Standardisation of Pavement Licence

scaff

scaff

Paul Bourne
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
300
Reaction score
0
Location
Essex
One of the few good things to come from the NASC.

The standardisation of the pavement licence, as anyone of you who have to fill these in they can be a nightmare especially if you work in different areas, so the NASC are trying to push this draft (follow link) onto all councils so as to standardise the form filling :D:D

I for one quite like this

http://v35.up1.universalpixel.com/a...e final version inc drawings - 08 02 2010.pdf
 
Good idea, I know from personal experience that the criteria application process and time scale vary from one local authority to the next .

Only reservation would be the the box for NASC registration number , is it an underhanded way of getting local authority's to issue Pavement Licenses to NASC members only :wondering:
 
paddy carr said:
Podger
I noticed that box as well mate, 'Hands across the sea's' springs to mind.

Regards
Paddy
Click to expand...

Or maybe too big for there boots ! Local Authoritys do the dictating and dont like being dictated to :nuts:
 
Dont like the Fan Lift Design---I prefer under-slinging a tube 1 ft in from the out side ledger on a 7 ft Lift then fixing the Fan needles over the out side ledger and under the Slung Tube, this provision allows for un-impeded walk through.
 
Podger/Paddy
I should have said that's the only bit I didn't like. :sad:

---------- Post added at 10:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:35 PM ----------
Garry Adams said:
Dont like the Fan Lift Design---I prefer under-slinging a tube 1 ft in from the out side ledger on a 7 ft Lift then fixing the Fan needles over the out side ledger and under the Slung Tube, this provision allows for un-impeded walk through.
Click to expand...

Garry
The sketches are for guidence only.

I agree with your fan method especially as lifts are meant to be 2.00m now (unless designed) there's a good chance of cracking your head on a fitting bolt :sad:
 
looks good to me , we are not an NASC member but standardisation across all the councils would be great
 
scaffy said:
looks good to me , we are not an NASC member but standardisation across all the councils would be great
Click to expand...

Scaffy as a non NASC member would Section 2:4 Scaffold License Standard Conditions/Drawings be cause for concern ?

" The nominated Scaffold Contractor must hold current accreditation with the National Access & Scaffolding Confederation (NASC)"

As a non NASC member I for one shall be having a word in my local councilors shell like :)

I think the idea in principle is good one but IMO NASC have over stepped the mark on this issue :mad:
 
Last edited:
I would repeat the above comments in regard to Standardization, a "One Document Does All" scenario cannot be bad, but for me it is just too long.

At 9 pages it is 6 more than any of the L.A's that I deal with and they also usually include hoardings/skip siting licenses on them too, for me I would be surprised if many L.A's take the scheme up after all its just more work for them, bearing in mind the cuts to resources that are inevitabley going to occur in the public sector it becomes harder to see it happening.

Lastly, as mentioned, I dont like the NASC tie in, I appreicate they set a standard but they are far from the Benchmark in our industry, I know of plenty of Companies that surpass their members standards, furthermore of the 1000s of Scaffolding Companies in the UK only 170 are NASC members so they are clearly a minority, I dont like the insinuation that the 1000s are not up to scratch.

My two penneth for what its worth.
 
didnt spot that bit , yeh that takes the piss ,
 
Podger
I don't think I explained myself properly, I am just happy with the possibility of standardisation but not the NASC bits
 
One thing that I have noticed that is on some existing street licences and is definately ommitted on the proposed NASC document is the fixing of loose objects including scaffold boards.

Here are few that I found where fixing scaffold boards is a requirement of the licence.

St Helens Council
Westminster Council
Halton Borough Council
West Sussex County Council
Aberdeen City Council


I think that Wirral and Islington Councils also operate this requirement (cant find the weblinks at the minute), and I am pretty sure this is the case for many other councils.

I would have thought that it would be common sense to fix boards down where the public are in close proximity to scaffold, I would definately be interested to hear of other councils that do (may be one for another thread).
 
Last edited:
Great idea, but does it mean that if your not a member of the NASC or you haven't been trading long enough to join you can no longer erect scaffolds on pavements for your regular customers with whom you have worked safely with for years ?????

I would rather fill in different forms than be forced to join the NASC to do my job. one more reason for another association for scaffolders as well as the NASC, and another good reason as to why this forum is a great idea, without it I for one wouldn't be getting the national picture ,we have to stick together we need a different voice.
 
havent come across a council yet that insist on nasc membership - are there any that do
 
It's starting to gain momentum. I think birmingham were the first to insist on it and after one or two incidents last year Edinburgh are phasing it in to come in to force next year to give non members a chance to join. Can't remember exactly where but there was a talk from someone from a massive university complex that were planning to spend millions that were insisting on membership.
 
Pavement Licence

Hi All

I agree that it is a bit of a cheek the NASC putting their bit on the form, but hopefully this wont mean the council will not accept non NASC members.

Noticed in the drawings the ledger braces seem to go the opposite way to what I would normally draw. This way means that the ledger cannot be fixed close to the lift level as the boards get in the way. It does not make a lot of difference, but not normal practise so dont know who they got to do their sketches.

See they have specified debris netting/ sheeting on the sketches. Dont always see this on all scaffolds ?. They are probably correct, but then we get involved with sorting out the tie loads, etc.

All the best

Chris Eng :)
 
another great reason to join the nasc surprisingly
 
Pavement Licence - NASC

Hi Scaffy

It is okay to say that this is a good reason to join the NASC, but for many smaller and medium size firms the cost of joining is expensive and a bit of overkill for some of them.

Not sure what is the answer as they are trying to control standards and cant just provide membership without checking that the member firms are operating to acceptable levels.

See there is another thread on some other organisation for non-NASC members on this forum.

Will see how this goes

All the best

Chris Eng:)
 
Hi Chris, I think Scaffy was being sarcastic, he and I have both tried to join the NASC but as we haven't been trading for 2 years we aren't allowed, and thats the point mate. They are trying to standardise the licence as long as you fit their own criteria i.e. your a member of the NASC if not goodbye. Hardly seems fair and if it was any other kind of business you would be reporting them to the monopolys and mergers commision.
 
dangeruss said:
Hi Chris, I think Scaffy was being sarcastic, he and I have both tried to join the NASC but as we haven't been trading for 2 years we aren't allowed, and thats the point mate. They are trying to standardise the licence as long as you fit their own criteria i.e. your a member of the NASC if not goodbye. Hardly seems fair and if it was any other kind of business you would be reporting them to the monopolys and mergers commision.
Click to expand...

Hi Dangeruss,

I can see that it is a bit of a prickly subject and I have come across a few companies now that have had the short shrift from the NASC. The point I was trying to make is that it would appear that the NASC have released this proposed document without full appraisal of the documentation that is already being used by councils, the fixing down of boards is just one omission that I have come across in the research for our Safelinx scaffold board retainer... but what else have they missed?

I think that the idea of a standard document is a sound one, but councils excluding good scaffolders from work that they have historically been awarded because of their non-membership of a paid membership if fundamentally flawed, it strikes me as a blatent abuse of position by the NASC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom