, in their ownership so, in effect, you are getting permission...kinda. Good luck.. Paul

Hi Tom, I understand your frustration, ad indeed apologise for any contribution we've inadvertently made. We do (try) to talk to the Commission but with very varying degrees of success, which varies greatly in the different regions. Whilst the FC are obviously one organisation, in my experience, the regions operate with varying degrees of autonomy and trying to get a consistent approach is challenging (a grave understatement!) The most recent example of this would be two 'tree surgery' framework contracts advertised side by side on the FC website where one (East Anglia) stipulated contractors must be ARB Approved and the other (South West) didn't mention it at all. As an aside, but related, at a recent HSE event, 2 chaps from the FC were present and when I questioned them about their take on things, as far as tree surgery was concerned, and they indicated mandatory FISA training would not be applicable in the tree...but as soon as they stood on the ground it would. Needless to say I raised my eyebrows over the top of my head..! We will persevere where/when we can. Cheers.. Paul

Hi Jules, I hope you're well. Exactly, the problem is the HSE RIDDOR reports don't differentiate between the different industry sectors. Hence FISA, originally, representing the larger organisations within the forestry industry sector, were able to identify chainsaw etc. accidents, of which there were many (apparently) and hence the mandatory refresher training requirement was introduced. Arguably, I would suggest, the skills requirements, and therefore the corresponding need for refresher / update training, is much more diverse in the 'arb' sector and hence more challenging. regards.. Paul

Morning all, an interesting thread. Firstly, if I may, to say that refresher / update training has always been a requirement of the PUWER Regs and AFAG/FISA 805 'Training and Certification', and rightly so. The recommended time period for a professional user, so not me anymore , is every 5 years. Secondly, I have had conversations with HSE regarding the FISA 'mandatory training' situation and been reassured they have no intention to introduce that in the arb sector (remembering of course the HSE didn't introduce in the Forestry sector, FISA and the larger organisations did due to their poor accident rates.) Nonetheless it does highlight the issue and means we need to think more seriously about it perhaps. Thirdly, never been there myself, but many of our scheme Lead Assessors do accident investigation and the very definite feedback I get is that HSE / coroners etc. are generally more interested in training / refresher training than NPTCs / Lantra's etc. (perhaps in part not being aware of them.) So, to protect yourself AND your staff, you do need to be able to demonstrate an 'active' system of skills review and updates where/when/if necessary. I would suggest "up-skilling" wherever possible, and applicable, e.g. CS31 up to CS32/33 up to CS34/35 etc. (and yes I know that's old money now.) Also, accident stats, safety performance, longevity are other important considerations. IMHO, albeit not exclusively, there is often a greater need for refreshers / updates in the aerial aspects, rescue/climbing/rigging etc. due to advances in equipment / techniques / technologies. I wholly acknowledge the financial implications of training, a 'tripe whammy' in effect, BUT it is a significant 'control' issue for risk and needs to be viewed as an investment (I know, easy for me to say, to promote it as such and hopefully you'll get 'buy-in' and commitment from staff.) Lastly, we are involved with FISA on the review of the leaflets that cross both industry sectors to ensure 'arb' is represented (this avoids having a separate set of leaflets / guidance.) The aerial leaflets are still HSE/AFAG, and the group is still active, and these are coming our way. Finally, FISA have told me, albeit I've asked for a written position statement but nothing to date, that 'arb' activities will not require FISA refresher training...but they will require evidence of suitable 'refresher training' to work on their sites. Hope this helps, a little, n apologies for the verboseness (if such a word .) Cheers all, n take care out there.. Paul

Hi Steph, good to hear, I hope you're all well. Thanks for this and I look forward to seeing you at Kirkley Hall. Excellent stuff.. TTFN.. Paul

Hi Sam, Look here Training - Arboricultural Association scrolling through to ROLO courses. Cheers.. Paul

Hi all, just an early 'heads up' for this FREE workshop / seminar. See ARB Approved Contractor Preparation Workshop for further info. Post back soon Thanks all.. Paul