Sorry for yet another thread (rant) about CSCS. Up to now, I've had the relative comfort that CSCS etc. existed primarily in the commercial world and didn't directly impact on my work within a Scottish LA. My comfort zone has now been invaded. I've just been informed of a new Scottish Government Policy (link below) which will require all on-site staff for all future construction projects to be accredited under the CSCS or equivalent scheme.This policy arose as a result of intervention (lobbying suggestion) of the Scottish Building Federation. http://www.scotland.gov....source/0041/00411385.pdf I have real concerns that this policy will be misinterpreted, and at the continued lauding and promotion (CSCS is the only 'named' scheme in the policy) of CSCS particularly given the weaknesses identified in this scheme by the HSE and Constructionskills own commissioned report RR877 "A commentary on routes to competence in the construction sector" (available as a free download - I urge all with an interest to read this). As an aside, I wonder too if there are legal issues (with respect to local government procurement rules) in restricting prospective contractors to demonstrating competency of their own and sub-contractor appointments only by way of commercial priced accreditation schemes. There are other ways to demonstrate competency. Many of the small local contractors we in local government are being encouraged to support are less likely to be able to demonstrate the qualifications CSCS will ask for (particularly true of the specialist contractor and older tradesmen) and can little afford yet another ££ burden. Rant over.Comments welcome.

I had thought the "score" scheme to be the (approximate) US equivalent to Constructionline - a broader assessment of capacity and financial standing of the company or Organisation itself, as opposed to the assessed competencies of individual employees (or as is all too often the case with CSCS, attested by the employer). I wasn't aware of such a scheme in the UK - do you have a link Peter? DLOs as I understand things were a passing phase of political determinism, enacted by legislation, involving a considerable expenditure from the public purse, and repealed not long afterwards.

Thanks for the input, RP. Whilst the policy I reference above is more about application to external contractors, you also correctly identify a creeping in-house adoption of CSCS within local government. As you say, considerable expense - for no added value. All contrary to the basic tenets of accountability and best value as preached by central and local government organisations. In the context of contract requirements, I urge you to have a read of the HSE/Construction skills own commissioned report (ref my OP above). A very high proportion of card issued to individuals on the basis of the employer attesting that his people have the requisite qualifications when in fact they don't - but nobody checks and nobody cares as long as you pay for the card. A test which allows an hour, but which anyone with savvy can pass in 10 minutes. A test that can be passed without the candidate ever having set foot on a construction site. The corrolary that whilst the test can be practiced and studied, a very high proportion of candidates fail it first time. Not because they are dunces, more because they've never used a computer before! The World's going mad.