Rank: Super forum user
|
Can anyone reccomend a training provider (preferably in the NE) for this?
Cheers
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Bear in mind the Regs are being rewritten in 2014!
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
SP900308 wrote:Bear in mind the Regs are being rewritten in 2014!
Pikeman,
I would caution against any CDM-C training until there is greater clarity over the direction these new regulations are potentially taking us. There are suggestions that the Lead Designers may finally be encouraged to undertake this role!
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Might not worth it, have heard that the CDMC will be disappearing in 2014 when the new CDM regs appear
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Pikeman,
IMO, your time would be better spent reading the non-binding guide to good practice for understanding and implementing Directive 92/57/EEC ‘Construction Sites’ on the implementation of minimum safety and health requirements at temporary or mobile construction sites.
Simon
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Irrespective of CDM change and the potential for straght implementation of the parent Directive, there will remain a Project role for identification, communication and mitigation of project specific risk. If current bodies and courses address that basic premise, the transition from CDM-C to Project Supervisor (I don't recall of the top of my head the terms used in the parent Directive) or whatever shouldn't be so onerous.
CDM Regulations are being criticised unfairly in my opinion. They never stipulated that the CDM-C role had to be entirely separate from other duty holder roles. It seems that many Clients have gone down this 'separate appointment' route out of fear, ignorance or the mistaken belief that they will no longer be accountable when or if things go wrong.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
To back up Ron's comment, I would guess that at least 80% of our appointments (and a substantially greater proportion of revenue) as CDMC are on projects where we also have design responsibilities (usually as lead designer)
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
If I draw your attention to the TMCS Directive http://eur-lex.europa.eu...=CELEX:31992L0057:EN:NOT there is still a requirement for a 'coordinator for safety and health matters at the project preparations stage', however the weakness with the current system on many projects is the late appointment of CDM-Cs and often when the construction phase of the project is about to commence on site and therefore this requirement of the Directive fails.
One of the ideas currently being discussed to avoid this situation is that the lead designer automatically undertaking the responsibility and role of 'coordinator for safety and health matters at the project preparations stage'.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Stedman,
'the lead designer automatically undertaking the responsibility and role of 'coordinator for safety and health matters at the project preparations stage'
The late appointment of the CDM-C as you highlighted is probably owing to the lead designer forgetting to advise the Client of his duties (Part 3) or not understanding his CDM duties in the first place!
With this often seen lack of understanding / commitment as it exists, I fail to see how any changes will vastly improve the situation?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
SP,
1. Regulation 11 (1) clearly states that No designer shall commence work in relation to a project unless any client for the project is aware of his duties under these Regulations.
2. The role of 'coordinator for safety and health matters at the project preparations stage' in the UK is undertaken by the CDM-Coordinator hence where the title originated.
3. The default position for a CDM-C if one is not specifically appointed by the Client is the Client and not the lead designer. This is specified within Regulation 14 (4)
Whilst I disagree with detail in the first part of your reply, I do agree that lack of Client interest is likely to improve. The bottom line is that the current CDM review is being driven by the Cabinet Office ‘Red Tape Challenge’ initiative and reduced bureaucracy rather than improved performance in safety.
The purpose of my message was to try and explain the background arguments to this change of role.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
stedman,
1. Agreed but often ignored;
2. Agreed (if the CDM-C is onboard early enough - ref item 1 above);
3. Agreed, but most likely the Client is oblivious to this, if the designer has failed to enlightened them so.
I can't see the lack of Client interest improving. I personally feel that CDM2007 is fundamentally sound but its failure relates to enforcement and buy-in from some dutyholders.
So, will enforcement and buy-in improve with CDM2014? I'm not confident!
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
I agree that to train know may not be the best advice. I transfered from the old planning supervisor role, via on line exam to become a CDM-C. I get so frustrated by persistant late appointments, is this a lack of cdm knowledge of many designers? or is it they dont want the early intervention into their design? The later it is the more difficult it is to warrant change!
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
SP900308 wrote:stedman,
1. Agreed but often ignored;
2. Agreed (if the CDM-C is onboard early enough - ref item 1 above);
3. Agreed, but most likely the Client is oblivious to this, if the designer has failed to enlightened them so.
I can't see the lack of Client interest improving. I personally feel that CDM2007 is fundamentally sound but its failure relates to enforcement and buy-in from some dutyholders.
So, will enforcement and buy-in improve with CDM2014? I'm not confident!
SP,
I agree with you last two statements, however the outline objectives driving CDM 2014 are very different to 2007.
Unlike in the past where the HSE clearly lead the changes, on this occasion the Government as part of the Cabinet Office ‘Red Tape Challenge’ initiative have sought initial advice from other sources outside field of safety, such as political think tanks, the CBI, Eurosceptics, H&S sceptics, other interest groups and I believe it is the Treasury on this occasion who have been tasked with the drafting of these Regulations.
What is also driving this review is the one million Euro fine imposed on UK Plc each month for failing to fully implement the TMCS Directive.
The draft regulations were due to be published this month but have now been put off till March. I suspect the draft regulations will be an almost straight copy of the TMCS Directive in order to satisfy the EU, however if this goes on beyond October, this could be kicked into the long grass due the limitation of the life of our current Parliament and the TMCS Directive is also due for a review!
|
|
|
|
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.