Rank: Forum user 
|
Our company sub-contracts a roofer who employs one other person to do any small roofing work we need doing.
He insists that because his company has less than 5 people he is exempt from having to supply them.
I insist on them due to the high risk activities involved in roofing.
Is he correct ? the regs are not clear on this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Paul, forget the Regs.
You are correct in asking any subcontractor to assess the risks associated with their work, set out how the work will be done and to state the risk controls that will be needed and used.
If that cannot be supplied to your satisfaction, do you really want to be using this subbie?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
My sentiments exactly David.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Paul
David is right.
Don't forget that your company has to satisfy itself that he is competent to carry out these works too. Part of that looks at how risks are managed, if you want to see that he should be able to provide you with something to satisfy you!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi Paul
In a way he is correct, according to the Management of Health and Safety at work regs he should be carrying RA's, however these only need to be recorded if he has 5 or more employees.
But I do agree David that he should be providing RA's especially with the work being high risk.
You may find that because he is a one man band he doesn't have the necessary knowledge to complete the risk assessment and does not have access to a competent person to assist him.
If you do want to use the subbie, you may find that you have to provide him with some guidance or assist him with the RA's. Maybe send him your company template and relevant HSE guidance to his operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Have to agree with David
All work at height should be properly planned, that means assessing the risks and deciding what is needed to control these.
If he is a competent roofer this should be second nature, if not I wouldn't use them!
Jonty
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I agree with David.
This is an area that I'm having o deal with at the moment, at the moment we ask that our sub-contractors sign up to to ConstructionLine but some of our smaller subbie's don't want to do this and are looking for exemptions
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Paul
Under CDM 2015 a construction phase plan is required - there is no exemption based on low number of employees.
End of story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
A visit to a court after somebody has fallen off a roof will confirm David is right and as the client the roofer should do as U request irrespective or change your roofer ---- is this 'one other person' that your roofer uses self employed as if so that is then 2 contractors on site even for a v small job
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
peter gotch wrote:Paul
Under CDM 2015 a construction phase plan is required - there is no exemption based on low number of employees.
End of story.
We are the PC on the project so if i'm correct he does not need to supply a CPP. We as PC have already submitted one
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Taken from CDM 2015, Guidance for contractors
2.4 Prepare the construction phase plan
On a project with more than one contractor, developing the construction phase plan will be the responsibility of the
principal contractor, and they should provide you with information within it that is relevant to your work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
In my opinion this is such a waste of time, not on here as it is an interesting topic but for the contractor.
Who is running the project and responsible for everyone involved? If you know the answer to that then they should be calling the tune and requiring the information to be provided.
No RAMS no work!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Paul B wrote:Our company sub-contracts a roofer who employs one other person to do any small roofing work we need doing.
He insists that because his company has less than 5 people he is exempt from having to supply them.
I insist on them due to the high risk activities involved in roofing.
Is he correct ? the regs are not clear on this.
Talk to the man, and help him to create the RAM's for his works (may not be your place granted, but at least it will get the paperwork done to your requirements). As someone else mentioned, he is basically a one man band, he may not have the knowledge on how to prepare such paperwork, his works may be perfectly fine. He should know how to, but many dont, and bury their heads in the sand.
WaH is a dangerous task, one of the main causes of fatalities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
My understanding was that with less than 5 employees you are under no obligation to RECORD your RA's. You still have a duty to carry out a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks and take appropriate action. Any RA's conducted in this manner must be easily recallable, which begs the question; why wouldn't you record them? A print or photocopy is quicker than writing it out again every time...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
whilst the 'less than 5 employees' situation may [technically] apply the need to adequately manage does go away for a one man band so get them to get things done properly
Is this yet another case of it being OK for a micro company to be able to comply with social security, tax, national insurance, PL, EL, driving and other laws, which are all more complicated and in depth than day to day H&S law, yet its OK for them not to comply with H&S law?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
woops
I should have said "whilst the 'less than 5 employees' situation may [technically] apply the need to adequately manage does 'not' go away for a one man band so get them to get things done properly
sorry
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.