ECA and ESC announce major partnership

[Spoon]

The thing is MDJ, I dont trust things like this. The original idea is good, but then when you look at it its all about money. They are hoping that this will really take off and all the other people in other schemes will have to join theirs. Money!!!!
I like Phil D's idea in post 32. There is no other way round this. Even when you look at the electricalsafetyregister.com site it smacks of politics. Why cant it be honest to joe public and state that this site only has 2 scheme providers listed and that that there are other people in different schemes who are competent... Money....

 

[MDJ]

Absolutely, you said what I was thinking but couldn't put into words, this is why there will never be one scheme, money is the deal here, and who wins long term?

 

[Octopus]

In response to Murdoch an answer is posted earlier in the thread.

The ESC has tried in the not too distant past to create one register for the promotion of contractors from many schemes, but some schemes did not want to participate. www.electricalsafetyregister.com was therefore developed for NICEIC, ELECSA and ECA registrants.

The ECA and ESC havebeen working for nearly two years to form a meaningful partnership and jointgovernance over NICEIC and ELECSA. The register is just the first benefit forthose ELECSA and NICEIC contractors, as well as ECA members.

Buried in a heap of other Q & A.

Seriously not impressed. There should be one register ONLY and before you say it won't cost me anything, I bet it will be funded by the ECA, Elecsa and NICEIC so it WILL cost the members.

Fees should be going down to match Stroma!

 

[Guest111]

Mike and Murdoch you are right,while you have to pay a yearly fee to be registered with the gmc if you are a doctor,there is only one register so everyone is on a level playing field.if you look at any other group of professionals they only have one governing body,eg RCVS for vets FRICS for accountants to name only 2,this begs the question if it can be done for everyone else why not us,simple money!At the end of the day the government could turn around and say right as of 1st jan any electrician wanting to work must prove their qualifications and be registered with the national register of electricians.Anyone not registered would not be able to work and it would be illegal for them to charge for any work they do.If people wanted to be a member of any other scheme then that would be up to them,however they must be listed on the national register.Sadly however I only forsee this happening if there is an incident involving an mp,s family and it later turns out that the electrician involved wasn,t really an electrician.

 

[Guest111]

It just seems unfair that Joe Public will search the database and those folks in NAPIT will not come up on it, suggesting to the public that they are in some way less or even not competent.

EXACTLY what i,ve been saying all along!for many years there was only the Ni and then other groups started up,that should have been prevented and ONE national register created,seems theres a lot of us on here can see this so why cant the scheme providers? Simple,they go on about the greater good yes for their wallets,not the poor sods who actually work at the ground level i,e the electricians

- - - Updated - - -

It just seems unfair that Joe Public will search the database and those folks in NAPIT will not come up on it, suggesting to the public that they are in some way less or even not competent.

EXACTLY what i,ve been saying all along!for many years there was only the Ni and then other groups started up,that should have been prevented and ONE national register created,seems theres a lot of us on here can see this so why cant the scheme providers? Simple,they go on about the greater good yes for their wallets,not the poor sods who actually work at the ground level i,e the electricians

 

[MDJ]

Fees should be going down to match Stroma!

No actually the list should be free to sparks who can prove they have the qualifications by showing their certificates obtained whilst training on a credible course at college, then when they notify works a small cost should be incurred for admin costs when they notify building control, why pay hundreds a year to be on a list after a 5 year apprenticship which costs thousands of hard earn pounds, not only that but having several scammers policing us is just making money for them which in reality is not necassary, we are asking a body to confirm we are competant after we have served our time paying for the original apprentiship, a 12 month MOT would be adequate once registration is assured IMO to make sure we are not slipping in standards, but to get on the list and to be able to get the 12 month MOT a 2 week course should not be adequate and further training and experience obtained by the applicant and not assured due to money paid out, 17 days is a total joke regarding part pee and I for one think the whole thing should be removed at once and a proper scheme set up without a dozen scammers fighting for money which shouldn't have to be paid out to skilled time served tradesmen, as mentioned dozens of times before by dozens of sparks money is what part pee is all about. now as to the guys who have done DI courses over 2-3 years I applaud you for trying to get there via bonafide courses at college and have no problem with you if you pass the 12 monthly MOT which is by engineers who should have a minimun 10 years experience in the trade and not be tesco shelf stackers, the problem I and many have if the 17 day course, this should be abandoned immediately for the safety of the consumer.

 

[brman]

Tony have you any of those pills going spare, because I do not think anyone here could have penned this better or more succinctly.

I proffered in another thread, that though they are far from perfect the JIB are perhaps the nearest and best suited to carry the mantle for an Electricians Register.

They cover all areas and at least have standards, that are not swayed by the colour your money.

My once proud trade has gone from a highly respected position in society to be on a par with a back street mechanic.

That my friend says it all, a trade destroyed by narrow minded governments who over the years thought that trades were a thing of the past, things like manufacturing, coal, steel, ship building was a dirty word, and that the future was a service driven industry where we would all sell insurance, banking services and work in call centres, if there are any left.

Now it is coming back to haunt them, with a population of 60 odd million and not an handful of tradesmen, in any discipline, you can shake a stick at. Just some poorly trained lads, who through no fault of their own, have been lied to and conned into thinking they are getting trained

While I have some sympathy for your views I am not at all convinced the facts support this. I see poor, if not dangerous, workmanship everyday and it seems to me that there is just as much that is 20 to 30 years old compared to recent.
Maybe others experiences are different......

But back to the subject of the thread. I can see why this register could be good but it has a way to go.
1) get everyone on board, including NAPIT. I don't believe blackmailing them with a "join us or you will get marginalised" is the best approach though.
2) Properly publicise it! Get it in national papers, on the news, leaflets in B&Q etc etc. Without that it is all for nothing.
3) Start policing the part P schemes! I don't care how people get training or on schemes in the 1st place but I do care a lot that they can then do poor or dangerous work and nothing is apparently done about it. There are regular threads on here about substandard work or inspection reports with hard evidence they are done by registered "electricians" and nothing is done about it by the scheme involved.

I'd particularly like feedback on that last point because without it the rest is meaningless!

 

[MDJ]

I'd particularly like feedback on that last point because without it the rest is meaningless!

I'd like to see 12 month MOTs for sparks tested by engineers with at least 10 years experience in the trade and who are to date with regs and ammendments myself. the criteria can be discussed regarding the MOTs at any time IMO

 

[Des 56]

Mr Niceic engineer

Your organisation has over the last 10 years become an absolute disgrace to the electrical industry and an executioners hatchet to the standards that were once the pride that was the trade of electrician

I have been an electrician for nigh on 50 years and you destroyed, in the name of profit,the trade I loved


One part of your post suggested that other future participants would have to meet the standards set by the Niceic "Are you actually serious with that comment",because it borders on being hysterically funny



Qualifying supervisors have been used by yourselves in the electrical industry
It could be justifeid on larger projects

You created the term Domestic installer and used the QS system in the domestic sector
The consequences of that decision (aside from the argument about lowering the standards of an electrican)is that enterprises working in the Domestic sector have one qualified person and myriads of Joe bloggs personel who may never have held a screwdriver in their paws

Domestic Eicrs are often, if not usually, carried out by incompetent employees with the QS oversigning from the office ( I know and you know that supervision is not on site supervision.its office based and with your blessing)therefore excluding well trained electricans from competeing against low skilled low paid labourers doing electricians tasks

This farce actually destroys any hope of individual competence by all in the industry

Here is my question if you have the courage to answer it

Will you support individual competence and at a level agreed with the other schemes and do away with the Qualifying supervisor system ?

 

[brman]

There is nothing wrong with someone inexperienced or unqualified doing work. Just as long as he is properly supervised by a QS. Same in industry as it is in domestic! Lets face it, how do you get experience without doing it for real? How do you employ a lad if you are not allowed to let him work on site?

I also think the situation is already very clear. If a QS signs off some work then he is signing to say he has supervised the work, seen it at all stages and can guarantee its quality and he can't do that from an office.

Again, it is about policing. No scheme will work if you just assume that everything will be fine if you have the right bit of paper. I believe this is the biggest problem with the schemes at present.

 

[brman]

I'd like to see 12 month MOTs for sparks tested by engineers with at least 10 years experience in the trade and who are to date with regs and ammendments myself. the criteria can be discussed regarding the MOTs at any time IMO

Got to admit I am not sure what you mean by the MOTs. The current yearly assessments are a check of the quality of your work plus and a check you are up to date with the regs. What are you suggesting that should be different?

 

[MDJ]

but who checks it and whats thier qualifications?

 

[Spudnik]

Personally, i think this is a step in the right direction.

 

[RJT_94]

I sent my email to Napit this morning asking why and what they intend to do no reply as yet

 

[brman]

but who checks it and whats thier qualifications?

Ah, right. I see your problem. My assessor obviously knew his stuff but I can't answer for any others.
I would certainly be happy to get a bit more of a grilling at assessment time though. Questions like how I would deal with common problems etc rather than just the stuff you can look up in the on site guide....

 

[Des 56]

There is nothing wrong with someone inexperienced or unqualified doing work. Just as long as he is properly supervised by a QS. Same in industry as it is in domestic! Lets face it, how do you get experience without doing it for real? How do you employ a lad if you are not allowed to let him work on site?

I also think the situation is already very clear. If a QS signs off some work then he is signing to say he has supervised the work, seen it at all stages and can guarantee its quality and he can't do that from an office.

Again, it is about policing. No scheme will work if you just assume that everything will be fine if you have the right bit of paper. I believe this is the biggest problem with the schemes at present.

I believe training and electrician mentored on site supervision is exactly what should and what has in the past been the most effective way of producing a competent spark,there is no argument about supervision or unskilled operatives gaining experience

The system currently used by the Niceic regarding a sole Qualifying supervisor is not to be confused with adequate training or systems that promote training to operatives who may not be competent for unsupervised work

The Niceic QS system is an invite to open abuse and should not be permitted.it is not a substitute for training either
There can and should be no argument against individual competence for employees doing skilled work

 

[brman]

I believe training and electrician mentored on site supervision is exactly what should and what has in the past been the most effective way of producing a competent spark,there is no argument about supervision or unskilled operatives gaining experience

The system currently used by the Niceic regarding a sole Qualifying supervisor is not to be confused with adequate training or systems that promote training to operatives who may not be competent for unsupervised work

The Niceic QS system is an invite to open abuse and should not be permitted.it is not a substitute for training either
There can and should be no argument against individual competence for employees doing skilled work

I can't argue with that

 

[Knobhead]

Personally, i think this is a step in the right direction.

If the schemes could be trusted I’d agree with you Jason. Remember I’ve no axe to grind, as it doesn’t concern me directly. But as an observer I see things differently, I see an industry being gutted by profiteers.
Safety and informing the public doesn’t come in to it.

 

[Zeno]

The level of hypocrisy from the Schemes is beyond belief, the standard for Contractors and Electricians is set in the EAS Committee, that is where the 5DW to the Electrical Trainee are agreed to be let in, the following people attend,

British Standards Institution (BG)
Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG)
Benchmark Certification Ltd
Electrical Contractors’ Association (ECA)
ECA Certification ltd (incorporating ELECSA)
Electrical Safety Council
Fire Industry Association (FIA)
Health and Safety Executive (HSE)
Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET)
NAPIT Registration Ltd
National Association of Professional Inspectors and Testers (NAPIT)
Ascertiva Group Ltd (trading as NICEIC)
Oil Firing Technical Association (OFTEC)
Electrical Contractors’ Association of Scotland (SELECT)
Society of Electrical and Mechanical Engineers Serving Local Government (SCEME)
SummitSkills
United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS)

So the above organisations are all aware of the dangers that the public face and for their own business reasons turn a blind eye to it.

The Schemes and the IET are the only ones that vote the rest observe, presumably with a nothing to do with me look on their faces.

Now there is some low level bitching as they manoeuvre themselves to try and get the best commercial benefit from Part P MK2, which will be announced before Christmas.

So NAPIT more than a year ago took the initiative to start ElectricSafe which is free and open to ALL members of Schemes.

Within days the ECA/ESC/NICEIC started their proprietary Electrical Safety Register, open only to ECA/ELECSA and ESC/NICEIC members.

This cheap politics, which Our Trade funds indirectly is damaging to Our businesses, it is absolutely appalling

The statements about Not for Profit are meaningless, there are no shareholders but directors and owners can pay themselves what they want, that probably makes us all Not for Profits as well!

 

[Guest111]

I was a qs for a firm years ago and was called into the office regarding testing on newbuilds.The issue was that the boss wanted more houses tested than I could do in a day,his answer was to get one of the lads to do some tests and me sign the ticket,I refused to do this as in my opinion it was not on,the following week I found a phase earth reverse fault on a ring main that had been wired by one of our so called foolproof sparks and supposedly checked.Incidentally I left the company soon after.