[Andrew Willis]

LOL at Andrew willis.

Not that it is any of your concern, but I do have a training certificate for waterfed poles, from the BWCA when I did a course with them.  But even if I hadn't you are still dodging the question.

The point you were on about in your article wasn't ablout lack of training, it was about not courdoning off the area when using poles.

In case you forget, this is what you actually said:

"So what happens if a cleaner drops a pole onto a member of the public?  Regulation 10 of the Working at Height Legislation covers falling objects, and makes it clear that in order to fully comply with the law, a safety zone should be demarcated, ideally including cones, tape and barriers.  There should also be clear signs indicating that work is iin progress, and that there may be a falling objects hazard.  Such barriers and signs are frequently missing."

Now, to put it bluntly, its my opinion that what you've said there is a load of rubbish, for the simple reason that doing so would not be "reasonably practicable", and the work at height regs always say that they apply as long as it is reasonably practicable.

So, let me ask you a straight question:
Do you stand by this?  Do you really believe that we should all be courdoning off an area when we use poles?

Yes or no?

(And "our training course deals with all that" is not an answer)

PS I especially liked the "in the next week" bit, kinda feisty when you get asked awkward questions aint ya?

Load it up then Nick lol
"reasonably practicable".
I cover this in the course......what is the known calculation that a judge uses on this?

Andy

[Nick Wareham]

So, let me ask you a straight question:
Do you stand by this?  Do you really believe that we should all be courdoning off an area when we use poles?

Yes or no?

well?

Are you going to answer or not?

[formb]

LOL at Andrew willis.

Not that it is any of your concern, but I do have a training certificate for waterfed poles, from the BWCA when I did a course with them.  But even if I hadn't you are still dodging the question.

The point you were on about in your article wasn't ablout lack of training, it was about not courdoning off the area when using poles.

In case you forget, this is what you actually said:

"So what happens if a cleaner drops a pole onto a member of the public?  Regulation 10 of the Working at Height Legislation covers falling objects, and makes it clear that in order to fully comply with the law, a safety zone should be demarcated, ideally including cones, tape and barriers.  There should also be clear signs indicating that work is iin progress, and that there may be a falling objects hazard.  Such barriers and signs are frequently missing."

Now, to put it bluntly, its my opinion that what you've said there is a load of rubbish, for the simple reason that doing so would not be "reasonably practicable", and the work at height regs always say that they apply as long as it is reasonably practicable.

So, let me ask you a straight question:
Do you stand by this?  Do you really believe that we should all be courdoning off an area when we use poles?

Yes or no?

(And "our training course deals with all that" is not an answer)

PS I especially liked the "in the next week" bit, kinda feisty when you get asked awkward questions aint ya?

Load it up then Nick lol
"reasonably practicable".
I cover this in the course......what is the known calculation that a judge uses on this?

Andy

http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/alarpglance.htm

"It requires judgment. There is no simple formula for computing what is ALARP."

[Nick Wareham]

Nice link soapy.

Now, once again andy, are you going to answer the question?

You said in your article that over 90% of window cleaning with waterfed pole was illegal because people don't courdon off the area to prevent the risk of falling poles.

Do you stand by this or not?  Do you think we should all be courdoning off the area when we use waterfed poles?

Its a very simple question.  It literally is a 'yes' or 'no' answer.

[James Leet]

LOL at Andrew willis.


PS I especially liked the "in the next week" bit, kinda feisty when you get asked awkward questions aint ya?

I preferred this line if i am honest

If not stop posting on these items

He told ya good and proper

Be warned though, he is like a god on here, can get away with posting what he likes ( as can his family ) if you post against him the thread will be locked / deleted in the end, might be due to him paying for a advert on here ?

[James Leet]

Nice link soapy.

Now, once again andy, are you going to answer the question?

You said in your article that over 90% of window cleaning with waterfed pole was illegal because people don't courdon off the area to prevent the risk of falling poles.

Do you stand by this or not?  Do you think we should all be courdoning off the area when we use waterfed poles?

Its a very simple question.  It literally is a 'yes' or 'no' answer.

I must have missed this post, as its just plain idiotic, do we have to have portable traffic lights when we force pedestrians into the road ? i guess would will need to provide a safe walkway for them into the road ?

[Steve Sed]

Andrew Willis still hasn't explained why we should not work on flat roofs. I understand that there are risks and certain actions (most blindingly obvious) that we need to be mindful of, but to state no working off flat roofs at all is plain silly and wrong.

[formb]

Andrew Willis still hasn't explained why we should not work on flat roofs. I understand that there are risks and certain actions (most blindingly obvious) that we need to be mindful of, but to state no working off flat roofs at all is plain silly and wrong.

Surely after performing a risk assessment it may be the case that access via a flat roof is the safest reasonably practicable method of cleaning the window?

I have cleaned schools where the building was actually designed for the windows to be cleaned from the flat roof, indeed the facilities management company in charge of the school insisted that I clean it this way.

[AuRavelling79]

For me, the amazing Andy Willis and his crew lost all credibility when he wrote in that article that people using waterfed pole, even in a private street, should courdon off the area below the pole in case it falls and hurts someone, and this was the law.

It clearly is NOT the law, and is just them scare mongering.  I think he said that he thought that because of this that 90% of waterfed polers were breaking the law.

If this is the level of regulation they are pushing for then they should disappear back to whatever it was they were doing before they realised they could claim a fat cheque from the government for every window cleaner they get to go on their course.

Nick Wareham
Thank you for your post
Please up load a copy of your training certificate for the use of water fed pole
Within the next week
I guess you are amongst many that don't have one
If thats the case then you don't comply with PUWER 1998
If you have one accept my apologies
If not stop posting on these items

Andrew that bit in red; would you point me to where PUWER 98 says I need a training certificate for using a wfp please?

I understand that I and any employee should know how to use it properly and safely but I do not see the requirement for a certificate.

[AuRavelling79]

Andrew Willis still hasn't explained why we should not work on flat roofs. I understand that there are risks and certain actions (most blindingly obvious) that we need to be mindful of, but to state no working off flat roofs at all is plain silly and wrong.

Surely after performing a risk assessment it may be the case that access via a flat roof is the safest reasonably practicable method of cleaning the window?

I have cleaned schools where the building was actually designed for the windows to be cleaned from the flat roof, indeed the facilities management company in charge of the school insisted that I clean it this way.

Me too!

[barry mallett]

i know someone that broke a fingernail working on a flat roof . after that you wont get me on one

[wightsurf]

I think you lack one thing Mr willis.

It's called common sence 

[Steve_c]

For me, the amazing Andy Willis and his crew lost all credibility when he wrote in that article that people using waterfed pole, even in a private street, should courdon off the area below the pole in case it falls and hurts someone, and this was the law.

It clearly is NOT the law, and is just them scare mongering.  I think he said that he thought that because of this that 90% of waterfed polers were breaking the law.

If this is the level of regulation they are pushing for then they should disappear back to whatever it was they were doing before they realised they could claim a fat cheque from the government for every window cleaner they get to go on their course.

Nick Wareham
Thank you for your post
Please up load a copy of your training certificate for the use of water fed pole
Within the next week
I guess you are amongst many that don't have one
If thats the case then you don't comply with PUWER 1998
If you have one accept my apologies
If not stop posting on these items

Andrew that bit in red; would you point me to where PUWER 98 says I need a training certificate for using a wfp please?

I understand that I and any employee should know how to use it properly and safely but I do not see the requirement for a certificate.

It doesn't  ........http://books.hse.gov.uk/hse/public/saleproduct.jsf?catalogueCode=9780717662852 is this the mob that asked for your client list based in Lincolnshire and then canvased the work? I have been on shed loads of Health and safety courses when i was in Printing and been on Two with the BWCA for water fed pole. I have never heard of such crap.

[James Leet]

For me, the amazing Andy Willis and his crew lost all credibility when he wrote in that article that people using waterfed pole, even in a private street, should courdon off the area below the pole in case it falls and hurts someone, and this was the law.

It clearly is NOT the law, and is just them scare mongering.  I think he said that he thought that because of this that 90% of waterfed polers were breaking the law.

If this is the level of regulation they are pushing for then they should disappear back to whatever it was they were doing before they realised they could claim a fat cheque from the government for every window cleaner they get to go on their course.

Nick Wareham
Thank you for your post
Please up load a copy of your training certificate for the use of water fed pole
Within the next week
I guess you are amongst many that don't have one
If thats the case then you don't comply with PUWER 1998
If you have one accept my apologies
If not stop posting on these items

Andrew that bit in red; would you point me to where PUWER 98 says I need a training certificate for using a wfp please?

I understand that I and any employee should know how to use it properly and safely but I do not see the requirement for a certificate.

My guess is that it doesnt

Of course that is not what Mr Willis wants you to know, afterall he makes money out of providing these worthless NVQ certificates

( i have crossed out the worthless bit, it will save the mods deleting it  )

[Alex Wingrove]

Sometimes with health and safety you get so caught up in regulation, and theory that you need to step back and look at the practical reality of implementation.

I think we all agree that cordoning off radius area of equi length to your pole is impracticable and infeasible. However it is good to be made aware of such an issue occurring.

Health and Safety cannot do the thinking for an individual only give them the theory.
It is ultimately up to each and everyone of us to take the safety of our selves, members of the public and employees into account and find the safest and most practical way to clean a window etc etc

[Steve Sed]

Quite agree Alex.

[James Leet]

Sometimes with health and safety you get so caught up in regulation, and theory that you need to step back and look at the practical reality of implementation.

I think we all agree that cordoning off radius area of equi length to your pole is impracticable and infeasible. However it is good to be made aware of such an issue occurring.

Health and Safety cannot do the thinking for an individual only give them the theory.
It is ultimately up to each and everyone of us to take the safety of our selves, members of the public and employees into account and find the safest and most practical way to clean a window etc etc

Agree'd

Its called common sense is it not ? something Mr Willis implies WC'ers do not possess

[Nameless Drudge]

Andrew Willis still hasn't explained why we should not work on flat roofs. I understand that there are risks and certain actions (most blindingly obvious) that we need to be mindful of, but to state no working off flat roofs at all is plain silly and wrong.

Guessing now but often there is no way of being certain if the roof can hold a person's weight unless it is stress tested periodically.  Also, you are supposed to be at least 6 feet from the edge unless there are barriers to stop a fall.  You could not be 6 feet from the edge while getting on and off a ladder.
Funnily enough, I'm about to drop two link detached houses over this type of issue:  specifically because the ladder must be placed on the ground from the roof and it's not possible to test how slippery the ground is.  This is nothing to do with recent possible changes in law.  It's something that I've felt uncomfortable about for some time and should have acted sooner.

I read this with interest as i have this scenario(flat roof,ladder up, across and then down at the back).It is almost totally safe for me though, even though its a pain in the backside,i have a laddersafe fitted and so i just shove the ladder down and out until its basically hooked on at the top,it really is extremely secure.It is a prize possession of mine.

[James Leet]

Andrew Willis still hasn't explained why we should not work on flat roofs. I understand that there are risks and certain actions (most blindingly obvious) that we need to be mindful of, but to state no working off flat roofs at all is plain silly and wrong.

Guessing now but often there is no way of being certain if the roof can hold a person's weight unless it is stress tested periodically.  Also, you are supposed to be at least 6 feet from the edge unless there are barriers to stop a fall.  You could not be 6 feet from the edge while getting on and off a ladder.
Funnily enough, I'm about to drop two link detached houses over this type of issue:  specifically because the ladder must be placed on the ground from the roof and it's not possible to test how slippery the ground is.  This is nothing to do with recent possible changes in law.  It's something that I've felt uncomfortable about for some time and should have acted sooner.

I read this with interest as i have this scenario(flat roof,ladder up, across and then down at the back).It is almost totally safe for me though, even though its a pain in the backside,i have a laddersafe fitted and so i just shove the ladder down and out until its basically hooked on at the top,it really is extremely secure.It is a prize possession of mine.

BUT have you got a NVQ to tell you it is safe ?

[♠Winp®oClean♠]

I've read some rubbish in my time on here but this Impact lot take the biscuit!