IET logo
 
IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: ELECTRICAL REGISTERS
Topic Summary:
Created On: 03 September 2013 04:09 PM
Status: Post and Reply
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
<< 1 2 3 Previous Last unread
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 04 September 2013 08:19 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



perspicacious

Posts: 7235
Joined: 18 April 2006

"It is true JP, £489,133 to be precise, and 17 employees got in excess of £60k, 6 in excess of £70k, 4 in excess of £80k, 5 in excess of £90k and 3 in excess of £100k. It is all published in their annual report for everyone to see. It has always been lucrative at the top of the pile, even in the old NICEIC days, a very charitable institution.
The reports make very interesting reading when you see who is involved as well. Many fingers; all having slices of a very large pie."


It is alleged that the highest figure was as a result of a golden handshake upon departure and was not representative of the annual pay. I dare say that the next set of figures will reflect the actual, current employees in their pay banding.

Regards

BOD
 04 September 2013 10:43 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for dickllewellyn.
dickllewellyn

Posts: 1150
Joined: 19 March 2010

Mr Bratt was very quiet I notice, it seems that the ECA actually had the least input into that presentation. I was always led to believe that the joint venture (which many ECA members myself included knew nothing of until it happened) was so that the ECA became more the voice of the industry, but it all seemed very NIC-centric by any other name!

-------------------------
Regards
Richard (Dick)

"Insert words of wisdom and/or witty pun here"
 05 September 2013 04:55 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Cremeegg

Posts: 528
Joined: 13 July 2007

As I understand it the "merger " of NICEIC and ECA was like many such actions in fact a straight take over because ECA finances were in such a parlous state they couldn't argue. The NICEIC being so charitable dressed it up as a merger rather than a take over.
 06 September 2013 10:22 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for kj scott.
kj scott

Posts: 2144
Joined: 02 April 2006

If the industry really needs a register; should we not just have a simple list which includes all registered contractors listed against their field(s) of work/specialist area.
They would then be retained or removed on the register subject to their continued individual scheme registration; and any complaints lodged against them.
How hard could that be?
Who should manage/maintain this register?
This should be none of the current players; but a new independent body.
How should this be funded?
Funds should come from all of the scheme providers and the ESC; from the fees that they already receive.
Simples and no additional cost to anyone;.............. except the scheme providers.
BTW the scheme fees should be capped by the government for the first 5 years, just to ensure that the registered scheme members; and consequently the public don't end up paying for the schemes lack of efficiency.
And dare I say it; perhaps the competent electrician register administrator could also review the performance of the various scheme providers.

-------------------------
http://www.niceic.biz
 07 September 2013 08:13 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zoro

Posts: 138
Joined: 31 July 2011

Originally posted by: Cremeegg

As I understand it the "merger " of NICEIC and ECA was like many such actions in fact a straight take over because ECA finances were in such a parlous state they couldn't argue. The NICEIC being so charitable dressed it up as a merger rather than a take over.


Well their accounts state that they lost, £10,000,000 in 2010 and another £16,000,000 in 2011 on the Lloyd's insurance markets and their net worth in December 2011 was £4000.

Its all about Money not safety.
 07 September 2013 11:41 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for redtoblackblewtopieces.
redtoblackblewtopieces

Posts: 206
Joined: 10 January 2013

Not uo to date on this latest titbit but the last thing I read was a letter fron certsure dated from August of this year to the chair detailing their position on a register for all trades something like the Trustmark scheme, oh wait a minute isn't Emma Clancy now something to do with that
Now !
Kevin

-------------------------
Safety through a Standard
Compliance by Approved Documents
 10 September 2013 10:52 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



psychicwarrior

Posts: 220
Joined: 18 October 2010

@KJ Scott

"They would then be retained or removed on the register subject to their continued individual scheme registration; and any complaints lodged against them.
How hard could that be?"

...... please no! :-) 5+ schemes on the go... all with financially vested interests, all over priced, all with different views, an industry that contractually values one scheme better than another (utterly wrong).....it all befuddles me..............and no doubt the public if they can be bothered. ludicrous situation.... get rid/overhaul the schemes i say and do something that makes sense and is of real value :-)

peace.
 10 September 2013 11:17 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



napitprofessional

Posts: 376
Joined: 08 March 2008

You mean a system of individual competence and corresponding culpability? .... you radical!
 11 September 2013 08:11 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



weirdbeard

Posts: 1535
Joined: 26 September 2011

Going back to the OP, which if I recall correctly it was pretty much reps from the 2 largest scheme operators being questioned by a government panel about who's register and brand was best, but I don't recall any mention of why there needs to be a new register at all, unless the existing register which includes ALL registered CPS members is inadequate?

http://www.competentperson.co.uk/

I wonder how much we ALL paid for that meeting about something that already exists!
 12 September 2013 10:38 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zoro

Posts: 138
Joined: 31 July 2011

Well if you take the revenues of the Schemes it comes to around £50 million, this is what our trade pays in, we get nothing back.

They are totally unregulated, they make around 30% profit before the taxpayers gift aid, to the tune of another 20%.

They claim to be Competent Person Schemes, but they do not provide Competent persons on the Doorstep of the public, providing no plausible benefit to anyone.

They claim to have reduced fires in the home by 17%, but the Minister would not support that claim.

DCLG have no idea if what the Schemes tell them is true, after the 2nd September, it looks like the Select Committee has doubts as well.


It's all about Money not Safety.
 13 September 2013 06:38 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for kj scott.
kj scott

Posts: 2144
Joined: 02 April 2006

Originally posted by: weirdbeard

Going back to the OP, which if I recall correctly it was pretty much reps from the 2 largest scheme operators being questioned by a government panel about who's register and brand was best, but I don't recall any mention of why there needs to be a new register at all, unless the existing register which includes ALL registered CPS members is inadequate?

">http://www.competentperson.co.uk/


I wonder how much we ALL paid for that meeting about something that already exists!


A good link, and a valid point; but the register is only domestic and doesn't include inspection of existing installations.
A voluntary register that is independent of all scheme providers, but is inclusive of all schemes wouldn't be that difficult or expensive. It would also stop confusion as there would only be one source of information.
Clear and adequate advertising would be the real cost, but then ESC can fund that; as a service to industry; after the register is independently generated.

-------------------------
http://www.niceic.biz

Edited: 13 September 2013 at 06:48 PM by kj scott
 18 September 2013 07:32 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



alanblaby

Posts: 372
Joined: 09 March 2012

Originally posted by: kj scott
A voluntary register that is independent of all scheme providers, but is inclusive of all schemes wouldn't be that difficult or expensive. It would also stop confusion as there would only be one source of information.
.


Which is just what NAPIT offered with their electricsafe register - open to any and all Bodies and Contractors, then NICEIC/ESC jumped in and did their own a few days later.

If just one site, this would be great, all 'competent' persons/Co's in one place, but then NIC et al will only put their members on their site.

Hardly promoting safety as an whole, but more promoting themselves.
 18 September 2013 08:19 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for dickllewellyn.
dickllewellyn

Posts: 1150
Joined: 19 March 2010

It'll be interesting to see how ECA membership is effected by all of this. It was already on the decline, but I can see a lot of people not wishing to renew their memberships and transferring their part p interest to nappit.

Interesting times indeed. I can feel a CV to the council coming on to see if they've got any lawn mower vacancies for next summer!

-------------------------
Regards
Richard (Dick)

"Insert words of wisdom and/or witty pun here"
IET » Wiring and the regulations » ELECTRICAL REGISTERS

<< 1 2 3 Previous Last unread
Topic Tools Topic Tools
Statistics

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.