Posted By Warren Fothergill
I thought the CDM C was a duty holder who was not to be beauracratic and impose lots of unnecessary paperwork? Whilst the 'clients' best friend, as a contractor or even PC your h&s plan needs to meet your needs and show how you will ensure a safe site and any additional supporting documentation is referenced. Seems totally unjust to me.

Question to ask, is was the CDM C a former Planning Supervisor? Bet your bottom dollar he was!!

Posted By JasonGould
I Must admit that I have on the odd occasion had to write to the PC or his safety consultant / officer on the issue of a text change required in his CPP.

Something in the line of:-

Dear Sir can you please Not submit a CPP in which states "insert PC name here" on every other page and at various locations.

Whilst you can argue about the bad and pedantic CDMC's, you have to also concede about some of the shabby to say the least CPP's produced from a PC's safety consultant to the CDMCs.

I have to admit that I much prefer to see a terrible CPP which was actually written by the PC themselves rather than the very border line correctly worded generic CPP written by a external consultant living 200 miles away from the site.

With the terrible ones, a decent CDMC can and usually will assist and ensure that it is made right for the job at hand and trust me, we don't mind doing so so long as the PC commitment is there also and that the plan is delivered in plenty of time and not on day prior to construction (extreme case).

And all this talk about reducing paperwork makes me laugh at times and I think the HSE did state quite clearly that necessary paperwork will always be required where safety is concerned and should be site specific and suited for the work at hand.

It is Not an excuse for reducing the above, it's about reducing paperwork that adds no value to safety process in construction design and management e.g. the old designers risk assessment that tells a roofing contractor that working at heights is a hazard " well doh and unfortunately its still very much out there".

There is still paperwork and risk assessments etc required in giving out detail regarding the existing roof e.g. materials, stability significant hazards etc before the job is undertaken.

There is still the paperwork required in ensuring competent persons are going to work on the roof and there is still the paperwork required in the control and management of site operations and safe systems of work. All of which need to be clearly laid out in the CPP from a management arrangement point of view.

The CDM-C is a complete new role and is in no way related to the old PS role.

Whilst we are spending much of our time trying to change attitudes within the industry e.g. making the design teams not afraid to talk to us or see us as show stoppers etc and contractors not seeing us as police men to be blagged, we are still looking into our own role to see how improvements in our own processes can / should be made.

As a previous respondent as indicated, tea and biscuits as well as a good sit down and face to face chat is the way to go rather than the email trail which IMHO causes conflict, risk aversion and maintaining the industry viewpoint that safety is a hindrance rather than a benefit to the process.

There are no perfect CDM-C's out there and that is a 100% cert but we are getting there and I do feel the industry will benefit once the culture of CDM2007 has been embedded within the industry and through other disciplines / clients and yes in some cases the odd OTT CDMC's.

Here's to being optimistic for a change :), saying that "its the CPP review day tomorrow so here goes.

Posted By Brett Day

As an aside, companies I've worked for would love me to have a more active role in projects as would I, however, when the client is going to companies that offer the service for half our fee, it can make life difficult - some clients don't see it as helping with value or safety but as a legal requirement that they want to source as cheaply as possible.

Posted By PL
I know a couple of CDM-Cs who are encouraged by their employer to raise every little issue with paper work as every time they pick up the phone, write an email, pay a visit to discuss, etc. it's billable!

Posted By Lee Mac
Raymond

I fully appreciate & agree with your sentiments regarding the impartiality problem of having the Client & CDM-C being the same party/company.

So long as the company can show that there is indeed strict separation of the two roles and the competency is there, they have nothing to be over concerned about.

In my experience though it causes a lot of problems because the "in-house" CDM-C team usually consists of a number of individuals & there is normally conflicts of interest in this situation e.g. QS & H&S Prof view construction completely different and when H&S is versing cost cutting measures whose view do you think usually is given more consideration by the MD? Maybe it's just my experience.


Lee

Posted By Jeff Manion
We do provide this service.

Since 2007 we have provided this to various operations - demolition, replacement heating in church buildings, replacement heating in managed blocks of flats, block of flats - minor works internal decoration.

Demolition project, advised client not required - client insisted, so low key documentation provided / requested to PC, relevant to works and operation final documentation minimal.

Church location - was border line - advised Church Committee, not notifiable and to have in place a low key approach. The M&E engineers experienced and knowledgeable, one contractor (PC) to be on site full time (max of four persons) with contracted controls engineers (two persons). One church member "had HS Knowledge" was not keen that it was not notifiable and wanted to review my comments, he spoke to insurer, who then stated the are required required. It cost the church, but not a necessary approach.

Block of flats, board member knows about health and safety on this and that subject matter and insists CDM notifiable, works in my opinion was not notifiable, the value around £30K, they insisted CDMC in place, they found one for around £2K!

Another project met the CDMC a Tech IOSH, spouting this and that regulation, did not like the contractors approach to working at height, design by others considered risks and were appropriate for this operation. The CDMC turned up on the day the "pre-contract" meeting took place and a week later provided the pre-construction information.

He insists that he (CDMC) will review and comment on RA / SSOW / MS prior to works commencing, wow fees, fees and more fees.

Another one decommissioning project, several millions am the CDMC - when completed hole in the ground, little information to hand over, but the client wants in the HS File, the HS plan, RA, MS, SSOW, induction records, etc etc. As this is what they have had before.

JM
Could continue.