Sorry I know this has been covered so many times but memory goes with age. How long does the PA1 & PA6A certificate last? Did mine in 1997, there is no expiry date on it but someone told me they only last 4 years?
Many thanks.
to my knowledge Vic there is no expiry date ( i done mine in 96) but , a refresher course probably wouldnt go amiss.
I think this would need to be bespoke training, as i dont think there is such an "off the shelf course "
i did speak to a rep last year about it but cost was an issue, so will be looking at it again this summer.
I am of the same opinion Vic. Once test done thats it i believe, but agree with Niel, a refresher would be very handy.
Perhaps Pitchcare could put on a refresher, somewhere we could all get to. What a day out that could be.
2 Jan 2010 by Mal
I concur with you Neil, I for one have in the past arranged refresher courses for employees and this is a good way to keep up to date with events though as you say Neil there is no bespoke course as such and you will generally be asked what it is that you would like covered in the refresher course.
I would ask for:
overview of current legislation and recent changes likely future changes etc.
Label interpretation
Calibration techniques/refresher
Basic sprayer mainteance which could also include recent advances in nozzle technology & nozzle selection.
Geography is everywhere
Thanks guys, will be glad to tell my H&S advisor that she is wrong.
Bath, 'What a day out that would be'.
There has been numerous posts about tightening purse strings, laying off staff and here we are talking about refresher courses.... that at the end of the day come down to common sense management.
Come on guy's....
- What is there to refresh about calibration?
- Personal walking speed operating a knapsack?
- Output per hectare of a motorised sprayer?
Well sorry..... These should be carried out on a regular basis to ensure accurate and safe application. The same as basic sprayer maintenance should be carried out on a regular basis.
Legislation and label interpretation is something we should keep up to speed with and Vic, maybe that is what your H&S advisor was concerned about. If I direct my spray technician to spray a chemical, as his manager, I would make sure he keeps up to speed and is a safe operator, because at the end of the day, I would be responsible for his actions!
My first post of the year and here I go again ....... " Grumpy Old Man".
KB
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under who’s shade you do not expect to sit.
Unfortunatley Ken common sense is not something the HSE recognise.
4 Jan 2010 by vid
Ken - you are so right. I have neither the time or the money to spend on all these courses - where they have a definite benefit for my staff - fair enough, but what is there to refresh that cant be promulgated in the media, or locally through the councils. I suspect it keeps a lot of people 'gainfully' employed!
It is definitely the remit of people who have nice educational budgets sewn in to their workplace contracts and understanding employers who can spare them the time - oh the luxury!!
Vid - even more grumpy than usual!!
Hi Neil, It is not a legal requirement to take refresher courses, if there are such courses out there?
Is it not us managers who are held responsible and therefore who should maintain common sense practices in the work-place!
KB
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under who’s shade you do not expect to sit.
Vic...... Oh the typing you have caused this Christmas... I hope you have good Public Liaibility cover for the RSAs that are sure to occur...
What is a licence/certificate/ticket... Proof of Competance of a person to undertake a particular process or operate a certain machine.
What should they do... Ensure that any job is undertaken by experienced trained persons in a safe environmentally sound manner and reduce accidents, cowboys, misuse.
What does the whole Competance 'debacle' actually do... Create lots of income for the H & S industry, cover the backsides of Employers, Consultants, Insurers.
Increase massively the expense and paperwork involved in even the most simple operation.
Fill up your wallet with bits of plastic and drawer with bits of paper.
Allow people who really shouldnt be allowed out alone with even a blunt instrument allowed to operate all sorts of things after a few hours sat infront of a DVD and having ticked a few boxes next to some badly drawn pictures...
Not actually reduce the accidents or misuse that occurs by cowboys or muppets anyway....
Now if you feel that you are suddenly after all these years incompetant to do the job then you need refresher.... and why on earth hasn't the H & S Industry seen the need for this and legislated accordingly...
If however you purchase a new sprayer or start to use a new product shouldn't appropriate product use/information/training be provided by the Supplier, another little bit of paper provided for your full drawer and 'hey presto' suddenly you are fully competant again.....
Think of all those lives you are saving...
Plastic.... it's The End I tell you... THE END!!!!
I totally agree Ken, but taking a "refresher" course satisfies the HSE so much more than me (or anyone else) trying to explain what is carried out and how.
I once had an inspection by the HSE and one of the representatives of the HSE was insistent that to operate a 3 point linkage on a tractor the operator would need a fork lift license, despite my reassurance that it was not neccessary they still went ahead and investigated the matter with their agriculture section.
The same HSE inspector also stopped us using our composter for 3 months ( until we contacted the manufacturer and they installed one for us) , in their view the working platform was too small and with no back bar it presented a HSE risk, when they asked what would stop someone falling from it when " common sense tells you not to step back" they didnt find this as a suitable control method.
sorry for my tone when it comes to HSE, but i was also of the opinion that common sense was all that is needed, now having had to deal with their beurocracy on a couple of occassions ( the best one i have isnt for an open forum) i find "get staff certificiated" is the easiest solution, yes it costs, but if the club wont pay for training then at least you can turn round and tell the HSE this.
Hi again Barry,
So glad to keep your grey matter ticking over. I am most definitely not in favour of endless training courses, that is why I left cricket coaching behind. Unfortunately however, I have a H&S lady badgering me constantly for various info, which I don't often have the answers to. Will be glad when the inspection is over and once again I can stand on the top of the tractor to cut my hedges.
Neil, where do you draw the line with training though. By the time they're done I'll need a certificate to scratch my a4se and itch my balls.
Of course there's no bounce, bend your back and put some bloody effort in.
5 Jan 2010 by chrismitchell Last edited 5 Jan 2010
Spot on Ken. When I read the original post I thought, what is there to refresh. The basics are still the same. Just would be more wasted time and money. Remember no where does the law state that you need Pa1 Pa2 and Pa6 to use pestisides. It merely says you must have received proper training and be competent.
Remember Vic, Barry's description of a person not fit for purpose that can be regarded as fit for purpose after 2 hours in front of a DVD and answering a couple of questions is very apt. It also applies to some HSE inspectors who have absolutely no idea of how a golf course works and have become an inspector after very little training. Just don't get me on the subject. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
Chris
You will never see a statue in honour of a committee.
The trouble is Jon, one has to protect ones butt so it can continue to be scratched!!
A certificate is no measure of an operators compotence, but it is however a measure of the organsiations training policy, which more often than not that is what the HSE is looking for.
5 Jan 2010 by vid
So basically Neil so long as the paperwork is ok then the business and its employees must be safe.
I think thats what most of us here most dislike about the HSE - the practical application of common sense assisted by good managers is irrelevant in their eyes - the only way to keep someone safe as far as they are concerned is to send them on a course where for the most part you could sleep through the whole thing and still get a certificate!!
HSE....... sounds like another one of them quango's to me.
Neil, maybe if manager's kept a record to show they were doing their job propery i.e. as part of their annual risk assessment or staff appaisals, that is or should be sufficient proof to any quango organisation.
I work for a large international organisation that talks big about training, but at the end of the day it is impossible to get the approval of funds to send people on training courses. so when you speak of refresher courses that are not required, what chance is there of getting approval.
Besides, some of us have more important things to spend money on.
KB
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under who’s shade you do not expect to sit.
Good to see so many highly qualified applications for GOGGA membership being displayed by so many candidates.
Agreed that H & S inspections and requirements are time consuming, irritating and intrusive. Biggest problem is that they are now firmly embedded and part of the furniture just as much as training and development even though the respective benefits are massively different.
When it comes to telling chris how to manage his golf course, Neil how to maintain his sports fields and other grounds, vid how to run his sportsturf contracting business, Ken how to remain sustainable or Vic how to trim his hedges the requirements of each individual are immeasurably different, but H & S treat them all in the same way- that is galling. Working out a method statement for jl's itchy/scratchy is even more demanding but you can bet your life it'll be necessary before too long.
The fact remains however that we all have to learn to live with it as it won't be going away any time soon.
The light at the end of the tunnel is not a train
A mixed group of us sat in the pub one evening and started a risk assessment on having sex. The end result was about ten pages long and possibly the best contracepive ever invented. Still it would help ease global warming as the birth rate would drop dramaticaly. By the time you had gone through the risk assessment your partner would be snoring their head off!
Chris
You will never see a statue in honour of a committee.
Chris, were you snowed in?.... ROFL...
Plastic.... it's The End I tell you... THE END!!!!
Vid, in the HSE eyes then yes, if the paper work is in order they are happy, irrelevant of what may be going on behind the scenes - they are only interested in investigating accidents and box ticking, how the work is carried out is of no concern to them - until, god forbid, their is an accident, then they will tell you what and how you should be doing things, and with a big fat fine to pay as well.
Ken, i have training records, staff appraisals and risk assessments all detailing the staffs compotence / safety in the use of machinery, would the HSE accept this ???? i have no idea, but based on my previous experience with them i doubt it very much.
5 Jan 2010 by vid Last edited 5 Jan 2010
Hi Neil, as I have said on another thread I have a small team and very minimal office staff - virtually everything has to be done by me. I am also an integral part of the installation team. Admin now takes up so much of my time that I am having to reduce the amount of time on site and increase the amount of time in the office, hence the prime motivator for H&S is no longer on site. However at least I will be able to write method statements and risk assessments for the jobs instead. That way I will have the 'satisfaction' of the signature of one of my staff on a piece of paper. Imagine the sighs of relief from everyone now that safety is improved so dramatically by this signature - I can now sleep easy!!! ....... what a load of boll*cks.
Loamy do I qualify as a member yet!!
Vid you're an absolute shoo in, as long as Chairman Sumo sees it in the same light as the rest of us! Barry however may have to wait a while longer as he rofl far too frequently.
The light at the end of the tunnel is not a train
5 Jan 2010 by vid
Oh and by the way I will have to put up my prices by 10% to enable me to bring in more staff - no increase in income for me, just more office work and even less time on site. This is a never ending loop where more bureaucracy leads to more bureaucracy and ends up with high prices, little work achieved for the money and actually reduced standards because no-one is allowed to think for themselves. If you want an example just look at the NHS, schools, councils - none of whom are able to do anything without a mountain of statements, certificates and assessments. It is all completely out of hand, and it is here that the whole country should be campaigning very strongly. I am sick to death of being molly coddled by the state, for wealth creation there has to be an element of risk, there has to be a limit to which safety can be taken whilst still operating profitably. There is no way we as a country can continue down this route where wealth creation is supressed and bureaucracy promoted. Without income the government is unable to support this massive red tape structure - something has to break somewhere - if its not already breaking!!
Could anyone clarify what chris said in his post some 4hrs ago about it not being a legal requirment to have the pa1s/6 etc i was sure you had to have them as a legal requirment to spray chemicals and not just been competent. Just about to spend £600 on sending two employees on a course if not a legal requirment i wont bother!
http://www.pesticides-safety-training.co.uk/pesticides2.htm
The first line in the introduction would seem to disagree with Chris's statement.
You would need to prove competency and the understood manner of achieving this is to undertake training and then be assessed on what you have learnt. Most people feel that the NPTC Pa1,2+6 modules cover this quite adequately.
Regards
Steve
Don't talk to me about Contractors Wonka, I am one myself......
5 Jan 2010 by Mal
only if you were born before I think its 1962 or is it 1968?however I do know that I fall within the rule (grandad's rule ) that means that I do not have to have a certificate. I looked it up at the time and have I got a certificate - you betya. I figured that if I had the certificate, it was a better argument that in the event of a mishap that the accident could be better argued as just a accident and not incompetance.
Geography is everywhere
5 Jan 2010 by Cranfield Last edited 5 Jan 2010
Please see the following link, http://www.pesticides.gov.uk/uploadedfiles/Web_Assets/PSD/Code_of_Practice_for_using_Plant_Protection_Products_-_Section_2.pdf
Training and certification
2.1 Who must be trained in using pesticides?
By law, everyone who uses pesticides professionally must have received adequate training in using
pesticides safely and be skilled in the job they are carrying out. This applies to:
• users, operators and technicians (including contractors);
• managers;
• employers;
• self-employed people; and
• people who give instruction to others on how to use pesticides.
By law there are certain situations where you will need to have a qualification called a ‘certificate
of competence’. In general, you will need a certificate of competence if you supply, store or use
‘agricultural pesticides’. These are pesticides used:
• in agriculture;
• in horticulture (including horticulture of amenity areas such as parks, streets, sports pitches
and so on);
• in forestry;
• in or near water; and
• as industrial herbicides.
There must be a lot of bad weather around the country.
The "Grandfather clause" I think can be applied to people born before 1969, but you still need to be competent so how do you prove that without being assessed?.
I can train somebody and let him spray under my supervision, but if he screws up then I am in lumber, so whats the point in that.
Get people trained by professional trainers, assessed by professional assessors and remove the vagueness and doubt.
Steve
Don't talk to me about Contractors Wonka, I am one myself......
5 Jan 2010 by Ken Barber Last edited 5 Jan 2010
I am sorry to say that I was born quite a while before 1969 and I would consider myself more than competent.... In fact, I would class myself more competent than most. I trained and oversaw my staff for many years and encouraged them to become qualified. I decided to get qualified 2 years ago, for similar reasons Mal spoke of. Also, because prospective employers generally state this as a necessary qualification when applying for senior positions.
KB
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under who’s shade you do not expect to sit.
5 Jan 2010 by Mike
Ok, cert's of competence may not be for everyone, but let's just picture a few hypothetical scenarios, and before anyone says things like this don't happen, I have actually had first hand experience of all of these scenario's, and had to place my job on the line (twice) to ensure they didn't continue.
Scenario one: You work at a school, not one person on the groundstaff has a spraying qualification, and due to a lack of training, none of them really have any idea what they are doing. One of the groundstaff goes out, under instruction from the HG, who is also unqualified and hides behind grandfather rights, despite not having the fist idea of how to oversee a spraying operation, and has never even heard of coshh, proceeds to spray an area with a product which has been in the shed for the last 15 years that is no longer approved for use. During the spraying, a number of incidents happen i.e. a dog enters the area, a number of children come and play in the area, the sprayer develops a blockage in the nozzle which affects they spray pattern, and during the cleaning of the sprayer, an error in communication leads to one member of staff having pesticide sprayed over their upper body (chest and uncovered face).
I have seen every one of these instances happen first hand, having lost a dog to chemical ingestion a number of years ago, having personally been the person who had pesticide sprayed over me (which isn't very nice I might add), having personally burned off two areas of grass through nozzle blockages, and had to not only quit one job because of neglect of safe practices, but also had to tell an employer that "I will go back down there and drill a big f'ing hole in that damn thing", given that I had been told to go and spray an area 20 minutes before a lesson was due to take place, and when I refused to, was told that I would be sacked. What would be the end result of these instances if the hse had heard of them?
Scenario two: Each member of staff is qualified, but not really competent. The same incidents occur - what is the end result?
Scenario three: Each member of staff are qualified, kept up to date with relevant legislation and best practices. What are the results of the same incidents? I'll answer that one... there aren't any because none of the incidents would have happened in the first place.
That only covers a few instances of the many things that can happen to us in our working environment. At my place of work, i've had a colleague visit the dentist approx ten times last year, with the end result being 9 months worth of pain, several abscecces, a root canal, having a tooth removed, and now a lengthy and costly riddor case - all of this through another's negligence. 3 colleagues had been off with back injuries in the last 4 months - maybe a manual handling course would have stopped these injuries... the list goes on and on. These things can, and should be avoided - imo, there is no excuse. It all starts with simple, responsible management, and all that takes is for people to be conscious of the risks, putting ongoing procedures in place to reduce the risks... and proving it. Sure, you don't have to have everyone trained, but those who aren't must be adequately supervised, or have their duties limited until they are qualified/competent. Let's look at it another way, what happens when you are the only person capable of supervising a subordinate, and you need him/her to carry out a task, but you can't supervise them as you need to be somewhere else, so it ends up that you don't get the job done - after this happens to you a few times, it can shed a different light on what you originally thought was an overpriced course.
Having been in every one of the positions I have mentioned - from having colleagues lose fingers in a scarifier cassette, to having seen a 16 yr old with only months in the job being told to go and spray a cricket square, to nearly losing a finger myself etc - and all through a lack of training. On the flipside of this, following some changes which resulted in me being responsible for a number of staff, not one incident has taken place, and a big part of that is because my staff an I undergo regular and ongoing training. So, if i'm asked would I go back to the days of having no training, and seeing myself and my colleagues enduring one accident after another, I know what I would say...
I'll get off my soapbox now...
5 Jan 2010 by vid
Yours is an extreme case Mike and idiots like your HG or anyone endangering other people should be locked up, However there has to be a limit, it costs far too much to cover yourself every which way - I certainly cant afford it all or dedicate as much time as it says I should, the point where work is still competitive and profitable is now regularly surpassed by overregulation leaving most companies who include the cost to give up the tendering process to those who are more 'relaxed' about regulation and will employ solicitors and accountants to word things to their advantage.
I love what I do and get a buzz from doing a good job, my staff appreciate this and stick with me as well. However most of the time I am exhausted by the red tape, in order that things run smoothly in the week I often work late into the night and work a good proportion of my weekends and I am most certainly not alone. I wish I could earn the same amount and pack up at 5 and not have to think of work again until 8 the following morning - luxury!! However if I am tired and away from the site as so many small company managers have to be these days in order to comply with the paperwork, someone else has to be in charge of H & S, when I'm not there staff have a tendancy to cut corners and take risks, no amount of paperwork courses and signatures seem to stop this - it just doesnt make much sense.
5 Jan 2010 by Mike Last edited 5 Jan 2010
I think yours is an extreme case too, vid. I consider myself fortunate, in that we are now building a structure and introducing up to date systems of work at my place of employment, but I have had to fight tooth and nail for getting on for 8 years now to get things to where they are, and we are now seeing results that many people told me were impossible.
The two guys that I look after and I all got our spraying certs last year. The amazing thing is, we pay more for one bag of grass seed than it cost for the 3 of us to get those certs. I appreciate in a contracting sense, that money could be the deciding factor in whether you get the contract or not. For me, it means overseeding my cricket squares at 30g per m/2, as opposed to 35, and that only for one year. So from my position, keeping in mind the accidents that I have seen in the past, i'll happily miss out on 1 bag of grass seed in exchange for piece of mind.
I also consider myself to have been lucky in a round about way, with having seen all of these incidents, and knowing how they made me feel when I couldn't do a damn thing about them. I keep those memories with me every day, and whenever I ask a subordinate to do a job, I make sure that what I am asking them to do is something that I wouldn't have had any concerns about doing when I was in their position. I have a young apprentice now, and I drill h&s into him to the extent where I don't need to worry about him. He's been with us for just shy of two years now, and last year alone, we had him doing his nvq 2, he has pa 1, 2 and 6, he has the iog winter pitches basic level course, and most importantly, I can trust him to not cut corners when i'm not around. This year, he will have chainsaw certs coming out of his ears if he continues to show maturity and trustworthiness. If we hadn't got him sorted out with this training, he would be undertaking spraying, operating chainsaws, etc and without supervision - to me, the training is worth a huge amount. I also understand that one day he will move on, and as an example, he might end up working for you, and then you end up with a member of staff who won't cut corners when your not around. To me, the problem doesn't necessarily lie with training itself, but maybe the cost of training is something that should be looked at, certainly for smaller firms.
6 Jan 2010 by vid
I dont want to prolong this Mike because I dont disagree with you. Its just the conundrum it throws up - when does it become too much. The politicians would have us believe that a price cannot be put on a human life, that is very hard to put up an opposing argument to. However there is a limit and there is always a human wild card factor - we are not robots and we have a tendancy to do stupid things no matter how well trained. I nearly lost a finger recently doing something really stupid and I am unlikely to repeat it, however I did it unthinkingly even though I regularly preach to others - turn the machine off before working on it!!!
I got away with it as do most people but occasionally somebody gets terribly maimed or even killed.
Systems are good, practical inspections are good, education whether on site by your employer, through research or through training is good. Bureaucracy especially repetitive form filling, unskilled and inexperienced inspection, unnecessary repetitive course taking is bad as it does not improve our awareness and actually costs large amounts of time and money.
Its a difficult one Mike because at the end of the day it comes off your budget not out of your pocket - only then would you appreciate what wasted time is all about, believe me when you cut your family budget because one of your staff has to go on a refresher course where he learns nothing new, it tends to concentrate your mind.
Hi Mike, you tell us in detail how bad your situation was in terms of HSE. But, it all comes down to the person responsible for that team. Your HG was obviously an incompetent individual.
I would like to think that most managers would have all the common sense saftey nets in place i.e. coshh assessments, risk assessments, appraisals, in-house and external training. All these should ensure safe working practices.
The original post was asking whether refresher or re-training were a legal requirement. Well they should not be necessary if the individual is competent and he has a manager who is competent such as yourself.
Like most managers, I lead from the front, I would not give any task to a member of my team that I would not do myself, and I continually monitor their work ethics and standards. I reprimand any person who falls short of my expected standards and praise and encourage people as often as possible.
KB
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under who’s shade you do not expect to sit.
Interesting comments and interesting to see my website quoted (www.pesticides-safety-training.co.uk.)
In summary:
1) By law, everyone who uses pesticides professionally must have received adequate training in using pesticides safely and be skilled in the job they are carrying out.
2) In our industry (away from agriculture) grandfather rights should be ignored and everyone should have a certificate. This follows "Best Practice" because grandfather rights really only apply in agriculture and even farmers need to have received "adequate training".
3) Under the Health and Safety at Work Act, everyone needs to be updated in what they do. I need to be updated as a training provider.
4) The code of practice: 'Pesticides, code of practice for using plant protection products' which can be downloaded from the Chemicals Regulation Directorate website - http://www.pesticides.gov.uk/uploadedfiles/Web_Assets/PSD/Code_of_Practice_for_using_Plant_Protection_Products_-_Section_2.pdf also states: "Even if you have a certificate of competence or evidence of other training, it is important that
you develop your technical knowledge and practical skills in using pesticides. Whether you need a certificate of competence or not, you should make sure that you keep your training up to date and that you know the latest information on how to protect human health, wildlife, other plants and creatures you don’t intend to treat, water and the environment.
You can get evidence of your continuing professional development by being a member of:
• the National Register of Sprayer Operators - http://nroso.nptc.org.uk/
5) The PA1/PA6/PA2 certification at present is for life, but things do change - we offer updating courses around the UK covering various topics, in consultation with the customer. See http://www.pesticides-safety-training.co.uk/refresh.htm.
6 Jan 2010 by Mike Last edited 6 Jan 2010
Ken/Vid - my earlier replies appear to have come across wrong, english was never my strongest subject - my apologies. As you have both probably guessed, this subject hits a raw nerve with me, given the scenarios which I explained earlier. Let me try to clarify my opinion... and i'll even try to keep it brief this time!
I feel terribly sorry for people whom are in a position that is not as privileged as mine, and don't have the means to meet the stringent criteria set out by the government. In cases such as those, it is imperative that the employer at least tries to ensure bad things don't happen - cert's aren't needed for that, just responsible management. Things like what Ken outlines above, internal guidance and training, setting standards for staff etc will do just as much, if not more good in a real world sense than a piece of paper written by someone who never stepped foot outside of a padded room. Even I can't get my staff to where I would like them to be overnight, it will take several years to get to that stage, so in the interim I do everything in my power to make sure nothing bad happens, and I achieve this by on the job guidance, and the odd informal training day where we all get together and just talk things through - some others just turn a blind eye.
For me the problem is two fold. First up is that the government introduce these reg's and insist on businesses meeting their often irrelevant criteria, and they do this fully in the knowledge that many smaller firms are unable to fulfill this criteria, and to make matters worse, they go and fine people and in the most severe cases, shut companies down because they haven't been able to meet this 'impossible' criteria. This is where the likes of the iog and bigga need to pull their fingers out, and lobby the government with a view to making their stringent demands more achievable for all.
The second problem for me relates more specifically to the positions which I have found myself in. Back in the day, my employers couldn't afford to train staff at all, and to an extent still can't so I end up funding my training out of my own pocket. But just because someone can't afford to train staff, it doesn't mean that they show complete disregard for their staff's wellbeing and development - this is where I take people under my wing, and am constantly on at my guys about how important it is that they learn to do things the right way. I'm sure this is why Ken leads from the front, as i'm 1000% certain vid does too. So, my gripe in this regard isn't suggesting that vid, or anyone has no excuse for not sending staff on courses - you do what you can do, it is more aimed at my particular history, where it appeared that a lack of formal training gave a green light to supervisors who are ignorant of their responsibilities, and a lot of good people suffered because of that ignorance. I'm sure that vid is about as responsible as a boss can get, that is clear to see.
I hope this somewhat clears up any misunderstanding as it is not my aim to leave a bitter taste as I am well aware that I do come across strongly in matters like this.. lot of history!
What ever happened to me trying to keep this brief??
Mike
6 Jan 2010 by vid
1 question Ian what makes you better at training my staff than me, with a lifetimes experience, research and training under my belt. I read avidly and update my procedures and safety regularly. That I dont have time to keep records on everything I do and teach to my staff doesnt mean I am up to date. This is the luxury of big organisations, before long the little guys wont be ALLOWED to exist.
I give up I have said enough (BTW Mike carry on mate enjoyed every word!!)
6 Jan 2010 by Mike
Don't encourage me vid... my keyboard isn't up to the job!
Vid,
I have never stated that I am better at training your staff than you????!!!!
I specialise in pesticides training and have done so since the late 1980's.
Vid, Ian is probably deemed much better than you when stood in a court....................
Plastic.... it's The End I tell you... THE END!!!!
7 Jan 2010 by vid
My point exactly, and Ian I wasnt really meaning to get at you, I should have been more objective. My argument is a difficult one - I know I cant introduce the level of training I would require to satisfy the HSE purely because it is impractical and too expensive for a business my size to do so, mind you they know this as well and make a few allowances for the smaller operations. I have to ask how do you ensure everyone is following safe practises. The answer is you cant, much as I hate it the only way to get close is to legislate and introduce compulsory levels of certification/education/training. This means however that good capable managers are more and more superfluous because rather than taking training in hand themselves they spend their time organising courses and spending money. I think we have already gone too far down this line, there are now companies doing onsite training - teaching workforces the obvious and charging good money to do so, when 5 minutes chat with an experienced manager would be as good, or more likely (because it would be relevant to the place of work) better.
In the last visit I received from HSE the inspector was more than happy for me to train staff in the use of equipment. All I have to do is prove that I had received adequate training in it's use myself. I have to have date, time, who trained me and on what piece of equipment written down. I use a spreadsheet for that purpose. I then repeat this prossess with any member of staff I train. The installation process by the dealer was deemed adequate training for the use of new equipment. The inspector himself said that some people were trying to make things far more complicated than they otherwise need to be.
Chris
You will never see a statue in honour of a committee.
Back to Top - Go to Next Unread Message
This Message is closed, you may not post a reply at this time
