Posted By Holly McDermott Mark, Would you say that one person could carry out a CDM-Cordinator role for a steel structured building that will involve just 5 contractors and take 4 months from digging to finish

Posted By Mark Eden Holley For some small jobs this may be acceptable, but -are you a structural engineer, are you an M&E engineer, are able to comment on the fire strategy, are you knowledgeable in the proposed construction methods to be used are you able to comment on the proposed use of the building including maintenance issues, can you comment on the demolition of the building. This list goes on.

Posted By Robert K Lewis I think the starting point has to be that the CDMC is primarily a corporate role and any single person acting alone in such a role should be by exception and not the norm. I too am concerned about the increasing requests for templates of all kinds on the basis of re-inventing the wheel. This includes other regulatory situations as well - not just CDM07. The published guidance materials are very good at setting down the required content and I spend a lot of time tailoring forms and templates to match client needs, my client that is to say be it Principal Contractor, Designer or Client. The various competence questionnaires around also betray this tendency to use generic documentation in the assumption it is "Compliant". If the background is not fully understood the system will never comply fully. Mark is right to raise this important issue and we need to consider carefully if the current flow is correct. I somehow doubt this personally. Bob

Posted By Robert K Lewis Chris But the templates are also the sweat of somebody's brow and I have lost track of how many of mine resurface elsewhere without attribution. Even the odd typo has been known to remain as it was an early draft that was used. Generic templates are what they say they are - Generic. They need to be adapted to the situation and not made to work without changes. This is the rub - if you cannot produce your own first draft then you are unlikely to succeed in making a specific template out of a generic one. Understanding the regulatory environment is more than 70% of the task. Bob

Posted By Chris Harrison Bob, I hear what you are saying, I hasten to add that generic templates are the bane of my life. only last week I was reading a method statement for a decorating company that didn't sound quiet right, I turned the page over to read"then take the bread out of the oven", further research turned up that yes, it had been plagiarised from a bakery. where I agree with copying is that if you have a good one, it will have all the right headings and layout enabling you or anybody else to quickly find the relevant information you are looking for. where I disagree with them is that people are not cutting out the bumf, just adding to it. I continually remind our sub contractors that a good health and safety person will ask you how you do the job, then write it accordingly or advise you if your are doing something dangerous or reckless. there appear to be just as many rogue health and safety people out there as there are rogue tradesmen, normally the two attract each other. it has got to the stage that I can recognise the H & S practitioners in this area by there writing style, and know whether to take it at face value or interrogate the company further. it comes as no surprise when on site, how few employees within the building industry recognise there own company method statements, and have never met the person who wrote them, needless to say they bear no resemblence to the work that is being carried on.

Posted By SJA Hi I've been reading this thread with interest and disbelief at some of the more pompous responses to this thread. As a Chartered Engineer and Chartered Safety Practitioner I do however tend to totally agree with Richards view and those who believe that a team approach is the only option are somewhat misguided. As an experienced and well practiced CDM Co-ordinator I have previously been employed by some of the biggest names in the Health and Safety and Construction Consultancy sectors and can verify that although these companies will tender with the names and CV's of some very experienced and capable individuals, when it comes down to doing the actual work, it will often be left to inexperienced graduates to carry out the work with little checking or auditing of their work at all. Now contrast this to a self employed Chartered Engineer with XX years of experience, who is also a Chartered Health and Safety Professional and only has a few contracts to work on at any one time. Whilst as a Chartered Civil Engineer for example, he may not know how to design, specify or debug main PLC's controlling the works, but you can be guaranteed he will understand the purpose of them and the control philosophies sufficiently enough to be able to quiz the software engineers. Could the same be said about the inexperienced graduate who supposedly has the backing and support of a 15 man CDM-C team of experts? Well my experiences says that the graduate would not even know that he was supposed to be asking the questions in the first place, let alone know what he should be asking! Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that a team approach cannot work, it can, but to those who think that the only approach for anything bigger than a detached garage is to employ a team of CDM-C's, you are very very mistaken. For example I know of a £35M treatment plant project which involved all nature of hazards and risks and which has been completed very successfully (from a CDM perspective) with just a single person fulfilling the role of the CDM-C. He was very competent in role and understood what all aspects of the project involved. At the end of the day it all comes down to the individual that is being used to fulfill the role. To make global statements that the only solutions is a team approach and that individuals cannot possibly fulfilled the role are somewhat blinkered. Whilst dare I say, for many (not all) IOSH members this may well be case, but at the end of the day, the the CDM-C needs to have an in-depth knowledge of the construction and design processes as well as health and safety which may explain why so may IOSH members believe that a sole person cannot possibly fulfill the role.

Posted By SJA GeoffB4 No I don't need to think again. As for the construction industry grinding to a halt, I think that you will find that there is a far greater demand and shortage of skilled Civil Engineers, Structural Engineers and Building Services Engineers than CDM-C's, so I think that this is much more of a problem for the industry that any perceived lack of CDM-C's. I have not seen any statistics around citing that the industry needs X000's of CDM's, though there are such figures for designers and other construction professionals, hence some of the reasons for organisations such as the Association of Consulting Engineers lobbying the government to allow more foreign engineers into the country. Perhaps you could substantiate your beliefs regarding the lack of qualified CDM-C's.... And yes I do feel that construction and design experienced requirements need to be applied to ALL projects, this is in my opinion the very reason why the role of the Planning Supervisor was often seen as a failure, an why the HSE have emphasised the need for such competence over and above that of Health and Safety competence, though I am not saying you can have one without the other. Finally GeoffB4, the point I was trying to get across in my original posting was that a Team Approach is not the only approach to the role of the CDM-C.

Posted By Robert K Lewis Mitch A quick reply is that it is much more than many people seem to understand. Watch out for the book. Richard et al Those organisations who use the competencies of one group of individuals and then put a junior on the case are in my book not competent unless they can show competent ongoing supervision of all that is done. I still contest that the prime intent of the regulations is to make the CDMC an organisation role with the individual as the exception. Are you saying that each of your people has the totality of competencies to deal with any project? I trust not. Even as a qualified Chem Eng, many years ago, 25+ years in H&S, 25+ years in IOSH membership, and 20+ years in construction in many forms I would not venture such a claim. Yes one person may lead the team but the competent organisation will support each member with other persons as required by the work. We are rapidly falling back into 1994 thinking if we continue down the individual as the CDMC road. Back to the original post though. I have to agree with those who see templates, used randomly following requests to an open forum, as a troubling development. It does indeed raise questions concerninng the ability to act as CDMC. Ron is absolutely correct that the appendices etc in the guidance documents are invaluable. Generic should be the bane of all H&S practitioners life. It comes through most clearly here in CDM07 and in Risk Assessment. Generic becomes standard becomes ONLY and this is a tendency that must be fought vigorously. Bob

Posted By Ron Hunter Is the "Team Approach" promoted by CDM not more about all Duty Holders communicating and cooperating to achieve the same aims? I am against the presumption of a "group" CDM-C appointment.I would be asking specifically about who will be working on my Project. The fundamental issue for me is that the individual who constructively challenges a designer on how risks are mitigated must have sufficient individual competencies to do so.I can't see how that can sensibly be done on a "corporate" basis.

Posted By GeoffB4 Interesting that a genuine response saying that if the qualifications quoted were a nationwide requirement, then there would be a shortage of CDM Co-ordinatiors... ...is turned into an accusation that I have said there is a shortage of Co-ordinators and to substantiate it. More a ruse to turn the discussion other ways methinks.

Posted By Chris Harrison I have been following this discussion with interest over the last two days and find it incredulous that with the combined wealth of experience and knowledge out there between you/us all we cannot agree on many things. would it be fair to summarise it as follows: you can or you cannot take on the role of CDMC either as an individual or as part of a group dependent upon the complexity of the project and your own knowledge and experience. you can or you cannot use templates as a general guide, although the consensus is that actually copying other peoples templates or work is taboo. don't trust the big guys because they use false pretences to get the work awarded and then pass it (subcontract it out) on to somebody else (junior members) to actually do the work, (haven't the construction industry been doing this for years?) that it all really boils down to competency in the first place but nobody can say exactly what makes a person competent, it isn't a particular qualification or experience but a combination of many things. is it just me that can see why the world of health and safety is so mistrusted in general by the working population who just take in the bits they want to hear regardless of what we actually say. it certainly looks like we cant even agree among ourselves let alone convince anybody else. So what is competency?

Posted By Chris Harrison SJA I hear what you are saying, I started my working life as a site carpenter, then after being diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis and seeking advice from my doctor, had to move away from a site based role to a now predominantly office based role and visits to sites for audits. there is no doubt in my mind or my employers that the more trusted health and safety advice is coming from people similar to you or me, that have lived both sides of the fence. we are currently seeking an assistant to join me, my bosses told me to look specifically at who we currently have on ours or other companies construction sites for that person, who we will then train up in health and safety and will eventually replace me. so in the case of the group that employs me, they have come to their own decision about what makes a competent coordinator, they are looking at ex site managers/project managers who will then be sent on various courses and work their way up the health and safety ladder/career because they are already aware of what is actually carried out on site. a piece of advice I received many years ago from a very proficient site manager who over many years proved himself to be very competent at his job was that "for health and safety to work it has to be practical, as soon as it becomes impractical it becomes worthless because with or the goodwill or intent in the world it wont happen" over the years that has always remained in the back of my mind. unfortunately before I joined this company they had other professional health and safety people, who actually made my job harder because people had given them advice that was not practical, its taken me over 2 years of hard work and slogging with this company to get the sites to change their views on health and safety for the better, does that count as competence?

Posted By Ron Hunter Pete, that is not the main argument at all. If I and others stand aside from this issue of proliferation and sharing of template approaches to CDM "compliance" then ultimately we can & will suffer the detrimental effects as these 'templates' percolate through the industry - exactly as happened with CDM 1994. There is (and the intention always was for) a benefit to be had to the Construction Industry in terms of efficiency, reduced costs and a reduction in accidents and ill-health IF CDM is properly applied; but it does require people to be competent and to think about what it is about the Project they must communicate to others in good time. Ticking boxes on generic checklists, or obscuring important information amongst swathes of generic rubbish will never achieve this.

Posted By Pete Longworth I never said it would. My post is in a wider context than CDM. My point is that there is nothing wrong with sharing information and good practice, and I certainly wouldn't be looking for any credit for any information I passed on. We see it time and time again where posters are bleating about other posters asking for templates for this and that. So what, if it works, use it or modify it until it does do the job. There is certainly room within CDM for the use of templates on a limited basis, as in any other area of health and safety. If anyone is concerned that they are doing someone else's job for them. then don't contribute, but if they do contribute don't whinge when the expected "attribution" isn't forthcoming.

Posted By MAK Mark, you were right... can.... opened...worms everywhere lol! but for what its worth .. my opinion is that no template can be truly useful for any person to use without either a guidance document, which details the thought process or the statutory framework, or just some relevant and pertinent knoweldge behind the template. i.e You get a new game youve never played before.. e.g. the hell that is named monopoly... for christmas but you dont read the rules. Instead you just jump in and try to play based on the pictures on the box... how long do you think it would take you to figure out the game play and objective ? or how long would it take you to understand and remember the game play by reading the Rules yourself? (possibly bad choice of game or just a bad analogy!) Second issue is that if for example I had spent time in research and development and trials and designed an impressive, clever (of course)workable template, for my use or my company's use. Then another employee chose to disregard our company's policy and issue to all and sundry like any, for example, copy right infringement (I dont for a sec, pretend I know about copyright law).. then I think my company and myself would be a bit miffed. similarly my company would be a tad put out, if they had spent a fortune buying someone elses, all singing, technocolour flying whizzbee of a template , which woos our clients and promotes our business and then some one like me chose to give out for free. in regards to the other issue in Mark's orginal post.. I'm for a team approach, cos I dont know everything yet!

Posted By Robert K Lewis SJA Just doing a catch up on this - If you read the acop it is clear that individuals are not expected to be CDMC except on small non-complex work. This constant reference to templates for Files, CPPs and competence questionnaires really underlines why the debates around the question of individualk v organisation has arisen. Bob

Posted By SJA Bob I am very familiar with the content of the ACOP thank you. I also know exactly what you are referring to, but you are putting your own beliefs into play. There is not anything in the ACOP that states that an individual cannot fulfil the role of the CDM-C on any particular project. If you believe otherwise I would of course give you the opportunity to quote chapter and verse and state exactly where it clearly says in black and white that an individual cannot fulfill the role of the CDM-C - with no ifs or buts. Let us put this to rest once and for all and state clearly what the facts are rather than personal interpretations. All the ACOP refers to is competence, even the ACOP does not attempt prejudge what any ones competence is so why should you? I do however accept that in most cases you are right and that individuals would not be able to competently fulfil the role, but the point of my argument is that an individual if competent CAN act as the CDM-C and I have seen many instances where this has been carried out very successfully.