Rank: Super forum user 
|
I work in the Crane industry, as a CPCS Slinger (red card) and I'm a member of various facebook groups who are concerned with the Crane and Lifting industry in a friendly and professional way. A recent topic posted asked about the ongoing concerns the UK industry has with the proof of competence of workers. The replies came thick and fast, mostly negative, because that is the industry we happen to live in. There are quite a few cowboy companies out there who are willing to cut corners and save their money on the payroll by having certain workers double up on the jobs they are asked to do. So it has become an uneven playing field for those very professional companies who do their level best at providing a safe place to work.
There are currently 4 card schemes that I know of including CSCS, CPCS, NPORS, and a marine card (that I don't know the name), plus something going through the CITB called ECITB.
Now all these training schemes are there to make money for themselves at our expense, it's certainly not for charity or really even for the betterment of mankind, although the original idea was sound, 'provide a sheme to prove competance'. The result for some is now a massive outlay to keep qualified, as the cards run out between 2-5 years. On top of that in the CPCS scheme, there is an initial 2 year probation and then another bill for higher certification to became a blue card, I'm just approaching this level myself.
Now to make things interesting, some companies are willing to employ one person to do multiple jobs, that on a premium site is done by 2 or 3 other workers and includes close support by managers (known as Crane Supervisors). Under current UK law this is not illegal (see BS7121 and LOLER). Companies are tempting fate as far as I am concerned. The general consensus is that it's fine until somebody dies or gets injured, then we are sure, the workers doing these multiple jobs as one, will all be thrown under the bus as the companies reduce their burdens in a court of law.
The way the crane industry runs at the moment is lack lustre, there are some really great companies out there and then there are some that are not, so how can we make it fair. So my question is; How can we change it? How can the HSE address this problem (being a Government deptartment) and I would suggest change the law to make the industry safe?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
As far as I know these card schemes are prevalent across most industries and are seen to go some way to proving competence with many sites insisting that only people carrying specifdic cards are able to work on their site. But as far as I'm aware none of these card schemes hold any legal requirement to have them. The subject of competence has been a bugbear of mine for years as it is so subjective and open to interpratation - someone that has operated a crane safely for 30 years, knows the mechanics of it, is well read in the user manuals/safety guidance etc but doesnt have a card would not be considered as competent by some organisation, whereas somoene wet behind the ears but with a card is considered so.
It's a grey area and one that is very difficult to police or find a simple solution to. In essence a good card scheme should go along way towards proving competence but I do tend to agree that they seem to be growing legs and becoming more fo a money making tool than a tool to help improve safety and competence. I'm sure others will have totally different viewpoints but just thought I'd add my thoughts (right or wrong).
|
 1 user thanked grim72 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
The 'two years probation' is far more akin to 'competence' than any ticket/ card/ certificate et al. The training aspect and accredited bodies are a factor of competence but this is one area that I think CDM 2015 has made strides, competence= skills, knowledge, training and experience. If I today interviewed somebody to fulfill a crane operator's position I would consider experience before a certificate (the two would have to compliment each other)
|
1 user thanked Clark34486 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
"The way the crane industry runs at the moment is lack lustre, there are some really great companies out there and then there are some that are not, so how can we make it fair. So my question is; How can we change it? How can the HSE address this problem (being a Government deptartment) and I would suggest change the law to make the industry safe."
Nothing the HSE can ever do will address this problem. The poor companies will still exist and quit often only be found after a nasty accident. It a bit like saying how can the police stop crime!
|
1 user thanked HSSnail for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Kim - CITB and ECITB are different organisations. The latter deals with engineering construction e.g. for projects in the process sectors. Some working as e.g. a crane operator could end up being faced with a need to follow the schemes under the wings of both CITB AND ECITB. There's been much talk over years of trying to making this all simpler, but without much change to date.
|
1 user thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Interesting subject. The words competence is very interesting as you could ask, what level of competency. And what type of knowledge. What type of skills etc. The CITB is a charity aand a poor one at that. I worked for them for about 5 years and they are only like other training providers. The trainers are very professional but the managers (loads of them, top heavy) do not acyually know a great deal about training, some of them have never actually done any training. The managers just want revenue. I was eventually encouraged to leave after i complained. The only thing i didn't do was put in a formal greivance. There is a report online which looks at Competency called the Pye Tait report. It was commisioned by the CITB as luck would have it and it makes the CITB look quite bad. It is free and worth a read. The one thing that i believe makes a person competent. Is knowing when you are out of your depth or indeed competency level. Once you get there, ask for assistance from somebody who has the competency level greater than yours. Don't just crack on. Some prople get promoted way outside of their levels of competency and make fools of themselves. But they love to tell everybody,' im the manager, im the director. You do not need quals to be a director or a manager. But you do to be a skilled worker.
|
1 user thanked bigpub for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Still talking about 'Competance' and the many card schemes, there rises another major problem, that of pure safety, in particular having a varied construction site with multiple languages spoken, making it extremely difficult to get anything done added to this, it seems every other nationality outside the UK does simply not understand the concept of either their own safety or those around them that could be harmed by their actions. All these people have trade cards that they have obtained (we jokingly say from cerial packets) that bear little evidence when you actually start working together on a job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
CSCS does not prove competence in any way at all. It merely declares you have passed a test and have secured enough marks to give you a basic understanding of on site H&S. Competence has three core elements skills, knowledge and experience. The CSCS card scheme asks you for your skill level solely to give you the correct coloured card, no experience needed or asked for and in regard knowledge the CSCS test confirms you have a basic understanding of general H&S. CSCS cards do not confirm competence.
|
1 user thanked KEITH ROWSON for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: KEITH ROWSON  CSCS does not prove competence in any way at all. It merely declares you have passed a test and have secured enough marks to give you a basic understanding of on site H&S. Competence has three core elements skills, knowledge and experience. The CSCS card scheme asks you for your skill level solely to give you the correct coloured card, no experience needed or asked for and in regard knowledge the CSCS test confirms you have a basic understanding of general H&S. CSCS cards do not confirm competence.
With respect, you are completely wrong. CSCS cards do prove competence. The whole point of a CSCS card is to be a convenient "platform" for you to use to display details of your competence (eg your NVQ, degree or whatever you have for your job). To say that CSCS shows nothing but a basic understanding of H&S shows that you have no understanding of what CSCS is.
Whilst you do admiteddly need to complete a basic computer based H&S test to obtain your card each time you renew, this is 1% of what the card shows. The remaining 99% is your qualification. As an example with some of the most popular types of card... - Black "manager" card: H&S Test & NVQ 5+
- Gold "advanced/supervisory" card: H&S Test & NVQ 3+
- Blue "skilled worker" card: H&S Test & NVQ 2+
- Green "labourer" card: H&S Test & one of several entry level site courses accepted by the CITB.
The idea is that if you walk onto a site claiming to be a brickie then you can pull out your card proving that you are what you say you are (in that case, most likely a blue skilled worker card). On the front is your name and photo and on the back it will state that you are an NVQ qualified (and therefore, competent) bricklayer. Now, if sites are happy to accept the wrong card (for example, a green labourer card or one of the remaining green construction site operative cards still in circulation) then that is their fault, not the fault of the CSCS scheme.
Edited by user 28 May 2019 13:44:34(UTC)
| Reason: Minor wording amendment
|
1 user thanked Stern for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
From the CSCS Website
CSCS is not about competence…
In the past many schemes, CSCS included, have been promoted as ‘Competency’ card schemes i.e. possession of a card automatically signifies the cardholder is competent to carry out a given task or job. Furthermore the industry has been keen to embrace this concept with cursory inspection of the card before individuals are allowed to work on site.
Most cards do not currently record certain information that assists a Supervisor or Manager in determining an individual’s competence, such as physical fitness, work experience and behavioural attributes, yet production of a card is relied upon as proof of competence. This is clearly a dangerous assumption
Most cards do not currently record certain information that assists a Supervisor or Manager in determining an individual’s competence, such as physical fitness, work experience and behavioural attributes, yet production of a card is relied upon as proof of competence. This is clearly a dangerous assumption
|
1 user thanked MrBrightside for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Incidentally CSCS have lost their certification to continue distributing CSCS, the card isn't worth a carrot TBF (IMO)
|
1 user thanked Clark34486 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: MrBrightside From the CSCS Website
CSCS is not about competence…
In the past many schemes, CSCS included, have been promoted as ‘Competency’ card schemes i.e. possession of a card automatically signifies the cardholder is competent to carry out a given task or job. Furthermore the industry has been keen to embrace this concept with cursory inspection of the card before individuals are allowed to work on site.
Most cards do not currently record certain information that assists a Supervisor or Manager in determining an individual’s competence, such as physical fitness, work experience and behavioural attributes, yet production of a card is relied upon as proof of competence. This is clearly a dangerous assumption
Most cards do not currently record certain information that assists a Supervisor or Manager in determining an individual’s competence, such as physical fitness, work experience and behavioural attributes, yet production of a card is relied upon as proof of competence. This is clearly a dangerous assumption
Totally agree. Simplay having a CSCS card doesn't mean you are competent. However, working, studying, being assessed and then obtaining the necessary qualfication (in the majority of cases, an NVQ) does.
"The NVQ is a work based qualification which recognises the skills and knowledge a person needs to do a job. The candidate needs to demonstrate and prove their competency in their chosen role or career path"
"To achieve an NVQ, candidates have to prove that they have the ability (competence) to carry out their job to the required standard."
People's misconception is, for whatever reason, that a CSCS card is either A) A qualification in itself or B) That it is just a H&S card. Like them or not, NVQs are the measure of competence in many indutries nowadays and a CSCS is nothing more than a convenient way to show your NVQs to people without carrying round your certifiates,
Last time i checked, physical fitness and behavioural attributes were not a measure of a person's competence.
|
2 users thanked Stern for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I note that there is a lot of discussion about what competency means but from my experience, competency is in the eye of the beholder - especially if the beholder decides that he wants somebody quickly (and cheaply). I have worked recently on some construction sites in Central London alongside a major property developer for whom the buildngs were being built, and their expection in terms of competency (along with the major construction companies leading the builds) was that a worker should demonstrate suitable Skills, Knowledge, Attitude, Training and Experience - SKATE. This of course introduces the question of exactly how do you quantify someone's 'Attitude' on a regular (hourly? daily? weekly?) basis. A google search of the subject includes an article in SHP Online which states: The ‘competence’ requirement in CDM 2007 has been removed and replaced in the 2015 regulations with: ‘The necessary skills, knowledge, training and experience’ – the four elements of competence, which some would argue to be nothing more than semantics. However, the real purpose of removing the competence requirement per se was HSE recognised that by explicitly supporting schemes such as CSCS it does not in itself necessarily lead to a significant improvement in standards. Indeed, other contractor registration and procurement schemes have become something of a ‘cash cow’ adding unnecessary cost and bureaucracy with very little benefit in terms of managing health and safety and contractors" So this begs the question of whether 'competency' is now an empty vessel unless an individual demonstrates his SKTE etc in a practical test, before each and every employment?
|
1 user thanked Oxford for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
>So this begs the question of whether 'competency' is now an empty vessel unless an individual demonstrates his SKTE etc in a practical test, before each and every employment? Not really as it’s a valid criteria for lots of other schemes such as Railways Sentinel scheme where you have to resit your competencies every 2 years and pass a fairly stringent exam and in some cases a mid term assessment by an approved 3rd party observing you carrying out your duties and marking you accordingly. Also as many people have already pointed out CSCS cards are not a practical skills competency tree. For CPCS cards such as Blue Competent Operator Card, these should be viewed in conjunction with their log book which will have their previous site managers details so you can ring them up and talk to their previous employers. (No valid log book entries=no job on our sites) As for cutting corners/you get what you pay for in my experience. (most of the time :-) )
|
1 user thanked jmaclaughlin for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Stern, My qualifications are the documents that prove my competence endorsed by the awarding body. You are right that the CSCS card displays whatever qualifications you desire to be shown on the card and is therefore a convenient way of displaying your qualifications, however it is not the document that endorses your qualification. The 1% as you put it is a multiple choice test 100% on H&S, fail this 1% and you don't receive a card yet you still are deemed competent by your awarding body i.e. City and Guilds. So in this instance when you fail the test you cannot have a 'convenient card' to show your competence pass the multiple choice test and you have the convenient card. So a CSCS card does show you have successfully passed a basic H&S multiple choice test.
I can walk on site and pull out my indentures and my City and Guilds qualifications and prove my competence as a competent tradesman, however with no CSCS card I cannot access site as it is deemed I would not be able to prove I have the basic H&S knowledge to access site.A successful pass of the CSCS test confirms knowledge of basic H&S.
One final point I have a NEBOSH Diploma but choose not to display it on my card and the CSCS scheme are unaware of it, sites are unaware of it because I choose not to display it, but this doesn't mean I am not qualified at level 6 in H&S, and my qualifications can prove that.
|
1 user thanked KEITH ROWSON for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
With regard to the OP's observations ont he Crane Industry. I have had very little involvement in such things but a few years back worked on a site where a crane had to be be brought in to perform a reasonably complicated operation lifting a large instrument through an upper storey window in a cradle onto a sort of rail system. When I requested a Risk Assessment, Method Statement & maybe lifting plan from the company I was told that 'if I wanted all the H&S stuff the price would go up quite a bit' ........ I was overruled and the job went ahead without one. Fortunately nothing went amiss but the crane driver endeavoured to spend the vast majority of his time positioned unnecessarily directly below the load. I was rather glad when it was all over!
|
1 user thanked ttxela for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Was on Site yesterday and a Bricklayer turned up to start, his CSCS card had run out and was due to take a new CSCS test on Monday. He brought in his expired card which showed he was a Bricklayer on the reverse, however he was turned away and told to come back when he passes his test. Proof CSCS cards are a licence to access site.
|
1 user thanked KEITH ROWSON for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Thankfully the CSCS cards regarding labourers are on their way out. These were open to misuse with no qualifications required. This made a mockery of the big sites with big signs saying no card no work. It meant unskilled labour could get onto site with this card and work at anything. Now this has been found out it is stopping.
Regarding the initial post from Kim the HSE can do nothing to help in the crane industry as there are not enough inspectors qualified to help. Moving on to the other query regarding Operatives carrying out 2 or 3 jobs completely right if again this is monitored and carried out correctly.Danger area here is a Pedestrian Crane Operator being a Lift Supervisor,Slinger and Crane operator. Yes it happens . Here is the person slinging a load then fighting his way across site climbing stairs to unsling. All this time with a remote control for the crane in his hand. Not an accident waiting to happen it happens regularly. The Best practice guides and regulations are there it is up to us collectively to ensure what happens on the site safely. Kim forget asking on Lever Pullers they are a bunch of wind up merchants who know all the answers that will cause amusement to others.
I feel sorry for the other poster whose company allowed a CPA hire when it was obviously a Contract Lift as they were responsible if anything had gone wrong. First thing would have been why did you allow someone to go under a suspended load. Kim you are right things need to change but it is up to everyone involved from Operators to Site Managers to ensure that everyone does there job properly and all rules and regulations are complied with. Even then things will go wrong as there is always a human elemant to contend with..
|
1 user thanked alexmccreadie13 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Whilst I really enjoyed reading the replies and wholehearedly agree with all of you, this was 'my experience' of what I've seen. The actual question was at the bottom of the block of text that was describing in a preamble where we are now.
In general I agree with 'No card no work', but that doesn't guarantee to make it safer when some emplowers expect a safety critical job such as a Pedestrian Crane to operate with only one person doing three or four workers jobs.
How can the workforce (the people who use the various card schemes) actually change the system or is this a purely Governmental task, in which case how do we get something done?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: KEITH ROWSON Was on Site yesterday and a Bricklayer turned up to start, his CSCS card had run out and was due to take a new CSCS test on Monday. He brought in his expired card which showed he was a Bricklayer on the reverse, however he was turned away and told to come back when he passes his test. Proof CSCS cards are a licence to access site.
You're forgetting that all knowledge and skills are lost when a card expires. I'm in a similar boat, I have a yellow card as a visitor, I go to site to see our engrs who are fitting the aircon/heating systems. I'm not trained or qualified in this trade, although I have a C&G in carpentry from the late 80's, CSCS do not know about it. So the yellow visitors card is now defunct, or will be when mine expires in 2023 I think. I now need to gain the white card as a profesionaly qualified person. Or that is my understanding of it. I now need to sit the managers H&S test which then means I have to learn CDM. Where it has no bearing on the work that I'm conducting. I find this a bit frustrating that I have to learn a whole subject which will allow me access to site for 30-45 mins a month. Now tell me it's not a money making scheme
|
1 user thanked Mark-W for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
It is a money making scheme Mark, the industry is experiencing shortages in skilled and experienced people,and they refuse access to site to these vitally important people. A common sense solution to the problem that is being put in your way is.
The Principal contractor to provide a brief induction highlighting any issue of concern prior to accessing the place of your visit. Inform you of any RAMS. And then allow you access for this short visit. Make H&S simple and use common sense the CITB and the CSCS card are restricting people from site who would otherwise enhance the H&S of its contractors and the site they work on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Kim In answer to your question. The CSCS card is not a legislative requirement it is a condition that the
Principal Contractor applies to those accessing their site. Therefore it is not for the government to change as they have not implemented it. The only people who can change it are the Principal Contractors by changing their site rules on accessing their sites.
Principal Contractors and indeed Sub Contractors need to address their problem themselves or else the amount of skilled and experienced people being denied access because they don't hold a CSCS card will further delay completion times as labour becomes a premium.
The duty to manage H&S in the Construction Phase is written down in legislation in the CDM Regulation 2015 and that duty to manage is enshrined in Regulation 13 of the aforementioned Regulations. It doesn't mention CSCS Cards at all, but it is explicit in part four (a) of Regulation 13 that a suitable site inductionis is required. Surely this is the time that the Principal Contractor can inform its workforce of the suitable and I would argue appropriate control measures in place to manage Risk, and if further toolbox talks are required so be it.
The workforce cannot change the Principal Contractors rules to access site, however, if as is happening skilled and experienced people are denied access to site then the PrincipalContractor changes its stance or they will experience more failure to complete on time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Long overdue a revolution - 100% carded is not 100% safe - there will always be exceptions and I contest that doing a site audit on behalf of my employer is not part of the construction therefore I do not require a replacement for my now lapsed (and diminishing validity) visitor card.
To those principals who follow the 100% carded mantra - don't then be seen as hypocrites when you let the local MP, councillor, press team or celebrity builder on site without a card.
|
4 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Long overdue a revolution - 100% carded is not 100% safe - there will always be exceptions and I contest that doing a site audit on behalf of my employer is not part of the construction therefore I do not require a replacement for my now lapsed (and diminishing validity) visitor card.
To those principals who follow the 100% carded mantra - don't then be seen as hypocrites when you let the local MP, councillor, press team or celebrity builder on site without a card.
|
4 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
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.