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
LATCHY  
#1 Posted : 09 October 2012 15:38:31(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
LATCHY

Can anyone reccomend a website where the proposed changes can be studied, all advice welcome.
Stedman  
#2 Posted : 10 October 2012 08:41:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Stedman

Latchy, Sorry information on these changes is very thin and sketchy with my only source APS and the HSE press release. There is a lot of speculation over these changes; however until the draft regulations are published in December, I would not expect any further tangible information. APS appear to be quite optimistic about these changes; however as a practicing CDM-C, I am not as confident. See: http://www.hse.gov.uk/ab...iac/200612/m2-2012-2.pdf and http://eur-lex.europa.eu...=CELEX:31992L0057:EN:NOT and If you google the July/August CIOB magazine (Construction Manager) it is worth having a read of the comment article by Richard Thorne on page 12.
boblewis  
#3 Posted : 10 October 2012 11:13:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

The HSE Coniac paper highlighted certainly seems to show that Competence Assessment, both company and individual, are a real concern. Lets face it this is the area producing most bureacracy with the abundance of form filling and competence card pursuing. Problem really is though that the HSE have been all to keen to keep the message in a form that drives people to the use of such assessment methodologies. What field inspectors say they want does not match what is written. Until the HSE make clear statements about competence and competence management then we will continue as we are. Their support of the current systems has merely encouraged the addicts to keep taking their drugs. I would hope that some person will recognise that they have in the past created a good framework for competence management in regard to safety critical control systems and with very little work this document could change many attitudes. The trouble is that some will have to go Cold Turkey. Bob
MEden380  
#4 Posted : 10 October 2012 14:09:01(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
MEden380

LATCHY Attended a meeting with one of the Snr HSE Inspectors involved in the re-write of the regs and they are looking at doing a "copy out" of the EU Regs - basically means they will be word for word, I hope not. This is not definite just an option they are considering.
Ron Hunter  
#5 Posted : 10 October 2012 14:17:46(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

The Government (via CONIAC) is pushing for CDM to adopt the EU Directive verbatim. The real interest would remain as to what the ACoP would say thereafter. As I see it, the detractors of CDM Regs are in reality railing against inappropriate / disproportionate application of the guidance in the current ACoP. CDM-Cs should be prepared for yet another name change!!
BJC  
#6 Posted : 10 October 2012 14:39:31(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

The simplest thing would be to emphasize training rather than paperwork which currently sits in the corner.
m  
#7 Posted : 10 October 2012 14:48:41(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
m

For a job to be notifiable (currently 30 days OR involve more than 500 person days) they will add "20 or more working on site on any given day" which we forgot to include in the original. Domestic jobs will also be included as the directive did not exclude them.
Ron Hunter  
#8 Posted : 10 October 2012 15:57:43(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

m wrote:
For a job to be notifiable (currently 30 days OR involve more than 500 person days) they will add "20 or more working on site on any given day" which we forgot to include in the original. Domestic jobs will also be included as the directive did not exclude them.
I keep hitting post instead of entering text!! Anyhoo - we need to be careful when discussing "domestic" jobs in the context of the Directive 92/57/EEC. Whereas the Directive would apply to the contractor, designer etc. it DOES NOT extend to the domestic clients. Some people who should know better have been spreading this rumour (inc. CONIAC). 92/57/EEC has to be read in the context of the parent Directive - which is concerned with employers and undertakings in exactly the same way as our H&S@Work Act.
bob youel  
#9 Posted : 11 October 2012 07:31:31(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
bob youel

Whatever the changes we should all shout from the roof tops to have the MHSW Reg 7 person included as time and again I find that the only person who brings an allround picture to a job for the client is the clients R7 person [where they are in place!] yet that person is not noted in the current regs I can count on one [1] hand from smaller companies the amount of CDM plans that I have looked at over the years that include a proper management system as is required and as for very small companies enough said; yet it is those type of companies and their clients that bring the most risk!
Ron Hunter  
#10 Posted : 11 October 2012 11:04:30(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

I empathise with you there Bob, but from a regulatory perspective, this is already covered? The Management Regs apply to all aspects of work. In other respects, those from the Client side need effective training and effective systems for Project management - too often work ends up with us when it properly rests with the duty holder. In the wider context, for notifiable projects the emphasis should be on competent CDM-C appointments.
bob youel  
#11 Posted : 11 October 2012 14:54:44(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
bob youel

thanks Ron U and I know that but most designers, CDMC's, PC's and clients that I know do not know that the MHSW regs exist hence the need of a reference in the CDM regs
Stedman  
#12 Posted : 11 October 2012 15:15:50(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Stedman

The trouble is that much of what is being discussed is speculative and most of my clues have come from the APS press release issued back in May this year and stated “the HSE has indicated that it will be taking into account more closely the original requirements of the EU Temporary or Mobile Construction Sites Directive (TMCS), as well as the outcome of its CDM evaluation, and the various Red Tape Challenges and associated Star Chamber reports”. Interestingly this press release has been withdrawn; however there is still the Richard Thorne’s, Construction Manager article available http://construction-mana...-aint-broke-dont-fix-it/ which states that ACOP would be dropped in favour of a simpler guidance document. If I recall, this was also stated in the original APS press release. As a CDM-C I have a vested interest in the latest UK interpretation on the TMCS Coordinators for safety and health role and how this will be implemented? As an observer, I am also interested in seeing how differently the new regulations are once the legislation drafting process is complete. My hypothesis is that once they have taken the TMCS and scoped this around the framework of our current H&S legislation, I suspect that this may almost be back to where we currently are.
MrsBlue  
#13 Posted : 11 October 2012 15:45:28(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

I don't know CDM 2007 (I don't work in construction) but do the HSE policy makers actually go out into the real world and follow/monitor, from the beginning a project i.e.: the clients requirements the designer input the architect the PC the subbies the CDM-C etc etc or do they sit in their ivory towers and make out they are consulting and then take an EU policy. Because from the posts above it seems to me to be a fait accompli. Educate me please. Rich
PH2  
#14 Posted : 11 October 2012 15:52:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
PH2

If the review goes back to the basics of the Directive, we may have additional co-ordinators duties. The Directive discusses "the co-ordinator" responsibilities both during design and at construction stage. In the Republic of Ireland, there are Planning Supervisor, Design Stage (PSDS) and also Planning Supervisor, Construction Stage (PSCS) within their version of the CDM Regulations (The Procurement, Design and Management requirements of the Safety, Health and Welfare (Construction) Regulations 2006. This addresses the issue that many CDMC's have raised over the years: who will advise the Client on health and safety matters once construction starts? Not all Clients employ "competent persons" with comprehensive construction experience.
Stedman  
#15 Posted : 11 October 2012 16:28:12(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Stedman

PH2 wrote:
If the review goes back to the basics of the Directive, we may have additional co-ordinators duties. The Directive discusses "the co-ordinator" responsibilities both during design and at construction stage. In the Republic of Ireland, there are Planning Supervisor, Design Stage (PSDS) and also Planning Supervisor, Construction Stage (PSCS) within their version of the CDM Regulations (The Procurement, Design and Management requirements of the Safety, Health and Welfare (Construction) Regulations 2006. This addresses the issue that many CDMC's have raised over the years: who will advise the Client on health and safety matters once construction starts? Not all Clients employ "competent persons" with comprehensive construction experience.
Is it not Project Supervisor Planning Stage and not Planning Supervisor?
PH2  
#16 Posted : 11 October 2012 17:13:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
PH2

Stedman, your are correct: it should have been Project Supervisor. (I must have been indulging in nostalgia again). PH2
Stedman  
#17 Posted : 12 October 2012 11:08:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Stedman

rich777 wrote:
I don't know CDM 2007 (I don't work in construction) but do the HSE policy makers actually go out into the real world and follow/monitor, from the beginning a project i.e.: the clients requirements the designer input the architect the PC the subbies the CDM-C etc etc or do they sit in their ivory towers and make out they are consulting and then take an EU policy. Because from the posts above it seems to me to be a fait accompli. Educate me please. Rich
Rich, It appears that the origins of CDM 2014 appear to go beyond the HSE with their Research Report RR920 ‘Evaluation of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007’, beyond the Löfstedt Review and possible has its origins within an independent think tank. Unfortunately with a task such as this, one of the significant weaknesses with modern politics is that politicians will often listen to who they want to rather than who they ought to in order to get the answer they want.
Stedman  
#18 Posted : 12 October 2012 14:55:36(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Stedman

LATCHY wrote:
Can anyone reccomend a website where the proposed changes can be studied, all advice welcome.
Latchy, If you can get hold of the Current copy of the APS Digest, all will be much clearer in terms of the potential changes.
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.