Retired Climber

Whilst I agree with you from a micro-economics viewpoint, and agree that the approach will work for invividuals and their businesses, to fix an industry we surely need to concentrate on the macro environment. Whether we like it or not, prices are limited by the market's avoidance of cognitive dissonance; they simply can't bring themselves to pay above a certain level for someone doing a working class job.

I'd say completely the opposite. How do you think the 'going rate' for a job is set? It's the market and the perceived value that dictate price. We, as business owners, need to work out the best way to get the job done for somewhere near the price the market dictates to us. When Mrs Miggins decides to have you in to do some formative pruning, you aren't just competing on price with other arbs, you are competing with the new sofa, the holiday, or new wardrobe she could have instead of a nicely pruned tree. Your price can only rise to the point at which she would still prefer the tree work over the holiday. Part of this decision is based on the value she puts on you and your time, and not just the value of having a nice tree. The 'sod you, I'm not paying that' limit is very powerful. I agree that a shortage of climbers should put prices up, in theory, but what may actually happen is that less competent climbers simply fill the void.

It's one of the reasons that employed arb salaries are so low. This has a detrimental effect on the industry, who wants to work within it, and who wants to try to make a career out of it. We can call ourselves skilled professionals all we like, but it's the market's perception that largely dictates rates of pay. If an industry has the ' thick kid's job' image, it's hard to drag the pay out of the gutter.

The VAT threshold is a bit of a red herring. I've said this before, bit anyone trading under the threshold is just playing at running a business. If you, as a proper business, don't know how to differentiate your offering from those who are under the threshold, you have a fundamental flaw in your marketing strategy.

That's the same in loads of industries though, not just arb. Having staff who think they are self employed (because you told them they are) is a very widespread problem.

In this country, all the trades and manual jobs are seen as ' what the thick kids do'. I wasn't a thick kid, actually, I was one of the cleverest kids in the school. I competed for the top spot at school with people who are now oncologists, surgeons, and very good barristers. Numerous times I'd be asked why I was doing tree work, with the presumption that life had obviously gone very wrong for me. I did it because I wanted to, not because I didn't have options. I retired from climbing when I was in my mid 30's, and now have a career that's much more acceptable to my peers. Most people who have known me for less than 10 years would be amazed that I actually used to be a proficient climber. Most people who do what I do now couldn't use a pair of secateurs enthusiasticly without giving themselves a nose bleed. Arb and manual work generally is frowned upon because a lot of people need to bolster their fragile egos by trying to convince themselves that what they do is ' better' because they sit in an office and wear a shirt and tie. Additionally, anyone can call themself an arb, and the NPTC units are so incredibly easy to pass that they are just a joke. Oh, and the Arb Association think you are all a bunch of scumbags unless you are employed by an arb approved contractor. 😁

Haha, Steve's post did have a certain "bloody hell, he's had a good idea. I never knew he had it in him" feel to it.

That would make absolutely no difference. Minimum wage increases do not act upon an economy in isolation.

I don't mean this in a derogatory way, and I'm not taking a cheap dig, so please take this question in the spirit it's written. Do you have much experience with the law, courts, and what happens in the English legal system?

Not everyone asks " how high?", when someone tells them to jump.

What a load of nonsense.

The 211 is far superior; it's a small proper saw. The 181 is a toy saw. Go with as few gimmicks as you can get. The most basic versions of saws are always the best.

That is exceptionally rare, and near impossible to get in a garden environment.

Didn't come with a manual. I reckon she's an ex-demonstator or something cos apparently a couple of other lads had a go before I got her. Maybe one of them has the manual. 😁

Haha, my Mrs is a 1983 model; I don't think she looks as old as those saws though.

Get your solicitor to add your lost income to the claim as an 'uninsured loss'.

I'd have more respect for them if they had come back and said "yep, that's what we think of you all, now do one". 😁

I have no professional expertise in this matter but I'd have thought (as a layman) that if terms of the Planning permission were ignored / not met, then the permission could be revoked. If it was possible to simply ignore such things with little consequence, the whole system would fail.

To hide behind ‘The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Arboricultural Association.’ is just a polite way to stick two fingers up to anyone who thinks the AA should have higher standards than to post such rubbish on their website. Personally, I think this is going to be the AA's 'Ratner' moment. Many of their members will have started out as the bottom feeders they detest, and many future members will, at this moment, be trying to drag themselves out of the gutter to become AA Approved.😉 To hide behind T's and C's to call a sizeable portion of their current and future membership scum, is a very, very bad move. The bloke who wrote the article is clueless, and seems to have spent his career gaining qualifications rather than actually building his business. However, the AA should know better.

haha, that's 2 of us with an original then. 😉

Anyone wanting to see the original version should be quick. It's showing as having been edited already this morning.

Personally, based on nothing more than guessing, i'd say they took a load of weight from the crown and it sat up leaving 'x' amount of main stem left above what we see now. They then put a gob in thinking they would pull it backwards. However, being farmers, by the time the machine arrived they realised that they didn't need to drag it back, when someone could stand on forks / in bucket / on roof of aforementioned machine, and chog it down. When they hit fence wire / staples, they thought "sod it, let's just prop it up and go home".

I was thinking the cut is supposed to be a gob, and they were going to try to pull it backwards into the field with a tractor.

Let's be honest; it's written that way on purpose. It's a hamfisted attempt at self promotion written by someone without any kind of writing skill. He'd have read somewhere that a good way to get noticed in your industry is to have a controversial view, and had a go himself without taking advice. His target market are firms who want to be AA approved. He's hamfistedly tried to get their attention by pooping (sorry swear filter is set on children only mode) on the little guy. He's really not worth bothering about, the only reason he used that 'tone of voice' and content is because of lack of understanding. The Arb association, however, acted disgracefully in allowing it to be published. It's one of the least professional pieces of sales copy I've ever read. The AA can say what they like, but by hosting it on their website they are endorsing every word.

It was written by some fat bloke who looks like he'd have a heart attack if he tried to do a day's work. A self appointed expert who's very poor attempt at sales copy is just embarrassing.