AA Teccie (Paul)

Call for Expressions of Interest Industry Code of Practice for Tree Work at Height Authoring and Peer Review The Industry Code of Practice for Tree Work at Height (ICOP) will set out the key principles, policies, planning and control of tree work at height and will be written for those engaged in managing aerial tree work. The ICOP will provide detailed guidance on a wide range of topics including standards, legislation, competencies, equipment, inspection, access and work systems. Process The AA has now secured funding to commission the project and invites expressions of interest to tender for the authoring and/or peer reviewing of the ICOP document. Interested parties will be provided with a Framework Scoping Document which provides a more detailed description of the project requirements and will help prospective authors to tender for the work. The final stage will be to agree a contract with our preferred author and to identify a small group of technical peer reviewers. Next Steps Please forward your expression of interest only at this stage to Simon Richmond, Senior Technical Officer at [email protected] indicating your interest in either or both of the following: 1. To tender for the contract with the Arboricultural Association to produce the ICOP. 2. To offer technical advice and support for the production of the ICOP through peer review, on a paid but ad hoc basis. Expressions of interest must be received by 20 December 2013

Nope...well not yet anyway. Through previous inputs and comments from various industry based sources we have developed a list of invitees but protocol dictates we should advertise it widely as there are other people out there who are equally capable but not on our radar. Hence the post here on 'THE' industry forum. Cheers.. Paul

Hi Jamie, apologies for my delay in replying here. Thanks for your words of acknowledgement and support, much appreciated. I will keep the forum posted as things progress. Thanks again. Cheers.. Paul

Sounds like your getting closer then, I'm pretty sure it's one of the ornamental crateagus's. Cheers.. Paul PS Deffo not Hornbeam

both right, I believe...I'm getting braver

OMG...here goes (most embarrassing moment...again) is it a Cockspur Thorn (crataegus prunifolia)...or similar.

Hi all, The AA are commissioning the production of an industry specific code of practice for tree work at height (kinda like IRATA equivalent for rope access) and are looking for both an external author and peer reviewers. If this is of interest please see the attached. Thanks all.. Paul aa_icop_call_for_expressions_of_interest.docx

THANK YOU to the various posts of support for the ArbAC Scheme , and 'me' My only desire is to make the industry a better, and more professional, place for us ALL to be, whether ARB Approved or not...but with a bigger voice, i.e. more ArbACs, it would be a great help. So, if you're NW(ish) based, why not come along to the 'FoC' workshop at Wythenshawe Park (S. Manchester) on 14th Jan. to find out more (AND remember if you attend as a small business, and with a LA Tree Officer nomination, and there are at least 3 of you who do, and you agree to the assessment approx. 10 weeks later, you can enter the draw at the end of the day for 1x FREE, saving £495+VAT, or 2x 1/2 price, saving £247.50+VAT, assessments.) Regardless, it's got to be worth it just to meet me Thanks all. Paul

It appears we are maybe at cross purposes a little here. I'm certainly not taking sides but just trying to give more of an insight from the LPA perspective. They have a job to do too and whilst I acknowledge, perhaps, their practices may appear a little 'unorthodox' they're often up against people / tree owners, not usually MoPs, who don't have any morals at all (those who produce the things we live in.) I also acknowledge there is a great difference in the way different LPAs, and indeed different TOs, apply, or rather, implement the TPO legislation and fostering a good working relationship with the TO is key to this (in my experience.) Anyhows, yer days'd be too straight forward with the LPA n TOs n you'd have no-one to 'bait' Take care out there. Cheers.. Paul

Sorry, I'm a bit "confused.com" here , nothing new, and maybe you've interpreted my reply out of context. I was simply stating a hypothetical possibility in response to your comment about TPOs being placed everywhere (or similar) in that LPAs are going to have to focus their resources to best effect. Further, it would be the LPA who would advise and consult with the tree owner rather than yourself. Time to go home I think Cheers.. Paul

Haha, not at all mate, me bringing 'sanity'...really! Cheers Iain

I didn't expect that one as a caption / punch-line Iain. Naaah, sorry, yer gonna have to put up with me 'bleating on' for a while longer I'm afraid. We did have a 3rd Teccie originally, Guy Watson, who left earlier in the year and I've kinda absorbed his role with the Registered Consultants Scheme, in part, and the higher level membership applications etc. So, this role is to support both my colleague Simon Richmond, who will also be their line manager, on the training etc. side of things, and myself with the ArbAC Scheme, plus a few other 'bits n bobs.' Hope I've not disappointed...either way. Cheers Iain, hope you're well. Paul

This could end up being a 'caption' competition I know, AND I can anticipate some of the responses , but if anyone's interested we do have a vacancy going for a new teccie: see Overview - Arboricultural Association ...now form an orderly queue. Cheers all.. Paul

Hi Ben, I almost had cause to re-trace my Irish ancestry in your last game....sooooooooooooooooo lucky! Anyway, I am familiar with NARIC as we occasionally use them for international qualification comparisons when considering applications for AA membership. I would suggest that whilst they will be able to confirm whereabouts on the UK national qualifications framework, or as it's known now the qualifications and credits framework (QCF), i.e. the level 2 / 3 / 4 etc., which is useful, it still won't remove the HSE requirement for UK based practical skills qualifications, i.e. NPTCs (or Lantra Awards now who also offer, recognised, independent assessment.) Cheers.. Paul

Haha, I understand, thanks for your reply. All the best. Paul

I am sorry to hear of your previous experience, albeit well before my time, nonetheless painful, but I can assure you the process is very, very different now being more open, transparent and fair...and there is an appeals process if your aggrieved at the outcome but no-one's ever used it whilst I've been managing the scheme. It's hugely frustrating that, despite my previous postings about many businesses having recently gone through the process successfully, and being very complimentary about it, none post on here...but they do exist, honest! Thanks for your post and sharing your experience. Paul

Gents (despite stuffing us at both rugby disciplines ), The issue here is not that the academic aspects of your training / education are not recognised, nor for a certain duration (upto 12months) your practical skills capabilities, but that from a Health and Safety Executive regulatory point of view you should conform to the UK based system. Whilst this may change in the future as currently the Association's Education and Training Committee is looking into this very issues, albeit more in relation to the 'academic' side, or certainly initially, the expectation is that if you're here for anything more than a 12 month 'working holiday' (why would you? ) you should comply. As Iain and Tony have pointed out, if after working with English guys for 12months, you consider yourself to be to the same standard, which has certainly been my experience, then you could just undertake the assessments without the associated training. Hope this helps...and watch out in 2015! Cheers for now. Paul

Point taken, controlling standards and compliance is more challenging in a larger business but you should look at what the accreditation might be able to do for your business and not measure it against anybody elses performance. Nothing in life is perfect...and that incs. the ArbAC Scheme, but it is more robust than it was previously. In all honesty, the ArbACs in question are probably working under contract for an organisation and it is principally their responsibility to supervise their activities. IF there's a problem and they bring it to our attention we will, and we do, thoroughly investigate it (the trouble is more often than not they don't flag it up.) We do reassess, every two years now (previously every 5 yrs.), and we do reserve the right to do spot-checks at any time but we don't have adequate resource to undertake this very often. Thanks for your post Dan. Paul

In all honesty, and whilst I acknowledge this has happened in the past, with the ever declining resource on LAs I reckon they'll be focusing their attention on the trees that really justify a TPO and which are deemed to be 'under threat', i.e. where the TPO is expedient. I've also had instances where tree owners and contractors have been aggrieved with TPO placed in instances like this but there's often no absolute guarantee you, as the competent, knowledgeable and experienced tree surgeon/arborist, will actually undertake the proposed works and so the TPO is deemed to be a mechanism to control standards, in effect. Sorry, waffling again. Hope you're well. Cheers.. Paul

Ideally make your TPO etc. enquiries by email, so there's a written record of such, and obviously don't proceed until you've had a formal response. OR, if you do call, make a record in your diary of whom you spoke to and when (date and time). Cheers.. Paul

With respect, don't rely on the customer to know, or sometimes to tell you even if they do know, as it is your responsibility to check...not least as it is YOU who will be prosecuted, potentially. That said I would recommend you inform the client of your intention to check for legal protections, advising you're obliged to do so, giving them the opportunity to ask you not to if they so wish (we had a recent complaint of this nature which was difficult to defend.) Lastly, as a former TPO Officer with an LPA we had many SBs protected...remember, whilst its often the Oaks / Beech / Cedars etc. involved, the legislation isn't species specific and we also had a (large) Portugese Laurel and Magnolia protected (albeit in a Conservation Area.) Cheers.. Paul

Joe, thanks for your reply here...and apologies for mine being so delayed. Very quickly, Trustmark too offer an accreditation opportunity for tree surgeons which principally aims to safeguard the domestic sector, FSB is an organisation who support small businesses with general employment stuff, legal stuff, tax / insurance stuff etc. but is not relevant to a consumer, although maybe it shows the business is 'responsible' in its running (NOT to imply you're not if you're not a member!) Local firms are the way to go for the domestic sector in particular and that's why we have increasing nos. of such under the new(ish) small business category of ARB Approved (now accounts for 42% of all contractors where 3 years ago it was only 18%.) Lastly, the confusion between AA member, available on payment of a fee, but you are then bound by the Code of Ethics and Code of Prof. Conduct, AND subject to the formal complaints procedure, and an ARB Approved Contractor does prevail but with increasing nos. of LAs putting links on their websites to ours, which points directly at the 'Find a Tree Surgeon' (AKA ARB Approved Contractor) the outcome is the intended one. To date, having assessed 10s of small business contractors nationally, ALL have said at the end how useful the process has been as their businesses fell better organised and structured and lots of questions had been answered. Cheers.. Paul

The FC recommend 'Propellar' for sterilising saws etc. on sites with Phytophthora (see Woodland biosecurity – a simple guide | Gabriel Hemery which is very useful.) Cheers.. Paul PS There has been previous threads on this subject so maybe check the archives too.

Oops, hoping the heat's gone out of the situation a little bit Whilst it's not a legal requirement to be 'ARB Approved', or indeed a member, perhaps like the CORGI registered plumber it is a, convenient, and relevant point of reference for Local Authorities (LAs) to direct people to. Further it is one I am becoming increasingly aware of as many LAs now direct enquirers to the AA website when looking for a 'tree surgeon'. In reality what they are also seeking to do is further marginalise the disreputable 'rogues' in society who would never normally consider a 3rd party accreditation such as ARB Approved...and YES, including yourselves, there are many, in fact the majority (currently), of reputable tree surgeons who are not ARB Approved but what other, readily available and recognised, benchmark can they use? Lastly, please have a look at the scheme and how it might benefit your business, not least in the process of organising and preparing for assessment by using the publicised standards (see below), rather than simply dismissing it outright...thank you. Cheers.. Paul Standards-5-or-more-employees-FINALv3(131011).pdf Standards-less-than-5-employees-FINALv3(131011).pdf

Hmmm, MEWP?...or at least a modified climb to achieve a 'safe(ish) system of work' taking account of the fungal agent involved and extent of decay which was probably predictable from external observations. How else could you have done it? Straight fell, accepting some peripheral damage maybe. Maybe time to reflect and review for next time. Cheers.. Paul