Stuart Phillips

Given that the NZ Arb Assoc is affiliated to the ISA, and offers assessment for the ISA's certifications, you might consider taking the Certified Tree Worker or Certified Arborist certifications. AA Teccie Paul will probably be able to point you in the direction of someone that can assist with these, as I believe that UKAA is also an affiliate organisation.  This route would give you a qual that is already recognised in NZ. 

The current system doesn’t work but there is very little incentive to change it.  For ‘read ‘tricky and more expensive’.

Here’s some of what I think is wrong with what we have currently…

1.    PUWER (Regulation 9) emphasizes the need for adequate training.  Our current system places the emphasis on the ‘need’ for a ‘ticket’, a certificate.

2.    Learners, with no previous experience, complete a 5 day course (often only working on softwoods) and are then expecting to be competent to work in different situations with numerous different species.

3.    The quality control of instruction and assessment hasn’t always been all it could be (although I know that recently this has begun to be tightened up).

The net result being that the industry accident rate is higher that anyone thinks it should be.

A number of suggestion have been put forward for revising how we work, but usually these are relegated to the too expensive or too difficult piles.  So, until either people get over the stage of tutting and saying, “something should be done”, or there is legislation to force change, it is what we are stuck with.

All I would add is that the certification should be a starting point.  PUWER Reg 9 still places a duty on employers to ensure staff are adequately trained.  If we are saying that just doing a 5 day course isn’t sufficient then they are obliged to ensure that there is some further (presumably on the job) training.

Oh, and as for the C&G and Lantra 'gravy train', call into their offices some time, and see how many of the staff are sat in 18 carat gold chairs, and how many Bentleys are in the carpark.

Try giving Matt Cooper at Trees Limited a shout   ([email protected].).  He may do it, or lis likely to know someone who can.

PUWER reg 9 says that you must be adaquately trained (emphasis on the training).  For almost all purposes the Lantra quality assured course will fit the bill, and the certification will give evidence of training (emphasis on the training). 

The C&G ticket is a qualification (rather than a certification) and someone will put together a course to meet the requirements of the C&G assessment (the emphasis being on the qualification).

In both cases they follow the usual recommendation of periodic refresher training and the standard often quoted is 5 years for regular users and 3 years for occasional users.

On 24/06/2019 at 09:48, IronMike said:

I just wanted to say thanks to Bob at Forsyth Forestry Training for sorting me out with my FMO ticket for my wee Logbullet.

 

The time spent with him was very worthwhile, and I picked up some very useful tips and knowledge. Bob is a very easy person to get along with, and the atmosphere was very relaxed throughout. 

 

His communication beforehand and since the assessment has been great, and I would highly recommend him to anyone needing forestry training.

 

If you read this, thanks again mate!

He is a first rate matey!

On 06/05/2019 at 20:44, Stephen Blair said:

Just get an assessor in and do your big tree and wind blown.  Takes about 45 minutes if you are as up to speed as you think you are and believe it or not, you may even learn something.

Pizza cut, who knew ?

Felling 6-12 trees (according to the assessment schedule) including the set up and clearing up as well as the q & a, and including large trees, in 45 minutes.  Pretty good going.  Unless of course it was an assessor who was more interested in giving a Pass rather than checking competence.  It does confirm something long suspected, that this qualification is not fit for purpose and is not being delivered appropriately by (some) assessors.

On 23/12/2018 at 14:35, drinksloe said:

Just make sure u get NPTC tickets, possibly the cheap course is omething different.

NPTC are recognised by everybody, some forestry companies don't recognise lantra etc

 

But 1 hell of a lot to cram into 5 days, simply not possible

 

 

If anyone ever has a problem with Lantra quals, give Lantra a call.  

The units on which the NPTC e no ( and Lantra quals) are based on were all originally written by Lantra.  As these quals came out in 2012, any not recognising the Lantra ones is just out of touch.

There might be a temptation to think that getting everything done in 5 days is a really good time saving. But you want to make sure that you are properly trained, and assuming you have no prior experience, 5 days is not going to give proper training.  

If in doubt, go one the Lantra website and search the courses, it will show you the recommended durations for the difference courses.  Or, do a quick Google search, and you will quickly see what sort of duration (and prices) different independent trainers are putting against these courses. 

Cytokinins?

awarding bodies like Lantra and C&G produce qualifications, and these are regulated in England by Ofqual (in Scotland by SQA). They also produce certifications, which are non-regulated. Quals must meet the standards set by regulator, for the non regulated the awarding body pretty much sets its own standard.

So, Lantra's chipper ticket is non regulated, and if you run it past the RFS for your cert arb, they won't accept it because its not a qual. Likewise the C&G utility certificates are not qualifications. felling large trees... not a qual.

7 hours ago, spuddog0507 said:

whats NPTC level 3 unit 313 for then felling and crown break down of large trees over 760mm for then, ?

C&G/NPTC  still offer the unit for their own certification, but there is no corresponding regulated qualification like there is with the felling over 380. 

On 08/12/2018 at 08:51, Rough Hewn said:

Can anyone actually confirm what nptc301 (cs32) limitations are?
Is it 760 or unlimited.
I've heard and read many conflicting opinions.

There is no upper limit, the qual is simply "Felling and processing trees over 380mm".  That said, the responsibility of the employer is to ensure that an individual is "adequately  trained", and letting a newbie loose on a 'kin big tree the day after they completed their CS32 assessment is likely to fall short of this requirement. 

As far as I'm aware there isn't one.  As you know Lantra SSC developed the units used in both Lantra Awards' and NPTC's qualifications and, there was no comparable unit developed.  It may be that, at the time, it was seen that there was such low take up so as to suggest it was not needed. …  the lack of enquiries about it since would support that thought.

That's not to say that there are not a dozen training companies who will offer you training for CS44 if you ask them.

On ‎09‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 23:12, claydon said:

Though interesting it doesn't actually tell you the answers, like what is considered a safe way to fell a leaner or remove a hung up etc. I know what I was taught 20 years ago but wondered if its all still relevant?

See thread on refresher training

5 hours ago, difflock said:

Safe chainsaw use is no different to driving and dammed all to do with "training".

You remember that much quoted lie, "now you've passed your driving test, you can start to learn how to drive"??  In that sense, Chainsaws is no different to driving.   You do the basics, learn to pass the tests, and then start to learn the 'tricks of the trade' and build up competence.  As with driving, a gentle reminder of the basics... like 'mirror, signal, manoeuvre' is worthwhile (how often do you curse the bod in front for not using their indicators, or for doing it at the last minute?).

The issue comes with those who believe that a 'Certificate of Competence' is a certificate that they are competent.  Its like passing the driving test; it means that, on the day, at least you did the basics adequately.  Competence is all about learning those "old boy's skills" which get you out of trouble when you are half way up a hill without a winch....  And you don't get to be an 'old boy' by getting it wrong.

9 hours ago, Spruce Pirate said:

Can't speak for the arb side of things, but forestry is a 3 - 5 year refresher.  3 years if part time saw use, 5 years if it's full time saw use.  Have to refresh the "highest ticket", so in my case windblow.  Could be small trees or large trees depending on which tickets you hold.  The refresher course is only one day, and cost should be around £125 - £150 (at least that's what I've been quoted and told others have paid).

The push for refreshers is from the HSE's PUWER ACoP (Reg 9 paragraph 124 if you want to look it up) and the specifics for chainsaw is in the HSE guide INDG317 Chainsaws at Work (page 6).  This is also where the 3 and 5 year recommendation can be found. 

This 3 / 5 year recommendation has led to a compliance based approach to refresher training.  That is to say, no matter how incompetent someone is with a saw, if they have done a refresh within the last 5 years it will all be okay. (or possibly not).

The push more recently (and more sensibly) has been toward encouraging a  risk based approach to refresher training.  That would mean that there are still planned refreshers, but concentrating on higher risk activities, or doing something like hung up trees before starting a contract clearing a site with a lot of snagged trees in it.

The risk based approach is more difficult to manage for contracts, as it doesn't put a neat tick in a box. so the 3/5 year requirement is stuck into contracts. 

Up-skilling is a good option, if its a skill you are likely to use, and if its a skill that does refresh other units.  It can, in some contexts, become yet another thing to refresh in the future.

[It is often said ( and is in this thread) that there is no required refresher for driving... having driven into the office today, and seen the antics of some of the idiots on the road, perhaps there should be.]

On ‎18‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 16:45, Darrin Turnbull said:

Been working for a landscape company , two of their workers have just completed a chainsaw course . I think upto 30 cm 12 ins diameter felling.

They were telling me about leaving a hold at the back and were told to use it as much as possible 

 The reason was , they decide when it should fall not the tree.

 

what do you guys think ?  

I would like to know who the training instructor was.  If it was anyone working with us, a quiet word in their shell-like might be needed.

The need to do refresher training or some description comes from PUWER Regulation 9, and the often quoted 5 years is in the HSE's guide "Chainsaws at work" INDG 317 (http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg317.pdf).

The more recent guides from the HSE have tended to shy away from setting out that it should be on a 3 or 5 year basis, and gone for saying that they would expect there to be planned refresher training, on a risk based approach. 

You might go for up skilling, but think about which ticket you're collecting as, whilst felling over 380mm would clearly cover a lot of the same areas as Felling upto 380mm, that won't be true across the board.

It won't be a surprise that I wouldn't suggest just doing the ticket without doing the training.  Apart from having a vested interest, I am always aware that Regulation 9 stipulates "adequate training" not "collect a certificate" so, in case of accident, that's what you will be measured against.

On ‎19‎/‎08‎/‎2018 at 22:39, spuddog0507 said:

NO its not horseshit, its coming and we will have to follow suit, and if you read the post i quoted ? yes its got nothing to do with refresher courses but you might find its got a lot to do with how things have and are changing all the time, when some of us started there was no such thing as chainsaw tickets and very little PPE the younger generations have PPE , HSE drummed in to them but in these days common sense is becoming more and more scarce,

Couple of thoughts.  Construction tends to be static.  Its much easier , and more reasonable to provide facilities on a site where folk are going to be based for quite a while.

And, Health Safety and Welfare requirements tend to have a wonderful clause added into them which says, "as far as reasonably practicable". 

I will be seeing one of our friendly HSE inspectors in a week or so, and I will see what he knows about it.... if anything.

Had an interesting chat to the HSE about refresher training.  The whole 3 year/5 year thing as left everyone looking at a compliance based approach to refreshers. That is, "as long as I within my 5 years, it doesn't matter how bad I am".  The push would be to move to a planned, risk based approach so, "looking a doing a lot of bigger trees, so I'll refresh felling over 380mm this year".  That could be just the felling unit, not maintenance and cross cutting as well. This could be followed, in a year or three by windblow or whatever.  Or, if someone is away from work for a few weeks, a refresher course to get them back up to speed. 

The essential elements here being that there is some form of refresher training happening, and it is planned in.  And the training is against an identified need, through the risk assessment, rather than on lets refresh it all every 5 years basis (or, worst still, a "lets upskill to do windblown trees, even though I don't need the ticket, as it will 'refresh' the cross cutting skills I do need to refresh" approach).

It is a Lantra ticket.  Sawpod is a good shout, as is Arborventure.

On ‎29‎/‎05‎/‎2018 at 15:35, AA Teccie (Paul) said:

"Standing to be correct" as always (my standard caveat these days) but I believe chainsaw gloves, i.e. with Kevlar etc. protection on back of left-hand, were first introduced pre-front hand guard days when there was deemed to be a possibility of contacting the running chain.

 

The HSE / AFAG / FISA 'requirement' is to risk assess the situation / 'the job in hand' and select the most appropriate controls, inc. PPE. I think HSE would 'reasonably' expect gloves to be worn by most when using chainsaws on the ground, whether they be general work gloves or chainsaw gloves, but deemed more optional in the tree. As others have said, and particularly during colder weather conditions, they do help to keep hands warm and dampen vibrations a little = lowered risk of HAVS developing.

As folk will appreciate, in putting training materials together we end up writing in bits about the use of PPE including chainsaw gloves.  You would not believe the amount of debate, discussion and disagreement that the simple question of wearing chainsaw gloves has thrown up.  The guide from the HSE at the time was pretty near spot on what Paul has said.  The wearing of gloves was recommended for protecting against general scratches, thorns etc., and to keep the hands warm and dry  thereby reducing the risk of damage due to HAVs.  The FC still had the wearing of chainsaw gloves written in to their material, but recognized that it could be risk assessed out. 

The basic line would be that qualifications are recognised by those people who are prepared to recognise them.  There are a good number of folk in the UK who haven't even got their heads around recognising the UK qualifcations that have been about in the last 15 years, so haven't got a hope of understanding that there might be some from NZ.

The  base line here, if you can find an employer who knows what they are about, is that you need to demonstrate that you have been 'adequately trained'.  Whether they are from NZ or the UK, the quals should be the thing that gets you on site.  The scrutiny of the supervisor ought to be the arbiter of whether you stay on site.  They have to make up their mind as to whether the ticket you hold is actually worth anything.

If you want to map your quals to the UK, then contact UK NARIC (www.naric.org.uk) who will do it... at a price.

Tree life are really very good at what they do, and have a passion for the sector.  The level 4 is a good route to go down.

Distance learning courses are a trickier solution as they require a fair degree of commitment and self discipline on your part.  You will also learn a lot more from being a part of a group, rather than sat on your own.

If you're looking at distance learning courses, check them out fully as there are one or two floating about on the internet who appear UK based and will sell you a great course... for Australia.

Good luck with it.

You make it sound like there's a conspiracy in play here. 

BALI, as far as I can see it, are following 'best practice' as set down by the HSE's ICOP for PUWER.  They don't run refreshers and make no financial gain from refreshers.

Lantra will review and revise products, including training courses and qualifications, at regular intervals to ensure that they continue to be of value to the industry.  Rather than trying to 'decide' on what constitutes industry best practice, its more a case of trying to decipher what would be best practice and then shaping the products being offered accordingly.  To do that we end up taking to representatives from organisations such as the HSE, Arb Assoc, RFS, FISA, Forestry Commission and to employers.  We also speak to training providers and instructors to ensure that what we come up with is deliverable. 

If, on the other hand, its a case of individuals and companies deciding that they do not need to undertake refresher training of any type, that's up to them.  They are always the folk in the best position to know their own needs, and will be the people who have to defend that position in the case of an accident.