Paul Jenks

One site we regularly work on had an incident a few years ago. We got stiffed for two car valets at £100 each. Thereafter, on any of their sites the car park we work in has to be empty or we'll not carry out the works on the day of operations and charge for the delay. This does mean that sometimes we work on a Saturday. They pay for the overtime, happy days. Education is a two way street. (Pun intended).

There may be too much grease in the head. I always dribble a bit of petrol over the blades prior to running up as they can get quite bound up with sap. The petrol breaks it down quite well. Obviously don't do this over the clients grass, shrub bed, tarmac drive etc etc.

There are certain events where mechanical failure in the first bit af a race is an acceptable reason for a restart. Knowing the rules is one of the keystones of competing, like getting to the start on time. What the cyclist did and what the lightweight double did was within the rules and you can see by the results and the physical state of them at the end of the race that they worked as hard as they possibly could. The badminton situation addresses the spirit of the olympics. I'll agree that a situation where, by winning a round, you get a trickier draw shouldn't arise and that is something that the IOC should address. However, the relentless serving into the net by the badminton players was at best niave. Their coaches should have known better and the spectators, who, let it be said, are a fundamental part of The Olympic Games, deserved to be treated with more respect than they were and they pretty quickly picked up on the poor performance. To be recognised as the best in a sport you have to beat anyone and everyone on the day of competition. As for Chambers, the UKAA did ban him and fought long and hard to keep him banned. He got back in on a legal, international technicality. Whether he is booed out of the stadium or cheered to the rafters is a decision for the spectators in the stadium at the time of his performance.

We quoted for a reasonable sized job for a health centre development that involved felling about 15 trees and pruning a load more. As is usual we put in a further price for the grinding. We got the tree work but not the grinding as the construction company said they would deal with the stumps themselves. 3 weeks after completing the works we were asked if we could deal with the stumps for them. Sure, I said, our quote for grinding still stands. No, they said, can you deal with the stumps? We've dug them out of the ground and the skip company won't take them away. Unlucky, I said, get a bug tub grinder or a farmer. Educating the clients is a long slow process.

I with Likeitorlumpit. Improve your professional relatinship with your existing client base and ask for referrals. Look to improve your conversion rate with new prospects by offering a better, clearer and more professional service. Endeavour to put price low down the list of factors.(Of course it has a bit of bearing, but no so much). If you have clients who use other suppliers because they are cheaper, can you really call that person/organisation a client? Do you really want to be Quoting for them if they only go for the cheapest price and don't really value what you give? This is an attritional relationship and not good for business. The percentages for conversion Likeitorlumpit quoted are a very good guide.

Have you been instructed by either the client or the insurance company to remove the trees or have you been asked for advice on the best method? If the insurance company is involved then they should have a say on it. If the house is subsiding the trees will be a contributory factor only. Subsidance is usually caused by poor foundation design. The house will have to be underpinned so a bit of heave will probably help the house sit back together. If the house had been properly constructed in the first place it would be able to cope with a bit of movement in a plastic subsoil either way, up or down. Given that the rainfall is so unpredictable no-one would be able to predict the amount of soil movement post pruning/felling so take the fookers down and be done with it.

Many of the companies we work for require CIS and we require it for the few subcontractors we employ. The bit about materials not being deducted is correct. We are often deducted 20% from the cheque or BACS. We get a statement and we can offset this against our monthly PAYE bill. CIS is a tool for ensuring the contractor makes sure the sub-contractor pays their tax as the contractor can be held liable if the sub-contractor fails to pay. It's very handy as we ensured a subbie we employed for a year or so was CIS so all the monies he received from us were tax paid. ended up in jail for something or other and we were all clear. It's been so long since I got my card and since I had any direct dealings with the day to day financials but I seem to remember it was a doddle to get. It's just another card to hand over at site induction for the clip board guy to photocopy. I give them everything. CIS, NPTC, Streetworks, Driving licence. Taco, Nectar, Costa. They either get the joke or get really p*ssed. Often the latter as I can be a little abrasive.

That must have been the mother of all fields.

Looks like an old tear out. Works depend on the level of decay and the targets. Is that a car park underneath? Is there any appreciable lean in the stem? Can the extent of decay be ascertained by visual means or do you need to PICUS? The tree looks ok. Once the ivy is off a better view can be made of the foliar density, or does the ivy only cover the main bole? The tree appears to be reasonably well protected by the others around. A light reduction, pending decay inspection, might abate the hazard.

Any line of business is the same, MW. One has to look at the business model being used not the industry, and the culture of the business from the MD to the newest, rawest recruit. It doesn't always work as in tough times the business comes before all else. Having said that, directors do have a fundamental duty, having employed a person, to provide them with meaningful work. Many people who become directors are ignorant of their duties and responsibilities as laid out by Companies House, or they ignore them. In my view, not enough company owners and directors are brought to book for malpractice. The tools are available for employees to do this. Having worked as hard as I have to develop my team, when times get a bit tough, I work harder to ensure I generate enough work to keep hold of them.

It's a bolt on service for us. Clients can always get it done cheaper. Tree surgeons are geared for tree work not necessarily grinding and their prices reflect this. Many purely stump grinding co's don't remove the grindings so there is a big cost saving there. Give 2 prices. One to leave and one to remove leaving the site level. This price for removal has to reflect not only the costs associated with hauling it out of the garden but also the cost for disposal. I was criticized on a big felling and grinding job a few years ago. We had about 30 large H.chestnut stumps to deal with. We ground them down to about 650-750mm and each was about 1-1.5m across. There was about 2-4tonnes from each stump. The client compared our costs with a contractor in the midlands a quarter of the price, who, when one read the small print it turned out didn't remove the spoil and 'prices were based on grinding to 50-100mm below ground level'. Yes, 50-100mm. We never go another spot of work on the site. Can't educate pork.

PICUS. Too hard a reduction may hasten the decline. Get a succession tree in. We have a similar one near us where the client wishes to retain the tree. Bit more than just a bit of gano at the base though. 2 people could fit in the cavity at the base. Only a CA so shouldn't be too much of an issue as there is no way the TO can reasonably TPO. Client would want to re-plant anyway. We'll have to ge for a heavy reduction regardless of the effects on the physiology.

They go to HSE to get their figures. They certainly don't collate their own data. In the insurance business arboriculture is a very small part so they like to use external sources. Yes, domestic incidents are used as you only have to look at the HSE stats to see the type of incidents. Seems that anyone who cuts themself with a chainsaw whilst attacking a piece of wood is described as a 'tree surgeon' No disrespect Tony, but have you considered avoiding conifer hedges.

Are you after an ident or a steer as to recommendations? Looks like a fungus to me. Fell it and stock up on firewood.

I won't employ anyone that the guys think is an arse. They are the ones who know and find out much quicker than me. They have had to put up with one or two in the last couple of years and hopefully that is behind us. The newest guy we have is a professional child minder. He has a lot to learn. He has, however, got the right attitude and a desire to learn. Age shouldn't be a concern as far as driving vehicles goes. Get a decent broker and he'll get you a good fleet policy. There are fewer guys around now with pre-97 licences who're willing to graft at the levels required for modern arboriculture so one might as well train a good guy to drive for you. And before anyone starts bleating about training people and them going to work for the competition. If you pick them right and treat them right you should retain them.

I like your points Tony. The last paragraph is perhaps the most poignant. 'Unnecessary and avoidable risk of harm' This industry is chock full of hazards. The challenge is making sure those who work within it are aware of them. New ones crop up all the time. Every day is a school day. Awareness is sadly lacking in many and the ability to recognise hazard situations. I find that maintaining an internal dialogue through operations is one way to keep me alert to the hazards.( I have employed a couple of guys over the years for whom their internal dialogue was more disturbing than the hazards they regularly exposed themselves to.) Usually a well trained arborist will make an error when other factors come into play. I know that all my near misses have occurred when I been focussing on a very weak groundcrew in a tough situation or being very tired or showing off. My mantra in the tree, especially on tricky jobs is, 'Little bits'. Take little bits and there is so much more control. Also, if it goes Pete Tonge, there is likely to be less damage. I have noticed more and more arborists operating with more control and a lot closer to what is proscribed by NPTC/Lantra. This is a good start, though following doctrine is not always good. Another challenge is the length of time a certificate takes to get. A few weeks is nowhere near long enough to embed skills. Maybe the apprenticeship scheme will add to this. Climbers need to be monitored for much more time as the develop. In the real world, however, this will be a long time coming. I think we, at Jenks, are nearly there with the teamleaders encouraging the newbies and giving time and guidance. Everyone is encouraged to climb and are given opportunities to advance their skills.

Wow. There's one for a Saturday night. I think the basis for best practice has to stem from good industry training. There will always be a discrepency between what actually goes on in the field and in the classroom. There will always be different ways of working as the environment we work in cannot be wholly covered by structured training. There will always be differences as there are people involved, notwithstanding the fact that trees differ in size, shape, location, state of health and stability etc, etc. Part of the reason for most of the guys working in this industry is the buzz. Take that away and people either leave the industry or create a daily buzz by 'breaking' the 'rules'. We all do it or have done it. Our training system has to adapt back to the old way of training people to carry out a task rather than pass a test in a sterile situation. Continuous work development is an answer where, more than just re-doing a test, workers abilities to address different tasks are assessed and discussed. Training days or workshops. People need to be able to assess the risks they take before, during and after and apply the knowledge. Sorry, not as conclusive as I'd have liked to be. The kids are screaming and I'm getting the evil eye from my wife for being on here.

There is also another way of thinking in that maybe the developers and designers should involve tree professionals and actually learn some of the factors within the BS so they can build projects that aren't impacting on trees. This is always going to be a challenge as developers aren't known for they altruism. I've said previously that I believe either the next or next but one version of BS5837 will say that arb survey MUST be carried out prior to design. Changing the culture is hard and made doubley so as developers generally want to extract as much from their land banks as possible. Maybe, as the professionals involved with development become more enlighted, (to the rules, that is), land values, especially large gardens with trees in them, will be angled more to their aesthetic than their potential to slip in an extra house or two.

As I understand it, the latest BS revision is guiding users to get the tree survey carried out prior to design. (Eventually, IMO, it'll insist.) The LA's around and about us are less and less willing to condition consent. They require supporting documents with the planning application. All the documentation, Site Survey Drawing showing tree constraints and RPA's, Tree Survey, Arb Method Statement, Arb Impact Assessment, all have to tie up together so that anyone involved in the building can easily see what they are to do and not to do, where they can dig and not dig and , yes, where they can pee and not pee. (Usually referred to as site welfare facilities.) There should also be provision for arboicultural supervision for the installation of fencing and ground protection, where required, for the siting of site welfare, cement washout, materials storage and contractors parking. If there are to be any works within the RPA of a retained tree, there is now very clear guidance within the BS document on the specification of ground protection and the methodologies for works. This does make the whole operation a little more onerous for the developer before they have consent but it does make our job easier and the guidelines a lot clearer on what is expected.

Look up your terminology. Pollarding only applies to young trees. Re-pollarding applies to trees that have been historically pollarded on a cyclical basis. Removing the crown from a mature tree is called creating a monolith that may respond well and throw out profuse reaction growth that will need to be managed for a time as a pollard might. It may, however, die. It will almost certainly shorten the life of the tree as the large wounds will inevitably decay. It will exacerbate any fungal pathogens present and removing most of the trees carbohydrate store will not leave it in a good position to recover. However, if the only other option available is to fell it, then monolithing might be expedient.

Do you mean you are being contracted by EDF to carry out works and they want to pay you using a credit card? Or they want you to pay them using a credit card? We have a credit/debit card facility to take payments and a company credit card to make them. Large companies typically pay by BACS into your bank account or by cheque.

I believe that by 2014 we will have to have CPC if driving is part our daily job. When one of my guys took his C test he argued the toss with the examiner about having to have CPC and the examiner eventually admitted what Treequip has just posted. I.e. If driving isn't what you are principally employed for you don't need it.

My wife doesn't/won't eat liver, kidneys or heart so I very rarely cook it. As I traditionally do most of the cooking, as I'm better at it, I tend to do stuff everyone will eat. When I have done it I cook most of it seperately and throw it together at the last minute. Standard onion gravy, grilled bacon and flash fry the strips of liver. Getting the liver right takes a bit of practice. Too short and it's a bit fleshy, too long and it's shoe leather. Throw it in a pan or bowl, stir it up and serve.

We have a saw called Jack, after an ex employee. It only works when it wants to. There is also one in the vault called Betsy. I can only surmise the reason why.

Squirrells, rabbits or muntjac. They all do it.