Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 18 November 2008 08:59:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By C.W
After a bit of backing for a board meeting disscussion.

Company i work for at the moment hire in large mobile plant, we have always controled the operators/use on our sites by an authorisation to operate system where the Operator has to have a current CPCS card with the required category, we also except other cards/licences as long as the issuing body is CITB accredited then we know that the trainer has undergone CITB training. I know CPCS has its problems, but on the whole its still probably the most well recognised card in the industry. Within my Company they are now in my eyes wanting to lower standards and are recommending that we as a Company start to except any type of Mickey Mouse card/licence on site.
So if anyone has any form of argument backing material to support me it would be much appreciated.

Thanks CW
Admin  
#2 Posted : 19 November 2008 08:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Tony abc jprhdnMurphy
There should not, in theory, be a Micky Mouse card equivalent to CPCS but I do see the different attitudes on site daily and there are now some specialist trades who simply do not have access to a certiicated training scheme. Stick to your guns though.
Admin  
#3 Posted : 19 November 2008 08:54:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bluenose
Well here we go. The CPCS card scheme is purey voluntary. Now imagine a person comes on site and has been operating a machine for 10 years. But their card expired 2 days ago. So a new bod comes along and has only been operating the machine for 1 week but thier card is in date. Who is the competent operator here? Rant over. Just because the operator doesn't have aa card doesn't mean they are not competent. However, i believe these schemes are a step in the right direction. What doies your insurer say?
Admin  
#4 Posted : 19 November 2008 08:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bluenose
That should read PURELY and not lie a cat sound
Admin  
#5 Posted : 19 November 2008 08:56:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bluenose
Or LIKE
Admin  
#6 Posted : 19 November 2008 08:57:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bluenose
God this keyboard. I am not a competent operator
Admin  
#7 Posted : 19 November 2008 09:02:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Neil R
To be honest im not a huge fan of the competence card systems. The main thing for me when looking at drivers/ machine operators is a license to drive these! When i do competency checks i want to see certification of training in the use of and/or driving license.
Admin  
#8 Posted : 19 November 2008 09:05:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bluenose
I agree with above, but i think it is important that the company sets standard and sticks to it.
Admin  
#9 Posted : 19 November 2008 09:19:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By C.W
Thanks but did anyone read what i was after eg Support. Like i said i know the CPCS scheme is not a guaranty of the Operators competency but what my argument is to my Company is that it is at present the most well recognized within the industry and is therefore a good bench mark to aim for. The other alternative is to let all Managers on our sites decide what cards to except, we would then end up with the Micky Mouse Cards that you can get in the local pub. example came across 1 Operator on site with a card that stated Excavator any size on questioning the Operator i asked on what size Excavator did you pass you test, he replied a 6 ton mini digger after 1 mornings training. my point is that this Operator who past his test on a mini digger could by all accounts end up sat on a 70 ton excavator in the middle of a busy quarry just by having the card.
Admin  
#10 Posted : 19 November 2008 12:26:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bluenose
As i said check with your insurer. Or, get the site managers to sign a letter of authority to operate the machine. EG i hereby declare that i have witnessed operator J Smith and can varify that he/she is competent to operate the following machines.
See how that goes down.
Admin  
#11 Posted : 19 November 2008 13:00:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert K Lewis
CW

Treat any card for what it is - evidence of previous training but not competence. The CDM07 acop does in fact talk of site supervision assessing the competence of operatives on site. This means witnessing the performance of operatives and taking any necessary action if there is reason to doubt competency.

Personally if I have used someone for X years without a formal training card but with no problems I will always prefer that operative to the unknown person even with a card. I would support the open to any approved training stance but it must be backed up by on-site assessment.

Bob
Admin  
#12 Posted : 19 November 2008 13:51:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ciaran McAleenan
Hello Christian

I appreciate that you are looking for a line of support or a well structured case for your managers. To start I can't imagine your employer is contemplating accepting 'Mickey Mouse' cards as you call them. However you should look upon this as an opportunity in what seems to be on offer here. If your employer is looking alternatives to CPCS then the appropriate thing to do is go back to the source - National Occupational Standards (NOS- http://www.ukstandards.o...l_standards/default.aspx) for Construction Plant Operators.

Afterall these are what CPCS qualifications are based upon so as an alternative you could identify which of the NOS are appropriate for the mobile plant operators you are contemplating hiring in (that is one of the purposes behind the NOS). Then you can ask the hire companies to demonstrate that the skills development they operate in-company meets the NOS. If they use CPCS then you know it is mapped to NOS but if they use something else then they would have to show how it maps to the NOS you have considered appropriate to your type of work.

There is a bit of work involved in setting your own standards of acceptability, linked to NOS but if it means you get what you really need and want then it might be worth it. Here are a couple of useful links to get you started;

http://www.access2learni...nt%20Operations%20L2.pdf

http://www.ukstandards.o...?SuiteID=497&NosFindID=4

Best wishes

Ciaran
Admin  
#13 Posted : 19 November 2008 14:49:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By C.W
Ciaran, thats exactly what i was looking for thank you very much.

Admin  
#14 Posted : 19 November 2008 17:51:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By GeoffB4
Good useful response Ciaran.
Admin  
#15 Posted : 20 November 2008 20:49:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By David Bramall
Does CPCS recognise NOS?
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
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.