Posted By Arran Linton - Smith
Garry,

Thank you for the link. I would argue that this information is critical for all construction projects which has scaffolding and anyone undertaking construction site inspections should use this as opportunity to examine in detail their scaffolding safety arrangements.

I wonder what percentage of scaffolds should be inspected against a design when there is no such document?

Posted By bluesail461
The Info from the HSE gives a marker on competence at last relating to the design and erection of scaffolds. Its a start at least - I have been to too many sites where scaffolds are erected without design thought, just to be 'up there'.

This updated info from the HSE also i think highlights a problem we have more and more within construction, namely the wide varieties of industry bodies that give H&S advice on their particular area of expertise. There is so much variation and inconsistency within how info is put together.
I think it is a major problem and probably should be in the remit of the HSE (the old HSC part) to provide guidelines about how such information be presented and delivered to its target audience.
The most crucial place to gain acceptance is at site level - how hard must this be with all different formats given.
CDM talks about providing 'the right information to the right people at the right time', WHR gives a hierarchy of control but the practical advice from industry 'experts' is all over the place. The HSE must push harder for this consistency to make it easier for people onsite to design, install and comply with the relevant guidelines for scaffold or other working at height - especially with working at height being the killer that it is...

jez

Posted By bluesail461
I think its BS5973 thats an existing document that you could use as a start. Not sure when TG20 comes out - agreed its urgent!!

Posted By Garry Adams
Arron + Jez

Have a look at the NASC website home page...left hand side click on Guidance, on the right hand side of the page you will find info on TG 20:08 up-dated 9/6/08.

As you may know, the NASC TG series of Guidance Notes are Enabling Documents the dynamics of which fluctuate constantly, therefore due diligence must be observed to ensure that up-to date addendum's can be implemented. Therefore I share your concerns regarding the availability of the Document.

Posted By Arran Linton - Smith
Garry,

Last year when undertaking a project audit, I came across a scaffold that was significantly overloaded. BS 5973 gave me the opportunity to prove it and question why this had not been identified during the statutory inspections, the principal contractors weekly inspections or internal audits.

Interestingly this had been like this for eighteen months.

I would rather have the opportunity to query a scaffolding design with some hard information rather than be a position where I have to accept their word and rely on their PI cover.

I also remember ten years ago having a discussion about the development of an NVQ based assessment for scaffolding inspection rather than relying a two day inspection course, however this never materialised.

Posted By Paul Bourne
where do I start? I am informed that TG20:08 is due out Autumn/Winter of this year.

Design, sigh! I was horrified yesterday when a design engineer submitted a drawing to me that had no ladder access or single handrail or the boards that the ladder would rest on included in the drawing, what's wrong with that? I hear you say. A few things, I would tell my scaffolders to not deviate from the drawing but, I would also tell them to install a single handrail and have at least 1 bay boarded with ladder access so they have good access/egress from thier workplace so that they are complying with SG4:05, in doing this there would be extra self weight imposed on the scaffold. I had to wait days for a new set of drawings. Point of this rant is yes there is a shortage of design enineers but an even bigger shortage of design engineers with good scaffolding knowledge.

While I'm here, whilst on a harness inspection course last year, a health & safety manager for a scaffolding company with Nebosh Construction certificate and scaffold inspection cert under his belt failed to spot 50% of the faults in a scaffold when I challenged him. He has never been a scaffolder. Should scaffold inspection be left to the experts? comments?

Paul

Posted By Safety110
Hi Folks,

I too recived this through the HSE infonet.

When I read it I thought it was a good step to iron out the copmtency of Scaffolders(at last I said).
In this the HSE state that there must be a CISRS card holder within a gang erecting scaffolding structures, all very well but I think that this is going to bring in more Scaffolders asking for more money (don't have a problem with that) but Scaffolding Contractors will not send there Guys for training as they must go to a CITB centre. After these Guys get trained they usually jump ship for more money as they are a contract industry and the Company across the raod are paying an extra tenner.
I have discussed before that I think Scaffolders should be able to get a NVQ on site on the bases they are competent as there is a major skills shortage at present and any man and there dog is erecting scaffolding in the smaller sites around the UK. It is now officail that CITB is the only way to train a whole industry.

On the design stage it is all over to NASC to supply the long awaited TG20. If you look at the list of structures that must be designed, well, does anyone actually think that, say for instance every bridge (i.e. every opening into a building say over 2m) must be designed.

I think it is a good idea but good scaffolders can improvise themselves and beleive that it is a statement that is not practical and just making it easier to prosecute the smaller construction/ scaffolding Contractor.


Better get off my high horse now.

Good thread tho

Posted By db
Safety,

HSE would only prosecute for a scaffolding not being designed if it fell over. There wouldn't be a prosecution if there was nothing wrong with it, designed or not.

Posted By Robert K Lewis
Paul

As long as you have a proven design for the bridge I would have no issues with the base design. What is important is to recognise the scope/ability of the designs. I find loading bays more troublesome as the basic TG20 designs are for non-mechanical loading only.

I think also the NASC have caused some major problems with their suspension of print and sales of TG20.05 on the basis that the TG20 revision was about to be printed. This was over 9 months ago. It is still not available. My copy is now well worn and I need a new one but cannot get one for love nor money. Hopefully a NASC prson responsible will read this and take some rapid action. Perhaps they could make an electronic version of the old standard available as they no longer sell the hard copy.

Bob

Posted By lisa mccaulder
All,

This is such an interesting thread. I share your concerns and frustration; especially with the lack of a common approach making it difficult to enforce on site.

I've recently worked on a project where a scfolld specialist was employed to keep scaffolding under check - very large project not sure if I'm allowed to tell you where and who in case its advertising.

His job ranged from design of new scaffolds, thro inspection, management of the scaftag system and daily checks. Everyone on the sites had his number, could call him for advice, or, if unsure coudl take a scaffold out of use and be certain of getting a swift opinion and correction. This removed some of the risk taking behaviour we commonly see with scaffold and ad hoc alterations to them.

In my opinion Frank - for that is his name - added real value to the job and if the project is big enough and high profile enough to stand the cost then I would recommend a Frank.

regards

LIsa..

Posted By Garry Adams
Bob

I totaly agree with your veiws and the list of your conserns...tie matrix, ect, ect, ect as you intimated the list goes on.

Whilst I acknowledge that the expertise of the Nasc Officials and associated contrabutions from Member Orginisations and Individal Scaffolding Consultants are a integeral part of the consultation proccess to establish the evolutionary progression of Scaffold Procedures and Statutory requiements,I cannot help but conclude that the Very Breif Note produced by the HSE is rarther like the Tail wagging the Dog.

Given that the invaluable contributions of NASC has kudos in the HSE desision making proccess, in my view this is right and proper. however, I cannot help but conclude that the HSE are deligating part of their responsibilities to the NASC. I am aware that the HSE has the final vito in any proposed addendums to Statutory Requirements during this "joint consultation proccess", therefore why can the HSE not provide a more indepth Scaffold Information Sheet. I reolise that the HSE are over streached and in some departments under funded, however, this should not dilute nor retract from the HSE remit.

There are many issuse primed for discussion and topics awaiting debate, I look forward to viewing the new Revamp Scafflod Proposals in its entirety.

Garry...

Posted By Robert K Lewis
Karen

For all of its faults i think TG20.05 is still the best we have. as I have said though, it is unfortunate that it was withdrawn before the definite revised version was ready for print.

Bob

Posted By Garry Adams
The delay in the release of the amended T.G.20:08.

NASC has adopted a belt and braces approach and commissioned an independent Engineering Consultancy Firm to verify the calculations and recommendations prior to the T.G.20:08 Document release.

The T.G.20:08 (approx 250 pages)is a coupling together of two sub Documents.

Sub Document 1. Will relate to the recommendations stated within B.S. 5973, i.e. Traditional Tube and Fitting Structures that retain ledger bracing ect.

Sub Document 2. Will relate to the recommendations within B.S.E.N. 12811-1 and Manufacturers Operations Manual,Pre-fabricated Scaffold Systems. i.e. the non-requirement of leger bracing.

With the arrival of pre-fabricated Scaffold Systems and the E.N. inclusion to U.K. Scaffolding Standards, has certainly prompted new Scaffolding Procedures.

I am part of the Old Guard and Specialise in Bespoke Scaffold Structures in tube + fittings and allied Rigging and Lifting Operations. I have see many changes within the Saffolding Industry both pre and post HASAWA, the release of T.G.20:08 will clarify the future control measures and procedures required to address the challenges that face our Industry in the 21 Century.

Garry...

Posted By Karen H
yea sure i understand where you are coming from bob, but it's down to the indiviual scaffolders isn't it.
there are good and bad scaffolders, the same as there are good and bad builders.
It's a shame for the whole industry particularly in this current climate.
I think the whole of the construction industry must change it attitude, esp. the house builders, their 'time is money, and lets make a lot of it' attitude has caused a lot of this grief.
Corners get cut when your on price work, and when your being asked to cut a further 20% off of your labour cost, well it speaks volumes doesn't it. ( I must point out the i don't advocate this attitude by any of my men)
We had one safety officer trying to save his job. (yes threat of redundancy was looming for the poor guy) picked our scaffold to bits,then discovered he was reading the wrong regulations! (so left anyway)

Clarity, Common Sense and Fair and Eliquent Communication thats all I ask.

Posted By Paul Bourne
Garry,

I too have concerns regarding the types of job that the CITB train our scaffolders with. I was dissapointed to see that the flying shore has now been replaced with a pedestrian ramp, why? I know that you don't often see flying shores in tube and fittings now, normally done using "strong backs" these days but I would have liked to see the flying shore stay. As most people who have been on a Pt1, Pt2 or advanced scaffolding course know, they could easily be condensed into half the time, and that extra time could be well spent erecting more complex structures, I would like to see a more complex chimney stack, an internal and external circular tank scaffold, a wire slung scaffold, a loading bay a heavy duty fan, maybe a more difficult structure that involves some thinking rather than the jobs that are all perfect fit, I could go on forever. I also hear from the scaffold grapevine that TG20:08 is looking more like a Jan 2009 release :-(

Paul

Posted By Garry Adams
Paul

Your concerns are shared by a growing college of both onshore and offshore Scaffold Erectors. CITB teach the basic structures, however, it falls to the good will of the lead hands to teach the Green hand/novice the esoteric special Scaffolding Structures required to service the Construction; Maintenance and Decommissioning of Petrochemical and associated Power Generating Industries.

In June last a leading Offshore Union Regional Official and I invited a high Ranking CISRS/NASC Official to attend a meeting to discuss Bolt-on and Familiarisations Programmes, target audience being Green hand/Novice Scafflder new entries to the Offshore Industry. Course Content, Special Structures in Tube and Fittings. Although there was a consensus of opinion that there was a need for Specialist Training, there was neither the Political will to provide Academy Funding nor sufficient interest in the Service sector to support such an initiative.

Garry...

Posted By Garry Adams
Raymond

Firstly, May I recognise and welcome the contributions from the members of the Scaffolding Confederation. The latest addendum to the Training Portfolio is the Scaffolding Supervisors Course and a Scaffolding Managers Course curriculum is in the making. Perhaps the decision makers will include such things like TG20:08, for I too have found some ( but to be fair not all ) members of Scaffolding Management Teams oblivious to current and forth coming Standards and procedures.

With regard to the Scaffold Erectors, indeed with the on-set of and the prevalent use of Prefabricated System Scaffold Types the majority of new entrant Scaffolders do not get the opportunity to experience/learn the techniques and idiosyncrasies to erect a Traditional Tube and Fitting Structure, thus when they are confronted with a bespoke Scaffold they are found wanting, all be it through no fault of their own.

The Scaffolding Industry is a Service Industry and by its very nature is driven by the Client. As with the temporary Structures that the Scaffold Service Company provides to the client, so to is the Scaffold Erectors job a mere temporary position. This is widely accepted by the Erectors as the nature of he beast indeed it suits the mercenary and nomadic nature of many Scaffs. On many Jobs Scaffolder would nurture; monitor and pass heir knowledge to a Green hand...however, the Scaffold Erectors are now realising that the Employers are using them as unpaid on-site Trainers; Coaches and Mentors.

Further Issues for Discussion generic to HSE Scaffold Information Sheet + TG20:08.

With the added volume of Working Drawings as a requirement, who is to provide them, who deemed qualified to generate them and is CITB; CISRS/NASC willing to create a Training Programme to supply increased requirement for Scaffold Designers to generate these drawings.

As I have stated before, who is to Inspect the Structures, given the lack of knowledge by some members of Management Teams, the self regulating approach many to be sufficient for the requirements of the proposed new procedures.

Will te Inspections be part of PINS, considering that a Scaffold becomes an integral part of the Superstructure of a Building or Offshore Installation. Perhaps 3rd Party Inspectors can be recruited via the HSE.

Whats your opinion on the above ?

Thank goodness the spell cheque is fixed LOL.

Garry...

Posted By juliamgray
Do we not think that construction companies involved in large scale developments involving complex scaffolding structures need to employ someone with the relative experience in scaffolding? I.E. an Advanced Scaffolder. capable of inspecting complex structures and confident enough to recognise any defects (usualy without drawings),who could be used as an Scaffold coordinator capable of identifying the type of scaffold needed and the corect design and loadings for each type of structure.
Surely this would be not only benefitial to the construction company but also the scaffolding subcontractor, who I know would love to be able to deal with somebody that knows what they're talking about?
I have been in the scaffolding buisnes for 32 years and I find that the biggest problem I have on large projects is the lack of technical knowledge within the main contractors managment,with regards to scaffolding.

Posted By juliamgray
I totally agree. I have witnessed some very, shall we say, dodgy practices.
One in particular involving a young trainees death.
After the accident I was brought in as a troubleshooter to bring the project up to an acceptable standard, a proccess which took me 4 weeks.and I can in all honesty say that in all my years as a scaffolder I have never seen such a blatent disregard for both regulations and indeed the law.
I would love to see more scaffolding companies brought to justice over their lack of training and lack of willingness to accept the fact that the 1920's and all their ancient practices are no longer acceptable in our modern construction industry.

Posted By Garry Adams
al

Principal Contractors are responsible for the Selection of Subcontractors, therefore, prior to the inclusion to the approved list, the Subcontractor has to demonstrate their Competency/Capability Credentials. If the Subcontractor cannot accommodate all the Principal Contractors requirements then there application for work is rejected.