Rectifying Misconceptions about the NASC

  • Thread starter TRAD Health and Safety
  • Start date
T

TRAD Health and Safety

Guest
Since becoming sponsors of the forum we have read many of the posts and have enjoyed the comments and posts from most of the membership.
We have, however, noticed that there have been several negative comments about the National Access & Scaffolding Confederation (NASC) and its membership in general, with typical comments being:
• It’s just an old boys’ club!
• It rubbishes all other companies that are not members!
• It speaks on behalf of the Nationals and its member companies only!
• Once you’re in and passed the initial Audit you can then do what you like!
• All the Companies of the council, which is made up of the regional Chairman and the Chairman of the various committees, are all MD’s of big companies!

These comments are often misguided, based on hearsay and are for the most part completely without foundation, quite often posted by those who know little or nothing about the workings of the NASC in 2013; the basis of these inaccurate views are borne primarily from ignorance of the true facts.


THE REAL FACTS ARE
• Of the Contracting members,
o 33% in the NASC have a turnover of less than 1 million;
o 55% have a turnover less than 5 million.

• The governing council adequately and fairly reflects the membership base:
o Three of the four officers have businesses with turnovers of less than 3 million;
o The remainder of the council, which has fifteen representatives, is made up of:
• 11 small companies with owner managers; and
Only 4 large companies.

Old Household names, “who shall remain nameless but we all know who they are” who initially created the NASC, no longer sit on the council!

• All of these appointments are subject to a biennial turnaround and re-election;
• Upon an application being taking forward and membership being confirmed by a comprehensive audit, there is another audit in the following 12 months and then Biennial Audits; and despite comments, which suggest otherwise, there are companies that are expelled if upon re-audit they do not meet the current criteria for membership.

• The NASC’s mission statement is “To ensure the scaffolding and access industry maintains the highest practical standards”, it does not say anything about that applying to just its members!
• As a body it does not, would not and cannot “rubbish” companies that are not members; perhaps some member companies may do, but do so without any authority to speak on behalf of the NASC.

• All companies of any size just need to get involved because they can have an impact on the direction and policies of the NASC.

• The NASC does not want to keep companies out, instead it wants more companies as members; no Trade Body wants to keep its fee income low because that in turn limits the amount of work they are able to do on behalf of the industry.




NASC (National Access & Scaffolding Confederation)
4th Floor, 12 Bridewell Place
London
EC4V 6AP

Tel: 020 7822 7400
Fax: 020 7822 7401

Email: enquiries@nasc.org.uk

Web: NASC - National Access and Scaffolding Confederation
Follow us on Twitter: NASCscaffolding
Watch us on YouTube: NASClondon
 
Interesting post from Trads.

This would be the same NASC that pushed the use of "scaff Steps " when in fact they cause more problems then they solve.
The same NASC that recommended that virtually all scaffolds are designed , then change their mind 5 years later.
The same NASC who has members that regularly flout there own rules , we have all seen it and i for a fact no lads that are encouraged to do so to " get the job done "

So what makes a NASC member better or worse then a non member company ?
 
Interesting post from Trads.

This would be the same NASC that pushed the use of "scaff Steps " when in fact they cause more problems then they solve.
The same NASC that recommended that virtually all scaffolds are designed , then change their mind 5 years later.
The same NASC who has members that regularly flout there own rules , we have all seen it and i for a fact no lads that are encouraged to do so to " get the job done "

So what makes a NASC member better or worse then a non member company ?
Quite right,I have gone on about a certain Liverpool firm a NASC member,cash in hand labour,no PPE ,no training,treat the lads like dogs.Got NASC plastered over the wagons and the crap vans they have.NASC it's a joke.
 
Trad...just as a matter of interest as you seem so knowledgeble & the percentages seem at first glance quite credable i wounder if you would be able to tell us how many members there are in the nasc & how many registered scaffold companys are trading within the uk..many thx
 
33% turn over less than 1mil that say that 67 % turn over more than that with the majority of ember been in the £££££££ club do you not think this is a bad representation of nasc? work for a firm that work by the book i mean works by the book sometimes it can jsut be a fekign baw ake doign it that way but thats they way it needs to be done. not a nasc member. but again nasc are making reg that we all ave to follow shoudl every company not have a say in this ???????
 
Trad Health and Safety

Are you any relation to "Trad Recruitment" you both seem to appear good company men/women or committee

Why are you putting the views of the NASC, they are surely big enough boys to join the forum and defend their working practices first hand ?

I have no misconceptions of NASC,I have made informed judgements from my own and others dealings with this "Trade Organisation", who strut around as if the are thee Governing body of the scaffolding industry

This is some of the propaganda the NASC display on their website

"The Risks Of Not Using An NASC Member

Danger. Non members may employ a high proportion of inexperienced and unskilled labour.

Reputation. Over and above the risk to the public and employees, using non members could also endanger the reputation of your organisation.

Equipment. Some non members use inadequate equipment or even stolen plant.

Uninsured. There is a possibility that non members will be underinsured or carry no public or employers liability insurance at all for their work.

No Code. With no code of practice non members are unaccountable for their actions.

No Support. When complex problems arrive, non members do not have NASC resources at their disposal to help clients in the way an NASC member does.

No Expertise. NASC members account for a significant share of all turnover in the industry. They have the vast majority of the expertise."

So please explain where your:-

quote
"As a body it does not, would not and cannot “rubbish” companies that are not members; perhaps some member companies may do, but do so without any authority to speak on behalf of the NASC."

Lastly please do not instruct me on what I can and cannot post to this Forum. You have laid out a few £££s to become sponsors, for your own commercial reasons, that is all,

You do not own the Forum, or maybe you do, I notice you are top of the list of sponsors ( side bar) above "Buy Brand Tools"??? :sad2:
 
Don't forget every branch of DSL, Harsco etc is a seperate member hence the low turnover.
Should for example DSL Swansea get caught out and banished from the NASC all their other branches will still be members.
At the same time they also have members like AOM (And Trad?) that aren't huge but do the job as they should.

---------- Post added at 09:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:01 PM ----------

Good honest post Rigger.
 
erm... this could be a very long and interesting thread and its very strange that TRAD not the NASC have started this thread... Are Trad looking at the benefits of being a member? so testing the water??

DSL-LYNDON and Harsco (sgb) I was going to going to say Benchmark but they are no longer a member due to financial problems are the the big national companies but you do not see any director level view on this forum from these companies. - so I must give TRAD respect for giving there point of view on this forum!!

Lets put it out there to the 'big boys' mentioned above follow trad lead and give your expert view on our trade on this forum!!!

---------- Post added at 11:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:21 PM ----------

sorry was unaware as no 'lyndon' names on the forum...is the lyndon representative giving his/her views or the companies like TRAD?
 
Excellent one thousand four hundred and sixty fourth post Rigger.

I didn't join the forum to receive tool box talks from Trad
 
Don't forget every branch of DSL, Harsco etc is a seperate member hence the low turnover.
Should for example DSL Swansea get caught out and banished from the NASC all their other branches will still be members.
At the same time they also have members like AOM (And Trad?) that aren't huge but do the job as they should.

---------- Post added at 09:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:01 PM ----------

Good honest post Rigger.

Have any of the big companies ever had branches banished from the NASC? I thought as the NASC was self governing they always looked after their own.
 
What about using agency's instead of employing direct, MOST of the nasc firms are nearly 100% agency scaffs now.
 
rectifying ******** threads close it who actually gives a ****
 
why would you speak on behalf of them. i can understand on there own rules. but brown nose
 
Top Bottom