Tree Safety| Falling techniques investigated by OHS| 10 out of 17 FAIL!

faller

Thought you might be interested in the standards of tree felling in the Tasmanian logging industry.This report was prepared by the office of Workplace Standards in Tasmania.

All the fallers hold certificates of competency - based on the National Competencies.

This is all to do with the problems with the standards of the trainers and assessors.

It's pretty clear, if you can't do - teach

Attached Files

SA067_Tree_Falling.pdf (229.7 KB, 306 views)

TreeDimensional

That is quite a notch and back-cut (or something like that ????) on that stump. You would think that a Gov't publication would show a proper technique (positive education).

I wonder what other equipment issues they observed. Is this a failure of the certification process?

Eric Frei

Thanks for posting that Faller, it means a lot to see the Govt getting pro-active in seeing the bull crap out there!

Perhaps if a few more spoke up, took pictures and gave a crap it would not have come down to OHS investigating but some think it's best ignored and swept under the carpet.

Yes, over night they get their ticket, the next day back to the ole habits. I see it all the time, I know it happens.

Whilst they say there's national standards etc it's got more holes in than Swiss Cheese. Seems the cheese makers dont want to hear about the holes either, then the industry will knife you for being a dobber, and even wankers on this forum shit on you coz you try to make it better and explicitly show the offences/offenders.

What about when the boss of these legend crap cuts has no clue himself, and what if the boss is a so called Level 5 arborist (paper shuffler) who only did the business BS subjects? Who is then there to pull these people up when there's a line of incompetence marching all the way to the bank but all "credentialed experts".

Faller, bring all the evidence you got to the table and lets see it. In this thread Chatswood Hills State School Tree Issues| NT school tree kills boy and were advised! the boss overnight is certified and the climber now apparently a level 3 ... but only a few days before WHAM BAM THANKYOU MAAM!

I assure you, top to bottom you'll discover BS. I dont say that for the fun of it, I say that because it's true.

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________

faller

Thanks Ekka,

the trouble with finding the evidence is that the trainer/assessor only have to say on the day "the participant demonstrated sufficient competence". (that's a Workcover expression)

The system at present is too subjective and the more black and white they try and make it, the grayer it becomes.

having trained and assessed for near 20 years, I have worked with the older competencies and am trying to work with the new standards as well.

the bosses and overseers are part of the problem, all they want is for the work to be done.

Eric Frei

No doubt, I'm with you.

What about pre-requisites for levels?

What about the fact that people can shoot straight for Level5, in fact dont even have to know how to fell a tree, then they supervise those beneath them felling.

Imagine that, a person running around assessing trees, a so called level 5 with only 10 units AQF competency under his belt, of which 8 could be for everything but trees!

I know, that's why I advertise 44 units of competency on my website.

__________________

Sean Freeman

Have always felt that the practical elements...weilding a saw...of our work require on going reassessment, some kind of review of the skills of the qualified person.

Certainly not enough to gain life long competency after only a few days at TAFE imo.

The ISA cert arb (which has recieved mixed reviews here) has an element of continuing education in it, it would not be so hard to establish a similar system.

Eric Frei

Yes however CEU units for paperwork and reading etc are far from real practical skills. And for re-assessing real practical skills on the day we can all be alter boys.

It's not the answer.

What is the answer is similar to the way a shoddy plumber, electrician or builder get dealt with, that is the only lifelong viable and enforceable answer, not shuffling more bits of BS paper around some fat cats office giving CEU's for attending a seminar or answering questions about rubber side walks.

Who did it, why so bad, what is the penalty, simple.

__________________

Sean Freeman

I wasn't suggesting that a review of practical arb skills would be done through paper work Eric.....

Until tree workers are registered and licensed like plumbers and builders your analogy doesn't stand up.....

The only way in Queensland of challanging such sub-standard work is in term of WH&S or through a specific contractual agreement as to how the works are to be conducted...we don't even have a code of practice for our state, but piggy back on Victoria and NSW.

Eric Frei

It's the only answer, because what we have now is thorough BS with orgs covering their tracks.

Continuing education ... doesn't work. And the document shows why, because on the day they pass, tomorrow back to the same ole rubbish.

Building industry tried self regulation, of tradesmen, do the right thing they're qualified .... after about 5 years+ of problems going through the roof, back to inspections at stages.

Leave people to their own devices for most parts there will be short cuts etc.

What we have now doesn't work, what you and other industry people propose that some magnificent document with 1000+ rules ... doesn't work. Try police the door knockers with that document.

What does work, a licencing and registration system. even that has flaws but it's open to less prejudice, bias and cover ups than the current club.

Do we resit our drivers licences every so many years? Nope.

But sure as eggs do silly shit you will get booked or lose your licence and possibly car. Those systems work, not perfect but better than any other let alone risk something like ISA or QAA suggest I'm "worthy" or not.

__________________

faller

Registration doesn't work, it's only a licence.
Industry needs to establish an association that has high standards for entry and ongoing compliance requirements.

Compliance with the standards would be an ongoing condition of membership with member companies being subjected to work method audits by competent auditors.

Minimal training and competency standards would need to be met with the association able to nominate who is delivering the appropriate quality in training or other requirements.
(That would make even TAFE stop sitting on their hands)

The association would need to create and maintain contacts with relevant Government and Industry stakeholders (Workcover&Insurance companies and the like)

Ultimately, I would see a system that if you are not a member you will not receive either Government or Insurance company contracts.

The public would slowly come to recognize the fact that they should only deal with association members.

It would require a full fleshing out but the concept is pretty simple.

Operators that provide a quality service spend half their life complaining about those that don't. Spend that time enlisting companies that provide high level services and create an association.

Eric Frei

Read this then.

QAA|Queensland Arboricultural Association Incorporated| unqualified members and selling credibility

I wouldn't trust the types we got up here!

__________________

faller

I see your problem, "crayfish" (all shell, no guts)organizations do a great deal of damage to the reputations of industries.

The Association I would envisage would have the power to ensure that minimally qualified operators undertake the works or tasks.

The reality is that you know of companies that operate morally and professionally and they know companies that operate the same way etc etc.
The fact is that they are probably just as tired of the shenanigans going on out there as you are.

The start of a meaningful body

Sean Freeman

So you're inside my head now Eric???

For someone who is often bemoaning the pesonalisation of issues you are a little too quick to do exactly that yourself

I haven't proposed any magnificent document of any size all I said was....

Try to choose analogies that make sense.....Drivers Licences are supported by some of the most comprehensive set of statute laws around...it is not the same thing and never will be.

Eric Frei

You wrote this.

Also this.
Also this.

So from those statements I dont see many ideas and a bias toward some sort of OHS compliance and CEU units. Who's policing the shammozzle going on in Brisbane now? I can tell you that right under the authorities noses there's untrained uncertified unqualifed going for it, on govt projects.

I do see you shooting down attempts to ideas that overcome some of the issues, that's how I read it.

I put up ideas, similarities, anologies.

In response to you shooting down a valid one ....

Drivers licences, yeah I got mine at 16yo and haven't had to bother since, neither do many till they hit what, 70 years old or something. Very valid comparison, it shows that for something so common and deadly (road deaths, accidents, maiming etc) the enforcement isn't competency or testing, it's catching and copping off. For new players there's criteria like P Plates etc and at the other end of the scale for old timers there's tests (often cried about not being tough enough).

The laws etc are made up, as required .... something that can be done and has been done for many other areas business operates in. These are valid anologies, comparisons to shift thinking from the "all too hard cant be done mentality" to the "why not? mentality".

I feel there's resistance to change Sean, and those who's asses are comfortable under the current mayhem wouldn't want change I suppose, especially if they're making a good buck.

What we have isn't good enough.

__________________

Sean Freeman

Eric, analogies can be useful or harmful, when they bear little relation to the actual topic they are not helpful at all. The drivers licence is not valid as I tried to point out to you, it works as a system of regulation and control because of the enormous structure of statute laws, and enforcement agencies to support it....it is not the same or even close to the operation of chainsaws imo....I'm sorry if you don't like valid criticism.


I don't disagree there is resistance to change, you are not the only person trying to operate properly in Qld! Many of us constantly face obstructions and resistance to the implementation of best practice, and standards well established elsewhere in the world.

All I'm saying from the first post I wrote is that a registration system along the lines of say the blue card, nationally accredited, beginning with the operation of chainsaws with the emphasis on practical evidence of competency, building up to complex felling/dangerous trees...all only valid for say 12 months requiring recertification every year, maybe also demanding some evidence of competency on the job. Such a system could be introduced through WH&S they have exactly the same requirements of WH&SO's.

Victor Lindsay

Doctors and teachers use CEUs. It's a qualifing step thats used in alot of professions.

Eric Frei

Yes, like Dr Death and The Butcher of Bega

__________________

Sean Freeman

Yes there are lunatics in every walk of life....

OutofMytree

I hold a Senior First Aid Certificate as required by our franchise and insurance company. This certificate is valid for 2 years. It is MY responsibility to renew this certificate. Should an accident occur which involves insurance for injury my claim will be denied if I do not have this certificate.

It's a start.

Eric one of the problems your drivers license analogy brings to the fore is the sheer cost of policing any activity. As an arborist and strong vocal advocate for registration and licensing of our skills I would still not vote for taking millions of dollars from hospitals or schools to fund said policing. If we are to be regulated it must be cost effective or we will fail.

It would be far simpler and cheaper to support a change in insurance regulations in Australia making it mandatory for anyone applying for public liability cover for tree work to possess an "arbor license". No license, no insurance. Said license can be renewed every 2 years after taking a standard refresher course covering the basic aspects of safety and tree care. The costs here would be borne initially by the arborist but ultimately would deliver more profit as cowboys are driven out of the industry and there is more work available to those who choose to comply. Furthermore this would have a significant effect on insurance claims and therefore premium costs as businesses become generally safer.

If you have a better idea please let's hear it. If you have some idea as to how we could "float this boat" then lets hear that too.

Eric Frei

Some of your key points:-

1/ Recertification
2/ Funding
3/ Insurance regulation

Recertification like I said before means Alter Boys on the day and Butchers the day after.

Funding, the BSA system here is self funded, policing and licensing under the one roof. It also offers a mechanism to report cowboys and rectify shoddy work. In the trade sections of newspaper print ads the BSA licence number must be shown, or no ad.

Insurance regulation, that's a free competative market, including overseas players, very hard to get change there I think. P/I insurance requires some qualification however it's the competativeness for the premium that decides the liability cover. In essence the culture is we are all good and start cheap then if claims occur it goes up. Now WC is different, you start at an "industry average" and go up/down according to claims history and tenure.

Would recertification of the two doctors mentioned above (and likely they had to anyway as were OS doctors) have prevented what they did? Or would have having a half decent reporting mechanism that kicked in early have saved a few people? I know which.

An authority that has both powers, to issue licences and police them funded by the members is the solution. Would you pay $600/year for that?

The policing authority needs to have non-arborists on board, many times things like this have a broad spectrum unlike say the medical fiasco cover ups and legal people not far off either. One of the largest issues is "cover ups, jobs for the boys, boys clubs".

Tell me this, and be honest. Do you believe the QAA or ISAAC for that matter is not open to corruption, bias, conflict of interest when the Presidents are actual arborists in the community? What if, and speculative, the President was the senior consulting arborist of a project and "binned" a contractor for being a "cowboy" but placed in an unqualified fellow organisation mate, can you see how easily and subtle the corruption starts .... helping out 1st your own career, then your mates. And where is the transparency? I assure you, this is happening right now somewhere, why, coz the streets talk mate.

__________________

OutofMytree

I agree on the point of requiring someone who does not have a vested interest in an industry being part of a watchdog group.

I believe it is possible to have legislation to compel insurance companies to require an "arborists" license be provided before providing insurance for tree work. On my insurance documentation the work I can do that is covered is very specific. That was one reason why I decided not to pursue additional skid steer work in say digging holes or levelling. Over the phone the insurance company was cautious about me cutting firebreaks with the loader! How this change is brought about is another matter but i refer yet again to the licensing of electricains and plumbers. I bet their PI is provided only after they produce their licenses.

Recertification is a little tougher and it is there that your dob-in-a-drongo style of photo expose works best. This is something we can all do.

On the funding side of things, I pay more than $600 a year in tip fees. I would willingly pay that for a license to prove that I am the real deal. Especially because I know that cowboys would not and if properly policed could not.

It seems we are all on the same page with only minor differences in opinion as to how this needs to proceed.

So how do we proceed with this concept? It sounds like political action is required so emailing mp's could be a good start. I believe politicians are like babies in that you must spoon feed them both the problem and the solution in one arse saving package. Can we have a seperate thread then? An Australian standard for arborists! You bet.

Garry Brockley

What eric is proposing is a superb idea but unfortunately not likely to happen as beaurocracy gets in the way every time.
I carried out some emergency work on thursday over power lines, the estate owner was present, the electricity board monitor was present, the company manager was present and not one asked for my certs i offered it to the electricty man and got "im not bothered with that mate just get it down" so why did i bother getting my certs when any old hack can carry this out jeez it's frustrating the incompetencies within.

__________________

Eric Frei

You bothered coz you care and you're a good bloke mate.

__________________

pomie

u will not ever get rid of cowboys got more chance of educating public about safe work methods/proper climbing pruning etc in the sad world we are in it just comes down to $$$$$$$$ whatever side of the fence you may sit on

Victor Lindsay

Hey...I just read your reply...not funny! Well maybe alittle.

Eric Frei

Magistrates Court : 2007 TASCD 002 - COLLINS, Jamie Lee

__________________

dcarter

To all, I think the deep rooted problems, no pun intended, is the fact that in today's world there is some expectation that you will be trained and pass a course simply by default. Education is something "learned" and unfortunately the objectives covered may not teach the individual or class anything about what needs to be learned.

Political correctness allows for "dumbing" down the lessons so everyone can pass. That would be fine if it were the other way around, increase and intensify the lessons so everyone can learn and understand. Unfortunately schools and intructors (harsh generalization here, I know there are good and great instructors and institutions----and I am not talking about them) are in business for the money. Here in the states we see schools bragging about the number of people who pass the state exam first time around. That is suggestive that the school is teaching how to pass the exam and not necessarily what is important toward learning the trade, skills, etc.

Another problem, IMO, is the fact that some people will never undestand trees or physics or earth science well enough to do this job safely.

And last but not least, everyone from time to time has an overconfidence peter principle in some aspect of life and they aren't willing to admit it (again, harsh generalization). A lot folks think they know enough about what they are doing to get them through, and maybe most of the time it's OK, but when it's not enough, it can get really bad, really dangerous, really quickly.

I have seen people both hurt and killed with chainsaws and tree failures. It is a dangerous tool, with dangerous to fatal consequences, often in remote areas where skilled hospitals are more than mere minutes away. We should be frank and honest with people about their skills and abilities. It is only fair and we should always err on the side of safety---even if it means we get someone more skilled to give us opinions, input, insight, or just let them do the job.

Eric Frei

Coroner urges forest worker checks

__________________

Garry Brockley

Sorry to say to but that was a really stupid thing to do.
The coroner has it in some ways, trainers should be assessed bi annually for thier competencies and then the crews should have ongoing training from the trainers.
then any accidents on the crews can be brought back to the trainers on the crew naking them liable if they are not training people correctly, just as bosses should. no excuse for a lack of training.

__________________

Eric Frei

The coroner admits the guy took a shortcut, his cuts for all we know were OK he just couldn't be bothered calling machinery in to pull the hung up tree out by the butt.

He got lazy or cocky, for all we know he may have done this a few times and got away with it.

Does everyone now need training or just a simple meeting with memo and a checklist .... abide by the rules I am sure they all know what they are. I doubt there is sawyers out there unqualified or uncertified, just a matter of preaching the good habits.

__________________