Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Are training levels and London scaffold collapes linked????

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    135
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 64 Times in 33 Posts

    Default Are training levels and London scaffold collapes linked????

    The recent scaffold collapses in London show there is either a massive problem in the quality of workmanship in our industry or all the information provided in relation to tying in scaffolds is seriously wrong.

    I used to work at a south London training center nr Dartford. But I will not name it !!! I was suspended for refusing to sign off a lad on a part two course that could not base out a small tower by my management. This was after his boss complained I singled him out. At an inquest that followed I was found to have been working within my guidelines and reinstated, but I left their employment soon after as I was discussed at the things I saw being done and the people that were signed off. I am not saying the individual in question was responsible for any of the recent events but I have to think that the ethics of the training center in question are responsible for much of the low standards that are evident all around us in London.
    The standards of training must be raised and the current 100% pass rate must show there is something wrong with our training industry. I do not want to see anyone fail a test, but if a person is not capable of genuinely passing an assessment they should not be given a ticket that states there are a competent person either. I am not aware of any other industry where people expect to pass no mater how poor their level of ability is.

    I think it would be a good idea if the assessments were carried out by a different person to the training by an assessor dedicated to assessments, if this showed a 100% pass rate this would only leave one line if enquiry to follow as is the case at driving centers . And the pass fail must be clear in black and white. Currently there is too much room for appeal.

    I wonder how many people reading this have seen trainees pass the assessments that should not have been signed off.??????

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

    Default

    CITB instructors are just failed scaffolders. The ones at Erith have always been clueless.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    35
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Default

    One word, LOL.

    All the new generation of scaffolders are clueless and asking stupid questions on this website, don't you teach them at course how to base out and tie scaffolds to certain structures? Or follow simple tie patterns, if a tie pattern can't be created due to you don't build that job on 'courses' do you teach them the safest methods to look for the best ways to tie scaffolds in, when there is nothing around you. We don't all build scaffolds on flat ground, 250/300 from a brick wall. Theres more to life.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to 91KH For This Useful Post:

    phil181 (21st March 2019)

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    35
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Default

    Responsible? YOU as a trainer should be compent enough to over watch any scaffold job, read any drawing, but yet the drawings at course are so simple, yet the teachers struggle to read them, on our course, the other group decided to do the hanger with the trepze method, 5ft tube connecting both droppers together and putting 3m planks on them to build their lift safely.. the tutor said it was a good build and safe to purpose, yet his boss made the group put check fittings under the trepze tubes.

    Our group did the ol' school down onto a 2ft butt, no better feeling.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to 91KH For This Useful Post:

    phil181 (21st March 2019)

  7. #5
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    cumbria
    Posts
    1,012
    Thanks
    355
    Thanked 329 Times in 240 Posts

    Default

    There is one better feeling, and thatÂ’s getting out of the scaffold game as itÂ’s about fecked now like!

  8. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    35
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Default

    Agreed lol, system scaffolders think they know it all, Layhet is slowly taking over.

  9. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    283
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 30 Times in 20 Posts

    Default

    for a long time i have asked the same questions over and over again ...when the HSE is undertaking investigations in the accidents - everything should be looked at including the training that was given, i still hear that even though the CISRS have tried to implement a sstandardized trainign scheme - it appears that some centers do it a little different to others - does this reflect on the competency passing the courses probably not - but the industry decided to accept only CISRS as industry standard backed by the HSE and CSCS - does that this mean it shouldnt be taken into account when investigating ???? for me everything should be taken into account but remember the CISRS is only a training scheme and not a qualification - the competency based qualification is the nvq.

    you can take it for granted that all the courses were delivered the same - if you get one rogue instructor then that will not be good for any training given

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?