Welcome! Login | Register

Message Board - Health & Safety: Pesticide Qualifications /Grandfather rights

Next Unread Thread
 
garyrk
Posted 6 Feb 2007
No Avatar
Posts: 7

I am in the situation of having a contractor possibly applying pesticide at a commercial site who has no PA1/PA6 qualification.

He states he has granfather rights as he was born before a certain date and therefore does not need it. He states he is qualified by experience.

Having checked there seems to be truth in this, but understand this \'quirk\' is to soon to be revoked.

I would appreciate any comments\guidance on this...

My view is why wouldn\'t you have PA1/PA6 qualifications whatever - surely it shows you have invested effort in staying abreast of current best pratice and technology ?

My other thought is what would their Public Liability insurers say ? They are usually strict on the insured having correct/verfied qualifications....
0
QUOTE REPLY

 
ticky21
Posted 6 Feb 2007
2010 0417HALTON0001
Posts: 1808

Ticky supports British farmers...!!

garyrk...he is spinning you a big ole yarn....you have to be certificated to spray on somebody elses land ...period....the grey area is that only the land owner can spray on his own land, BUT i work for a few farmers in our area, and i dont know of one that uses this get out clause, they are all holders of the relevant PA certs....and also your contractor would not have a valid public liability insurance without showing proof of training and certs....i had to....my advise would be use a reputable spray contractor....ie Complete Weed Control.....one phone call no aggro..easy peasy....
0
QUOTE REPLY

 
Edd Smith
Posted 6 Feb 2007
No Avatar
Posts: 41

bigg4bigc

If I were the estate manager at a commercial site where a contractor was employed to do pesticide application as part of routine maintenance tasks, no matter if the 'person' claims to have grandfather rights I would insist on all persons applying pesticides be qualified to at least PA1 and PA6.

If he is so confident of his ability and qualification through experience ask him to supply you with a copy of his spraying records for each application of pesticide to date, this is a legal requirement and he is obligated to show you or give you a copy. This should not be a problem for him as legally spray records should be kept for (i believe) 40 years, but if not that long it is a rediculously long time.

I'm sure this will spark a debate on pesticide use and who should be allowed. If it were me I would also check with the company that supplies my insurances, me being who ever it is you work for.
0
QUOTE REPLY

 
jlawrence
Posted 6 Feb 2007
No Avatar
Posts: 4335

Of course there's no bounce, bend your back and put some bloody effort in.

garyrk. As far as I can tell Ticky is perfectly correct.
In order to spray on someone elses land you need to hold the relevant certs - period.
0
QUOTE REPLY

 
...
Posted 6 Feb 2007
Avatar: Image15.png
Posts: 1908

Definately with Ticky on this, prove your competence with Pa1,Pa2+Pa6, if it is how you earn your living, surely it is a small investment.
I hold "Grandfather rights" but have been qualified for 19 years and have been on update courses. Do grandfather rights teach you about LERAP. (is it LERAP?, its so long since I sprayed I forget!!!! - Point proved?)

Regards

Steve
0
QUOTE REPLY

 
mario
Posted 6 Feb 2007
Saltire.gif
Posts: 1977

I know no boundaries.

I only spray at my own establishment and like Steve, have been qualified since 1997 although holding "Grandfather Rights".

By holding the appropriate certificates I would like to think that if there were to be a mishap, that I could prove a degree of competency.

Surely it's all about minimising the risk.
0
QUOTE REPLY

 
garyrk
Posted 6 Feb 2007
No Avatar
Posts: 7

Thanks for all that feedback.

You have confirmed my gut feelings by some solid facts and experience and agree it is a small investment to gain the right certificates. I intend to raise these points, especially the Liability. issue should a mishap occur.
0
QUOTE REPLY

 
chrismitchell
Posted 7 Feb 2007
IMG 3321
Posts: 1402

Green is not necessarily beautiful.

It's like everything else. You have to show you have been properly trained to undertake a task. If the guy can show he was trained to apply pesticides by attending the appropriate courses that would be fine. There is no legal requirement to have pa1 and pa6. Just a requirement you have been properly trained to apply pesticides. The obvious thing to do is get the certification but it is not mandatory. If that were the case it would not be possible to purchase pesticides without showing a certificate.

0
QUOTE REPLY

 
garyrk
Posted 7 Feb 2007
No Avatar
Posts: 7

Chris, an interetsting response.
I have spent ages reading the new Jan 2006 Code_of_Practice_for_using_Plant_Protection_Products fro the PSD (Gov Agency). They leave you in NO doubt that a certificate of competency is required (you follow thru a flow chart to detertmine what is needed for your situation)
In addition our local pesticide depot (who follow the BASIS code of practice ) DOES require to see your PA1/PA6

My concern is whether someone in that position is legally insured to work on a commercial site. Liability is every thing now....

And why would you NOT be certificated ?
0
QUOTE REPLY

 
chrismitchell
Posted 7 Feb 2007
IMG 3321
Posts: 1402

Green is not necessarily beautiful.

Agree with you garyrk. Everybody using pesticides should have a certificate. It would cut out all the grey areas. However by law you do not have to have one as long as you can prove you have been properly trained. I like the idea of your supplier asking to see a certificate before suppling but that is his choice and again not a legal requirement.

Chris
0
QUOTE REPLY

 
overstone
Posted 7 Feb 2007
No Avatar
Posts: 161

The reason people are spraying without certificates is the price of the course £520.00 +vat if one is working on a cricket pitch and the square requires worm. treating once a season it is a lot of money for a village club to pay out.,
perhaps the Goverment, ECB, Football foundation etc. should heavily subsidize the courses
0
QUOTE REPLY

 
garyrk
Posted 7 Feb 2007
No Avatar
Posts: 7

Hi Chris,

can I come back to one of your points ?

Why do you believe you do not need a certifcate to spray pesticides commercially (ie not on your own land) ?

Is it an historical view point ?

If so, I would be interested in your views after reading the new statuary code of practice mentioned above ...

Also, try this URL http://www.pesticides.gov.uk/safe_use.asp?id=626.

The key here is the impact of the simple word 'or' !! look and see !

As to costs, they seem expensive down here in the south it seems to be around £350ish, with training council grants of up to £200 pp off of this price for companies with less than 200 staff !!!!

I will check with our liabilitty insurers for a 'what-if..."

Thanks everyone
0
QUOTE REPLY

 
chrismitchell
Posted 7 Feb 2007
IMG 3321
Posts: 1402

Green is not necessarily beautiful.

garyrk, one of my staff undertook the pesticide training course but because of personal problems was unable to take the test at the end. He was awarded a certificate of attendance but not pa1 and pa6. This according to our HS adviser and insurers is perfectly adequate.


Overstone, you make a very valid point about the cost of certification. The government demands we are all trained to do everthing probably including making the tea. But it offers no financial help and the complete lack of information and grey areas as to what is required. Nobody ever checks up on these things. It is only when there is an accident or worse that the authorities suddenly wake up and tell you you have been doing it wrong for the last 20 years and it is all your fault.

0
QUOTE REPLY

This Message is read only, you may not post a reply at this time