Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 21 to 26 of 26

Thread: NASC-Good,Bad or just plain Ugly?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    A4109
    Posts
    8,335
    Thanks
    5,716
    Thanked 3,775 Times in 2,328 Posts

    Default

    Sarcastic one liners? Whatever next?
    .

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,971
    Thanks
    1,038
    Thanked 1,717 Times in 1,075 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SWIFTY View Post
    Sarcastic one liners? Whatever next?
    Milky Way bars are made of unicorn tumors?
    Cientos aplicados, seis fue elegido!!!

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    A4109
    Posts
    8,335
    Thanks
    5,716
    Thanked 3,775 Times in 2,328 Posts

    Default

    No that's Curly wurlys
    .

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    CHORLEY
    Posts
    4,579
    Thanks
    4,533
    Thanked 2,050 Times in 1,415 Posts

    Default

    was look wha a wrappa was lol baracuda, and found this == Anchor == SpanSet =====================

    the capcha looks the bees kness perfreck for the scaff
    GOD MADE SCAFFOLDERS SO BRIKIES COULD HAVE HEROES

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    19
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    NASC were aware of the clamp in 2000 but sat on it until 2005 until the introduction of working at height regs and SG4:05. The SG4:00 committee said they were not prepared to put one product to their members "why" and set about looking for alternatives wrappa, barracuda etc.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,971
    Thanks
    1,038
    Thanked 1,717 Times in 1,075 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jordan View Post
    NASC were aware of the clamp in 2000 but sat on it until 2005 until the introduction of working at height regs and SG4:05. The SG4:00 committee said they were not prepared to put one product to their members "why" and set about looking for alternatives wrappa, barracuda etc.
    That pretty much contradicts what you said in your earlier post :- 'NASC member companies did not think the scaffolders worthy enough to spend the money on this level of safety'


    Why would any trade orginisation force their members to use any one particular peice of equipment when there are various alternatives, some of them a far superior product - albeit more expensive...
    Last edited by phil181; 21st August 2012 at 12:11 PM.
    Cientos aplicados, seis fue elegido!!!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

New To Site? Need Help?