NASC-Good,Bad or just plain Ugly? (6 Viewers)

joebag

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2011
Messages
1,721
Reaction score
0
Location
Northwest England
Must admit after talking to a few nasc members on here and them being normalish am i wrong in thinking they are worse than malaria,better than Diana or a mix of both say simon cowell :D
 
I think it depends Joe.

Personally I have worked for companies who were members of the NASC and I can tell you that NASC rules go out of the window when it suits.

I am all for various industries having trade associations etc but the NASC tries to appear to have a lot more power and a lot more sway than it actually does.

We've had posts on here recently where the NASC have issued press releases about NASC member companies erecting more than 75% of the scaffold erected in the country. Obviously this does seem to be a little exaggeration of the truth. If it is true, where is the research? Where is the proof?

I don't doubt that the NASC has done a fair bit for the scaffolding industry in its time but I also think it has laid claim to a lot more than it has actually done.
 
I hope I fall into the "normallish" category Joe.:laugh:
 
I think it depends Joe.

Personally I have worked for companies who were members of the NASC and I can tell you that NASC rules go out of the window when it suits.

I am all for various industries having trade associations etc but the NASC tries to appear to have a lot more power and a lot more sway than it actually does.

We've had posts on here recently where the NASC have issued press releases about NASC member companies erecting more than 75% of the scaffold erected in the country. Obviously this does seem to be a little exaggeration of the truth. If it is true, where is the research? Where is the proof?

I don't doubt that the NASC has done a fair bit for the scaffolding industry in its time but I also think it has laid claim to a lot more than it has actually done.

that statment about the nacs member erecting 75% ,oght be true if you look at companies tax bills;) if you knwo what i mean ad say a good 30% of jobs are the of the crispy cash variety lol
 
NASC is run by people who are looking for "benefits" for themselves and their member companies and not the individual scaffolders.

This was clearly shown through their stance with the Jordan safety clamp which they did everything in their power to restrict its introdution in the industry because it would cost their members money to provide safety for the scaffolders which was quite clearly unacceptable to them.
 
As I have said before, your Industry body should help the core of the industry grow!!

At present it only helps firms with money!!

The SCCR want to chnage this but needs support.

Grow some balls!!!! :eek:


Contact us at sccr@sky.com
 
NASC is run by people who are looking for "benefits" for themselves and their member companies and not the individual scaffolders.

This was clearly shown through their stance with the Jordan safety clamp which they did everything in their power to restrict its introdution in the industry because it would cost their members money to provide safety for the scaffolders which was quite clearly unacceptable to them.

How did the NASC restrict the introduction of the Jordan Clamp?
 
How did the NASC restrict the introduction of the Jordan Clamp?
They had the opportunity to include the clamp in SG4:00 12 years ago and eliminate the need for the scaffolders to clip on at foot level but that would have cost the companies money !!!!!!! Unfortunately as I said before the actions taken by the NASC in my opinion meant that the NASC member companies did not think the scaffolders worthy enough to spend the money on this level of safety. Quite simply Clamp = cost clip on at foot level = no cost you work it out ??

---------- Post added at 03:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:25 PM ----------

They had the opportunity to include the clamp in SG4:00 12 years ago and eliminate the need for the scaffolders to clip on at foot level but that would have cost the companies money !!!!!!! Unfortunately as I said before the actions taken by the NASC in my opinion meant that the NASC member companies did not think the scaffolders worthy enough to spend the money on this level of safety. Quite simply Clamp = cost clip on at foot level = no cost you work it out ??
 
They had the opportunity to include the clamp in SG4:00 12 years ago and eliminate the need for the scaffolders to clip on at foot level but that would have cost the companies money !!!!!!! Unfortunately as I said before the actions taken by the NASC in my opinion meant that the NASC member companies did not think the scaffolders worthy enough to spend the money on this level of safety. Quite simply Clamp = cost clip on at foot level = no cost you work it out ??

---------- Post added at 03:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:25 PM ----------

They had the opportunity to include the clamp in SG4:00 12 years ago and eliminate the need for the scaffolders to clip on at foot level but that would have cost the companies money !!!!!!! Unfortunately as I said before the actions taken by the NASC in my opinion meant that the NASC member companies did not think the scaffolders worthy enough to spend the money on this level of safety. Quite simply Clamp = cost clip on at foot level = no cost you work it out ??

More nonsense from the fantasy land brigade.

I'm sure a few jordan clamps at a couple of quid a pop would be a lot more preferable from a commercial point-of-view than employing an advanced guardrail system and/or a host of safety steps at £60 a throw.

Fact is that the working at height regulations require that advanced collective fall protection is installed at the first opportunity - which is something that the jordan clamp does not satisfy.

If the need to clip on ahead of installing a guardrail is required, on a truss-out for example, then a wrappa sling is far more efficient to achieve a anchor point above head level, and will arrest a fall whilst sliding the sling up a standard - unlike the jordan clamp...
 
Pip you're getting more like Victor Meldrew each day.
The Spanset Wrappa is indeed a fine piece of kit but so are the Jordan Clamps. £13 for a wrappa with a limited life makes the Jordans look cheap.
 
Pip you're getting more like Victor Meldrew each day.
The Spanset Wrappa is indeed a fine piece of kit but so are the Jordan Clamps. £13 for a wrappa with a limited life makes the Jordans look cheap.

So what's the problem then?
 
You tell me.

I think the fact that my questions are usually followed by deafening silence about sums it up.

Either that, or they are tip-toed and skirted around with an unrelated rant or sarscastic one-liner...
 
Top Bottom