Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Lawson12
We are in the process of reviewing our training needs and ensuring we have enough operatives with the PASMA Tower Scaffold and IPAF MEWP certificates.
A consultancy / training provider has been trying to sell me their training which is not accredited to PASMA or IPAF.
We need PASMA / IPAF as on some sites it is specified, but what do you think, should it be accrediated or not?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By jayjay
Lawson12,
My advice on this is to go with an accredited oganisations such as you've mentioned, however as the person who is erecting/dismantling mobile towers or operating MEWP's has got to demonstrate he's trained and competent all that he needs to do is prove this to you. On the other hand a lot of sites will only allow certain 'Tickets' such PASMA or IPAF and for you to tender for work that is the route i would go.
Regards, JJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
The only requirement to ensure competence when using this type of equipment is that the trainer must be competent to deliver.
NO Legal requirement to use PASMA / IPAF but then how do you "prove" that the training you gave was from a competent source?
If you are happy that the training will deliver the required competence then go ahead, but when the proverbial hits the fan etc etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Dave wrote: If you are happy that the training will deliver the required competence then go ahead, but when the proverbial hits the fan etc etc
Question for Dave: (please note this is purely hypothetical and I could have chosen any provider name). I attend a IOSH manual handling course. I don't query the competence of the trainer because I trust IOSH to have done that So Dave, what checks would I have expected the provider to have carried out.
Going back to your original statement: You seem quite cynical about someone else judging competence - so lets see your answer to the above and we can then discuss this further.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By SJA
One of the local training providers in my area can offer you plant training accredited by CITB/IPAF/PASMA/LANTRA etc etc, or alternatively they will offer you the identical training covering the same topics, with the same level of detail being provided. The course is even delivered by the same tutors but it is only accredited by the training centre, as opposed to being accredited by CITB/IPAF/PASMA/LANTRA etc.
The other difference, and the main reason that they offer such an option is the cost. The CITB/IPAF/PASMA/LANTRA etc accredited courses cost significantly more than the courses run without the external accreditation. This is down to the high levels of cost and license fees that are payable by the trainer to the accreditation bodies.
So at the end of the day, whilst accredited training will probably be more widely accepted, it is not necessarily better!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David S Burt
A search of the National Data Base of accredited Qualifications in the UK will reveal that neither PASMA or IPAF are recognised or accredited by QCA (The Qualifications Curriculum Authority who accredit everything from GCSE’s through to Degrees in the UK)
NVQ Elements (accredited by QCA) are available for the erection and dismantling of Tower Scaffolds and the use of MEWPS. However for some reason both PASMA and IPAF are the only courses recognised by a considerable number of major construction companies.
A significant number of the major construction companies will not even allow advanced scaffolders (with over 25 years experience) to erect tower scaffolds unless they have been on a 1day PASMA course
On a positive note if you are an accredited PASMA or IPAF training provider you can make a shed load of money out of the provision of this training.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Steven Armstrong
I would select the accredited training provider, and not because I am one. The construction industry have generally moved towards PASMA and IPAF cards as the accepted level of consistant training provision. All approved instructors of PASMA courses must follow the program of training, and are audited annually, with tighter controls being introduced over the next few years. If you spend your money on the non-accredited training, even though it may be carried out by an accredited instructor, you may find the client will not accept the certificate. You can argue all day long, but if the client says 'No', then its more money to spend. On the comments of advanced scaffolder erecting towers, I've seen some horrendous examples of towers erected by so-called advanced scaffolders, who didn't have a clue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Basically it seems there is no strong point coming out on quality/competence of the training but because a client might demand it is accredited?
I'd prefer a response from Dave Wilson before pursuing this but I can say we were accredited on the well known Managing Safety and Working Safely courses purely by being CMIOSH - not because of the quality/competence of our training - that was not looked at.
The additional fees for accreditation put off all enquiries for these courses and we continue to offer very similar courses dedicated to each client and at a much lower cost.
Remember the term 'reasonably practicable'?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Geoff,
As an ex HSE enforcement officer I would always tell my employer / client what his statutory duties are - not what it is morally right to do.
If you get prosecuted or some other enforcement action against you the notice or indictment will not say "you are in breach of WAH regs etc coz you didn't use a pasma Trainer etc.
Personally speaking, using an IPAF / PASMA trainer will go a long way to say that your people are trained in accordance with a set criteria and are therefore competent!? but there is no statutory requirement to do so!
In my trade we use PASMA / IPAF trainers not because I am not competent to train them but it is the 'stamp' on the certificate you want.
So if you feel that you or anyone in your company is 'competent' to do this type (or any type)of training why go outside!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
I'll quote you again Dave: If you are happy that the training will deliver the required competence then go ahead, but when the proverbial hits the fan etc etc
But only if the training is shown to be incompetent.
What is your criteria for competence, because from your comment any unaccredited training would be seen to be incompetent, whether you vet it it not.
Or don't you have a criteria - only that it is accredited by someone/anyone who can take the blame?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Dave - it's the '...but when the proverbial hits the fan etc etc....' I'm unhappy with.
I'd like to see some evidence of this broad statement/assertion that unacredited training will lead to trouble, and a slur on all those who provide unacrediated courses.
I'd be surprised if you were ex HSE and would guess EHO, but that's also a generalisation!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Reading to much into this mate!
Just because you attend an accredited course does that make your people competent in that discipline? maybe / maybe not. At the end of the day it's the employer who decides on the competence of its employees and using an "accredited" trainer may help you achieve this.
I would personally ask for references and even ask to sit in on a course to see what the course is all about and make the decision from there.
Blind faith in that an "accredited" trainer will provide you with your requirements is foolhardy to say the least.
I can bet that IPAF / PASMA trainers out there can give you an educated guess of who are good and bad, its not just about the course content its delivery and the learning environment - how many H&S people do you know who could not deliver any level of training as they could not get the message across, maybe very knowledgeable but garbage at training!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Seems to me Dave you have made a big statement which I find offensive and one that you cannot support.
But that you feel unable or are not willing to retract it.
That's one of the problems with sites like this and why we lose so many contributors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jim Walker
Geoff,
Reading this, I'm afraid I see you as the "problem" poster not Dave.
OK putting aside the HSE involvement argument.
For my sins, I have to audit High risk sites. I will check the training of such people & maybe trail back to their certificates. Whilst I'm mindful that trainers (accredited or not) are a mixed bunch of good and useless. If the said cert has not got PASMA or something else I quickly recognise (these organisations have some quality checks) then I have no time nor inclination to check the trainer who delivered the course and will issue a systems failing notice to the employer and potentially stop work.
Is this good H&S practice - possibly not, but that's how business works, we lay down the rules to our subbies and if they don't conform then that is breach of contract.
Unfair - Yes, but so is life!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By SJA
Jim
Putting company safety rules aside, as a member of IOSH (which I assume you are) you have a professional and moral duty to comply with the IOSH code of conduct and in my opinion, by simply dismissing (without any consideration) the training provided by another organisation (who are also members of IOSH) could result in you breaching the IOSH Code of Conduct by bringing another member into disrepute.
You have a duty to assess the training provided or at least ask the contractor to provide you with evidence that the training is satisfactory. I feel that your current approach is short sighted and highly unprofessional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jim Walker
SJA,
Well its a nice thought! and a sweeping statement seeing as you know nothing about me.
BUT.......... I potentially view the qualifications certificates of up to 800 people with a diverse range of safety critical roles and that is a tiny part of my audits and auditing is only a small part of my role.
So I have to do something called prioritise my workload.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Some ridiculous statements here.
Why are you rattled Jim, has it hit a sore point? To dismiss a provider because they are not accredited is ridiculous and I suspect you know it. Your post is a wind up, right?
SJA: Some sanity in this thread at last.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jim Walker
Geoff,
Quite simply, I don't like being called unprofessional nor some stranger telling me how to do my job.
All I was try to say is for a practical point of view I don't have the time & resources to check every trainer and have to rely on the various accreditation bodies to do it for me.
I did say it was not ideal, did I not?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By SJA
Jim
As you have stated, I think the problem here is one of your own resources rather than those of the contractors you are judging.
Have you made your employer aware of this?
Also as I stated, place the onus on the contractor to provide you with the evidence, you do not have to go out and chase up the individual trainers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
I cant for the life of me see where I said that IPAF/PASMA trainers were rubbish what I said was that you do NOT LEGALLY have to use them. If you think the training you can provide / or others can provide deliver competence then why not!
Geoff have I made any personal attack on you, No! so what's the beef!
I have been in H&S in a vast range of industries for over 25 years, including enforcement! and I would always use an IPAF/PASMA trainer but I LEGALLY DO NOT HAVE TO!!!! Why would / should I spend £0000s pounds on some gadgey to show my guys how to put up a small minimax scaffold!!
I would always use an external trainer for areas I am not competent to do myself or if I am forced to by a specific client / industry. CSCS for instance!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Been listening to Gaunty on the way back to the office so will not go down that route.
name me the only "General" safety training which legally has to be done by an HSE "APPROVED" training organisation?? (Not trade specific)
Answers on a postage stamp!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By ClaireL
I haven't bothered to read all the responses as I am not about to get invloved in any battle of the words that seems to be going on.
I have a friend that works in the Construction Sector at the HSE.
I have asked her this question previously (as it is a question I am frequesntly asked) and she told me that for tower scaffolds the training course MUST be PASMA approved.
The HSE enforce the issue, this person advises the rest of the HSE Inspectors what the standards are, so that's the advice I give my clients!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Claire this is the standard which the HSE can request but they most certainly CANNOT ENFORCE IT!
The HSE / LA H&S enforcement officers enforce legislation and try to improve safety at work by giving guidance and in some case Approved guidance.
The WAH Regs REg 5
Competence
5. Every employer shall ensure that no person engages in any activity, including organisation, planning and supervision, in relation to work at height or work equipment for use in such work unless he is competent to do so or, if being trained, is being supervised by a competent person.
No mention of PASMA / IPAF there.
I think you are all missing the point, using an accredired training provider is GOOD PRACTICE it is NOT A LEGAL REQUIREMENT.
From WAH Guidance
This guidance is issued by the Health and Safety Executive. Following the
guidance is not compulsory and you are free to take other action. But if you
do follow the guidance you will normally be doing enough to comply with the
law. Health and safety inspectors seek to secure compliance with the law and
may refer to this guidance as illustrating good practice.
I am now miffed! Who was the git who has just phoned my company and asked if we use a PASMA trainer and when told yes put the phone down!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Dave, you said that if you use an unaccredited trainer then stand back and watch out for trouble. In other words unaccredited trainers should not be used and are not acceptable.
You've said it. I'm going to leave it at that because it's clear you don't really understand your own arguement, and I'll put it down to simply that.
Jim: As far as I'm concerned you don't have a reasonable statement to make on this, 'IF' your time is more important than your integrity and professionalism in carrying out audits.
Or maybe you have just expressed yourself badly?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
ClairL
I'd like to take this up with your contact as I don't for a moment believe it is a MUST. If it is I'd require it in writing.
Could you provide contact details please.
Geoff
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Geoff,
I have never ever said that you should use one or the other, I have also never said they are bad or good, some are and some aren't, it is up to the employer to decide, coz at the end of the day he is the one who is going to have to justify his actions when asked to by the Magistrate, what I have said is, it cannot be enforced.
Most organisations use "accredited" trainers from consultancies / training groups etc and some train their own in house.
I have never said DO NOT use IPAF / PASMA etc and I have also never said DO NOT use "unaccredited" trainers, just telling like it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Phil Errup
Geoff, read ClaireL's other posts... methinks she is a plant... IOSH's very own Jeremy Beadle (GRHS)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By ClaireL
I'm not about to get drawn into this slanging match.
I passed on the information that I have been given and if no one chooses to take it on board then that is not my problem.
And I will most certainly not give the name of my contact!!! I can't believe you even asked.
By the way I think you all behaving appallingly on this thread. As bad as MP's the lot of you!.. and they stand just over two swords lengths away from each other to prevent swords being drawn in arguments. Thanks goodness for the internet otherwise there'd be blood!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
ClairL: If I quote a source I would always expect that source to be queried, and be prepared to disclose it.
If not, it's a bit like newspapers quoting an unnamed source - take it with a pinch of salt!
M'lud, yes I was told by the HSE, but M'lud, no I won't tell you his/her name.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By ClaireL
This is not a court of law and so I am not posting my contacts name!
You lot are really something else!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Phil Errup
Or perhaps Claire we are merly professionals who actually know what we are talking about?
Be positive in your responses, try to offer guidance based on what you know, not what you heard or read somewhere and you will be taken more seriously. And don't keep getting so worked up. This could be a good place for you to actually learn something, if you will listen rather than keep saying " yeah but... i know someone... I read..... ". Again, I'm trying to help you, not have a go at you.
Good day all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Stand back ClairL and think about what you are saying. In effect anything goes as long as it can be attributed to some nameless person in authority?
Good job I'm a Colchester United supporter and have a sense of humour!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By ClaireL
Geoff,
Don't you think you are setting a dangereous precedent by asking everyone to 'prove' where they get their information from. Why would I lie?
I gave the advice I was given and you can choose to disregard that advice but I will not accept the insults about my professionalism from other users (that is repeated on other threads too).
I am an ex-inspector myself, a consultant and CMIOSH. These constant accusations that I am incompetent from some users is really very upsetting and unacceptable.
I am not telling you the name of my friend as I don't think that is fair. She is as overworked as the rest of us and the last thing she needs is people phoning her up en masse and giving her more grief. Please appreciate that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By SJA
Claire
Out of curiosity what were you an inspector of?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By ClaireL
Anything that fell under the remit of the HSE.
Why do I get the feeling I am about to be subjected to more insults!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By SJA
Claire
No insults intended, just trying to see where you are going from.
So when with the HSE one day you could have been involved in construction, the next day a farm followed by an office etc??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By SJA
Sorry
Should be 'coming from'
Doh!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By ClaireL
Yep, fairly broad experience that has broadened even further since becoming a consultant as I now also do what I refer to as LA (premises generally non industrial - lower risk) as well.
Jack of all trades master of none and I don't pretend otherwise.
If I don't know something I'll say so and I'm not too proud to ask for advice or help when needed. There's lots I don't know (anyone who says they know everything is lying!).
Also, when I'm wrong I'll say so. We're all fallible.
I'm an upfront person and so I really don't understand the grief I am getting on this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David S Burt
Well based on what Claire has said and the way that others think that PASMA and IPAF are so good despite neither of them being accredited by Ofqual (previously QCA), I might have to get my snout in the trough and become a provider of these courses.
It does look like I could make more money that delivering real accredited and externally verified qualifications.
The only problem with such an approach would be that I would have to sell out my professional integrity. Oh and I would also need to start spreading myths about what is legally required.
As I am not prepared to do either of the above I guess I will just have to carry on trying to educate clients and sadly a significant number of misguided so called health and safety people.
It is also worth remembering that the only time the issue over the standard of training provided will be brought in to question is following a serious accident. If things come to this it means that you have failed to discharge YOUR duties and I hope you will be able to live with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By ClaireL
My understanding is that he reason for the whole PASMA thing is that the HSE liased with PASMA to come up with safe practices for the erection and safe use of tower scaffolds.
PASMA sponsors courses for approved training providers ie those that follow the agreed standards.
What I have been told is that the HSE considers the competency test to be that of an approved course provider.
There are many things that are not stipulated in law but the HSE has set the benchmark for, that unless you can prove otherwise, will be what is expected.
I am just the messenger here but I will still go by what the enforcing authority want as the standard. My clients would expect nothing less.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.