Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By k murphy
A notifiable project has commenced on site without the appointment of a Planning Supervisor. The HSE has not been notified and a pre-tender health and safety plan was not produced.
Could somebody please advise as to the best course of action to follow? I know I must notify the HSE of the project but I am unsure of what else will be required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Firstly are you sure its is CDM Notifiable?
If so you could be in the cack mate as the HSE will not be impressed at all.
I would strongly suggest that the 'Client' sorts this ASAP as they will be held responsible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By k murphy
The project is definately notifiable as it has a 16 week construction period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David O'Hara
Are you in a position to stop the project if so do it immediately.
Undertake the process of appointing a planning supervisor.
Appoint a planning supervisor.
They will then produce a pre-tender health and safety plan and issue the F10.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By johnwaterson2773
I bet they made sure that there was a bar to tie their horses to though, clipty clop.
Have a good weekend one and all
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By p winter
This is not uncommon - but why does last post blame the contractor.
I work for a contractor - imagine the scenario. Client asks for job to be done, we price and get the job. We mention CDM /Planning sup, (no obligation if client is designer) , client sees extra cost and ignores. If we design we inform client in writing.
We treat job as CDM and prepare Const Phase Plan - based on our own knowledge (No pre tender plan available/no ps/no F10)and proceed with the work.
It's the real world out there we need the work and if we don't do it someone else will
CDM /not CDM - the ball is in the clients court.
You would be surprised how many LA either are ignorant of CDM or feign ignorance and ignore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Martyn Hendrie
Techically the contractor is in the wrong as well as the client. Regulation 19 (2) & (4) prohibits employers from putting their workers to work on a project unless they:
Know who is Planning Supervisor; and
know who is the Principal Contractor; and
have received the relevant parts of the H&S plan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By p winter
Agreed - but we have done as much as we can. What more can we do apart from turn away work we want and need. This is the real world we take a risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert Paterson
Whether you need the work or not we don't cut corners. How would it be if you ignored all legislation in order to get the work.
The Health and Safety at Work Act was supposed to address all the scenarios, obvoisly in the construction industry it hasn't.
If LA's choose not to adhere to the law, which it may be the case, the contractor needs to ensure that they are complying with the basic legislation. Failure not to could lead to serious consequences.
Regards
Robert Paterson
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Beadle
Mr. Winter obviously works for the kind of contractor we all dread. "Not my fault gov. it was the clients fault." So work is more important than your employees safety, try telling that to the relation of an employee who you have injured or even killed due to your lust for profit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Liam Mc Conalogue
Mr Winter,
Real world?? I think not- your company is baltantly diregarding current legislative requirements. I would hate to think what the practices are like without any controls being in place.
The real world is your company is taking one seriously large risk, and one it will be held accountable for, maybe not today, but your company will run out of luck. I just hope it's the Directors get it rather than something happening to the men/women on the ground. Although realistically it normally takes something to happen on the ground before you will be investigated.
I guess your insurance company are unaware that your company are taking these chances- I wonder what way this will affect your company if a claim ever arises- and I guess RIDDOR is a foreign land to this company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter Rose
It would appear that Mr Winters company has a total disregard of legislation
"We take the risk" is a concept that I had hoped was almost gone forever. In the "real world", people get killed and seriously injured by the "we take the risk" attitude. It is the employees who ultimately pay the price for you taking the risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.