Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi, I'd like to see other's opinions on CDM 2015 now we're nearing the 2 year anniversary. If asked to years ago what would I expect to see, I though Architechts or similar designers would have influenced Clients more who didn't have in-house H&S advice. Naive perhaps. I thought this would have influenced the project team into better compliance, again perhaps naive. My own experience has been that smaller clients who can ill-afford additional red-tape burden are actually taking these duties and changes more readily than big clients. Is anyone else seeing similar (or contrasting patterns) in industry? I thought the sentencing guideline changes would have proved a big enough motivator by now for corporate clients but I'm not getting that confirmed by popular opinion. are audits and inspections on CDM providing better performance than pre-2015? And has anyone noticed sizeable shifts regarding competency demonstration i.e. more extensive training and supervision procedures in place and doducmented rather than card scheme 'only' approaches? All experiences welcome (providing they're constructive, this is just a discussion, not an esssay or landmark precedent I'm fighting).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I agree. Larger clients still don't want to know, or accept their duties: very reluctant to become more involved in projects (frequent quote, along the lines of "We are not builders, that's what you guys get paid for". ) They are usually more than happy to appoint CDM Adviser or pay the PD to act as adviser and undertake their duties. Many Architects and Engineers reluctant to take on PD role. Increased friction between these groups and PD : perceived "interference" by PD, especially where the PD is appointed externally. Clients not happy with transfer of PD role to Design and Build Contractors (and resistance from some Principal Contractors at being asked to undertake the role for D&B contracts). Principal Contractors and others still trying to pass off CSCS / CSR etc cards as evidence of Skills, Knowlege and Experience. Accident statistics are no better or worse than they were pre CDM 15. The only good point is that it has weeded out some dubious CDMC's,.(though most CDMC's were doing a fine job).
Has it been the roaring success that HSE though it would be? In my experience, definitely not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Talked to a guy the other day that is working on a site [30 houses] with no welfare what so ever or other H&S areas so in my view, since when I started (1960's), there appears to be little difference between then and now on the vast majority of day to day CDM jobs
Bigger jobs tend to play the game although until clients are put away [as has been said many many times] nothing will really change
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Two years on and I still think there is some confusion with regards to the PD role. I notice that a lot of people still refer to it as a CDM-C or CDM Advisor role which in essence it isn't. A principal designer is a designer who is an organisation or individual (on smaller projects) appointed by the client to take control of the pre-construction phase of any project involving more than one contractor...plan, manage, monitor and coordinate health and safety in the pre-construction phase.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I have worked for a few PDs who do not have the necessary knowledge and confidence to carry out their work as per the regs. I did the Pre Construction Plans and H&S Files and was entitled CDM Consultant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
In contrast to CDM 1994 and CDM 2007, the preparation for CDM 2015 was rushed which meant that clients and designers did not have the opportunity to pilot their response in advance of the regulations coming into force. As example, we started our CDM training programmes 22 months before CDM 1994 came into force (15 months after the deadline in the parent directive) with confidence that nothing much was going to change in the interim.
CDM 2015 down to two issues
1. Changing the threshold for the requirement for appointment of two duty holders, i.e. for any project with more than one contractor. Could have easily amended CDM 2007 with a half page code of regulations.
2. The alleged threat of infraction proceedings against UK and other Member States as regards projects for domestic clients. Probability of such proceedings when Temporary or Mobile Construction Sites Directive is up for imminent review. When the Member States ask "did we intend to apply this to householders" my expectation is that they will conclude "of course not". At which point CDM 2015 would have over implemented an amended TMCSD, so it will be back to the drawing board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Positives (in my own circles):
Designers taking ownership of design risk and realising that they had been doing much of the CDM-C's job for him.
A reduction in use of external consultants and a resultant closer knit Project Team.
Could designers do more? Yes, of course, but the bottom line still rests with the Client holding the purse strings who does not always see (or want to see) the longer term benefits to end-users and maintainers arising from a greater upfront investment.
One can perhaps understand the frustration of the conscienscous designer who may simply stop making suggestions to an unresponsive or recalcitrant Client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Why spend good money complying with a reg when there is little to no chance of ending up in court?
To get a HSE management job, it would appear a degree in fence sitting is now compulsory.
I assume there are a few here who remember that the whole point of CDM regs was to reduce injuries & deaths in construction due to different trades not communicating.
Its still a pigs ear, just a slightly different pig
Edited by user 04 April 2017 13:15:51(UTC)
| Reason: typos
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
In my experience the understanding of CDM2015 has improved over the two years and our clients are now more knowledgable and pragmatic in their approach to what is and isn't CDM and especially the appointment of PC/PD's.
The role of PD though does still create some confusion with smaller clients and as a result they still use their former CDM-C's as "Safety Advisors" to make sure that they are compliant. Not a bad thing necessarily but surely defeating one of the purposes of the legislation which was to clearly identify and simplify the roles and responsibilities.
I'd agree with the response at #6 that many businesses didn't get their heads around the requirements in advance and it's probably taken two years to establish a process that works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.