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
nickgill  
#1 Posted : 21 May 2012 16:33:21(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
nickgill

I need some clarification please... My company is acting as a main contractor building a new roadside petrol station, with direct access into and off site from a main trunk road. We do not have the necessary skills in the company to do the S278 works and have engaged a specialist highways company to do this for us. The Highways Contractor is constructing the entrance and exit points to our site from the highway up to (but not over) our site boundary; they are not coming onto our site and are not using our site welfare facilities. I am given to believe that apart from duties of communication under CDM Reg 5, we have no other responsibilities to that sub-contractor. However, the contracts manager from this Highways company tells me that he believes he should be working under our site rules; our F10 and that they should be signing in & out of our site and getting a site induction. My response was that they are not working on our site; I agree we have placed the order on them, but if they are not on our site, why should they be treated as if they are... If it complicates matters the F10 for the project says "construction of new petrol station plus associated highways works. Does our site boundary have to temporarily move out to include the highway? or am I right? Any advice would be much appreciated
Ron Hunter  
#2 Posted : 21 May 2012 16:55:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

Assuming there are concurrent works, I honestly can't see the harm in some closer cooperation and coordination here (and sharing welfare?).
Marshall16321  
#3 Posted : 21 May 2012 17:05:30(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Marshall16321

Hello Another way to look at this is, the only reason the sub-contractor is carrying out these works is for part of the overall project and should be included within the management and F10 of the main project. I also believe the HSE would take a poor view of this situation as they would view this as splitting up a project into mini projects to avoid CDM regulations. hope this helps.
boblewis  
#4 Posted : 21 May 2012 18:21:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

They are your contractor and thus part of the work. Only the client has the power to split a project. Also who will do the connection between your works and the 278 works? If you, then you are undertaking 278 works, if him then is again part of your site in addition to the reason above. Why is it that so many wish to avoid their CDM duties. By the way I rather suspect that you are the PC not simply the Main Contractor. Some clearer understanding is needed. Bob
Chris Cahill  
#5 Posted : 21 May 2012 18:44:32(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Chris Cahill

Marshall16321 wrote:
Hello Another way to look at this is, the only reason the sub-contractor is carrying out these works is for part of the overall project and should be included within the management and F10 of the main project. I also believe the HSE would take a poor view of this situation as they would view this as splitting up a project into mini projects to avoid CDM regulations. hope this helps.
I concur with Marshall16321
boblewis  
#6 Posted : 22 May 2012 10:25:36(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

Marshall16321 and Chris How does it avoid CDM if ALL construction work is subject to CDM in some way? This question is purely about the issue of the supervisory function and other provisions made by a PC to one of his subcontractors. Look at it like this - if anything goes wrong who will the HSE see as in charge? Not the 278 contractor! Bob
james655  
#7 Posted : 22 May 2012 11:00:38(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
james655

On a technicality, how can there be a F10 if you are a Main Contractor? The term “Main Contractor” is only used for non notifable projects. A "Principal Contractor" is appointed for notificable projects where a F10 is submitted and a CDM C appointed. Also how do you define not being on site? Just being the other side of a fence doesn't necessarily mean that you are not on site or under CDM Regulations.
bob youel  
#8 Posted : 22 May 2012 11:08:58(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
bob youel

nickgill listen to all these good comments as they are correct and I would seriously seek some support because you appear to be using completely the wrong terminology also ask the CDMC for their opinion and if a similar piece of work was in my area under my wing I would 'educate' [one way or another] the various bodies concerned so as they work to the; in my view; proper systems best of luck and you have acted correctly in coming to this site
boblewis  
#9 Posted : 23 May 2012 08:59:13(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

Bob Y Totally with you. This post makes me feel very uneasy. What has happened on other similar jobs? - The number of contractors doing these works is very small so how comes this proposition is being stated? Bob
nickgill  
#10 Posted : 23 May 2012 09:20:34(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
nickgill

Firstly, thank you to all those who have given advice. I apologise for using incorrect terminology (MC instead of PC)...I would like to clarify a couple of things as I am disturbed by the "reading between the lines" that has seemed to have gone on in some replies: I am not seeking to circumvent any CDM regs or split the project up or get around any responsibilities we may have as the PC. I am merely seeking advice on something for which I have no experience. In response to boblewis - On the majority of our projects we normally get handed over to us a plot of land at formation level with all utility and S278 works already completed, by the Principal Contractor for the retail development. We then come in as Principal Contractor for the Petrol Station works. We do not normally build sites that have direct access / egress on to a main road - hence my inexperience. Again, many thanks for the advice so far..
boblewis  
#11 Posted : 23 May 2012 19:38:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

Nick My time with forecourts was the opposite Bob
Chris Cahill  
#12 Posted : 23 May 2012 20:37:16(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Chris Cahill

quote=boblewis]Marshall16321 and Chris How does it avoid CDM if ALL construction work is subject to CDM in some way? This question is purely about the issue of the supervisory function and other provisions made by a PC to one of his subcontractors. Look at it like this - if anything goes wrong who will the HSE see as in charge? Not the 278 contractor! Bob
Bob We are all aware that CDM covers all project with the difference being either notifiable or none notifiable The point was that the hse will take a dim view of any duty holder artificially splitting a project to avoid notification. I trust this clarifies your understanding
Sutty31  
#13 Posted : 24 May 2012 12:31:10(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Sutty31

My view.... you are acting as PC for the Petrol Station and as PC you have appointed a subbie to construct an access road. This definitely appears to be an integral element of the overall scheme and therefore the subbie is your responsibility to manage and provide welfare for. You may wish to contract out with them the supply of the welfare element but it is still your legal obligation as PC to "Ensure" welfare is provided. I agree with the subbie manager.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.