Posted By Lee Mac Hi All As PC we vet all sub contractor documentation and one issue that keeps reappearing its head is the inadequacy of submitted method statements. Now despite our best efforts of supplying them with templates they continue to miss out on information. I have trawled unsuccessfully both the HSE & HSENI websites attempting to source guidance on devising Method Statements. Strange why is this information not freely available on such websites- I guess that is a question I should direct at the HSE & HSENI directly. Does anyone have any information they have previously used successfully with subcontractors they wouldn't mind forwarding (especially if it has been sourced from HSE/HSENI and of course doesn't breach any copyrights? Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Lee

Posted By Raymond Rapp Lee You are not alone. I recently provided a template for sub-contractors which included information that they can either leave in (generic type issues) or subsume the information and delete/add information as necessary. The information to be generally left in (ie induction, permits, access to the site etc) is written in black and the information to be subsumed and then removed is written in red. I can't say it is a perfect method, but Method Statements do appear to be getting better. Ray

Posted By Alan Haynes Have you tried giving them the template and then rejecting MSs that don't conform? [and not letting them start work until they do]

Posted By Alan Haynes Lee, i think that if your subbies can't manage to follow a 'simple] template, there is little point in seeking further info etc. You'll have to just 'train them up' to fill in your templated MSs properly. [I assume that even though they can't fill in a template, that you still consider them 'competent'?]

Posted By Lee Mac Guys I fully appreciate your sentiments regarding competencies. I have to say most of the subcontractors that cross my path all know the benchmark we expect (i.e. the information is to be relevant and fully encompassing of their tasks). Problems usually arise when newbies come across the line that have been used to producing generic waffle that has nothing to do with their specific works but got away with it when with other PCs. It normally has to do with a slightly aprehensive approach to the documentation side of things- I guess you can call it competency. That said though from past experience when I have had a subcon review their paperwork in line with my recommendations, they 9 times out of 10 really give their men a good training session on what they are to adhere to. I often see the opposite occurring when the subcon submits excellent documentation when successfully winning tenders after a number of times. Since starting this thread though I issued instructions to the said subcontractors, I await with interest what positive effects I will see. Many Thanks Lee

Posted By Ron Hunter Given the choice between: (a) the dependable,consistent and safe contractor with a well resourced, motivated and competent workforce but with no aptitude, inclination or skill whatsoever in producing or delivering Method Statements; and (b) the Contractor who can produce the "perfect" document (by whatever means) and then pay not a blind bit of notice to it on Site; which one would you choose to engage? Which one demonstrates competency and illustrates that the Principal or Client has indeed engaged a competent contractor? Outwith truly "safety critical" situations, what value and purpose do you attribute to provision of a Method Statement? Beyond pre-qualification, then second stage competency evaluation can be a case of a simple dialogue with the contractor (or prospective contractor)to ascertain and satisfy yourself that he will deal with Project and Site specific risks in a competent and suitable fashion. It can even be part of a "tailored" induction process on Site and it needn't involve ANY paperwork. Remember: Cosmetics are not classed as PPE - they provide no protection whatsoever when the $h!T hits the fan.