IET logo
 
IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Gas Safe "style" system for domestic electrical work
Topic Summary: What are peoples objections and concerns?
Created On: 15 April 2014 06:56 PM
Status: Post and Reply
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
1 2 Next 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.
 15 April 2014 06:56 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



napitprofessional

Posts: 409
Joined: 08 March 2008

The DCLG Parliamentary Select Committee have indicated that a Gas Safe system for domestic electrical work could be a distinct possibility - so what problems do people foresee with regards technical standards and cost?

-------------------------
B. Eng (Hons) MIET
 15 April 2014 07:13 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for OMS.
OMS

Posts: 19900
Joined: 23 March 2004

For domestic work ? - so no equivalence to anything non domestic seems to be a significant diversion from a "gas safe" scheme - either the system is dangerous or it isn't - it can't be significantly more dangerous in a domestic than say any other household or similar application can it ?

Cost - who pays ?

Compliance - who checks?

Criteria - what benchmark for entry?

Censure - who gets chucked out and for what reason?

If this is introduced, it's clear to me that technical standards won't rise - how can they - it would be an admission that the schemes and government have colluded over the last 10 years to validate incompetent people.

I'd love to see the regulatory impact assessment for this - so we spend £XXX millions to save perhaps two people a year ?

As I've said before - be very careful what you wish for folks - a gold club is not what this industry needs at the moment - if only that there is no credible entity to run it (at the moment)

Regards

OMS

-------------------------
Failure is always an option
 15 April 2014 07:17 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for michaelbrett.
michaelbrett

Posts: 941
Joined: 28 December 2005

OMS

I completely agree with you.

It seems that our industry has developed a real persecution complex regarding domestic work.

Regards

Mike
 15 April 2014 09:08 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



jcm256

Posts: 1946
Joined: 01 April 2006

Read paragraph 23 in the web site below

http://www.publications.parlia...mcomloc/906/90606.htm

23. In our view the Government has until 2015 to show that the competent persons scheme model can work effectively for domestic electrical installation. We emphasise that it is for the Government - not the competent persons scheme operators or local authorities - to ensure the effective and consistent operation of Part P. This Government and its predecessors have favoured the competent persons model for the implementation of building control compliance over a mandatory requirement to use a qualified electrician. The Government has to demonstrate that its preferred model can match a mandatory model.

Looks like they (the select committee) have cast an eye on the government themselves and asked what are you going to do about this situation.

Do you think BS7671 will be made mandatory as well.

(Statutory means by statute. A statute is a law, which is written down.
Mandatory means you must. A statute make certain behaviours mandatory, such as stopping for red lights. A court may also make mandatory orders on its own initiative, such as ordering you to complete your end of a contract.
Bear in mind this advice applies to common law countries only. The words may have different meanings in other jurisdictions.)
 15 April 2014 10:31 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for spinlondon.
spinlondon

Posts: 4580
Joined: 10 December 2004

I think a gas safe type of scheme would be preferable to the mish mosh we have now.
At least then Mr DIYer would be able to do his stuff without falling foul of the law.
 15 April 2014 11:39 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



phantom9

Posts: 756
Joined: 16 December 2002

The NICEIC and all its "associates" will ensure this never happens. One governing body for the gas industry installers has been operated for decades and it has not had to contend with multiple governing bodies like we have. There is too much at stake for the likes of the NICEIC to lose it's stronghold on the industry. It would likely as not push to be THE governing body in this respect if it had to and would probably win, given its track history of getting its way. In principle I would welcome a move to introduce a gas safe style of regulation for the electrical industry but I can't see it happening. The electrical industry is too controlled by the NIC and, as far as I can see, always will be. I am NAPIT and would hate to be governed by the NICEIC as it stands now. Its akin to the bloody Third Reich.
 16 April 2014 08:56 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for sparkingchip.
sparkingchip

Posts: 6343
Joined: 18 January 2003

A Gas Safe style seem for only a few selected types of work with everything else as a free for all?

None starter.

Andy
 16 April 2014 07:39 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for stateit.
stateit

Posts: 2227
Joined: 15 April 2005

I forget the different gradings of Gas Safe registered engineers. It's been a while since I subbed as sparky for a Gas Installation company while they had a year hiatus with their resident electrician...

IIRC their engineers were graded. Some were only allowed to work up to 28mm pipe, others up to 63mm, others on big yellow plastic pipe and the bigger metal pipes.

I may be wrong in the details, but it equates to domestic , commercial & industrial.

So: How about gradings for sparkies? Single phase, 3-phase <=100A and then 3=phase >100A gradings?



-------------------------
S George
http://www.sg-electrical.com
 16 April 2014 07:46 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for spinlondon.
spinlondon

Posts: 4580
Joined: 10 December 2004

We already have something along those lines, to a degree.
If you want to work on domestics, you join one of the schemes.
If you prefer industrial/commercial, then you obtain a JIB card.
Sub Stations etc. all require relevant tickets.
 16 April 2014 07:47 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



daveparry1

Posts: 6392
Joined: 04 July 2007

I think that could work Stateit, i'd be quite happy with that but then again I only do domestic and very occasional small commercial.
 18 April 2014 06:35 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zoro

Posts: 170
Joined: 31 July 2011

Originally posted by: jcm256

Read paragraph 23 in the web site below

http://www.publications.parlia...c/906/90606.htm

23. In our view the Government has until 2015 to show that the competent persons scheme model can work effectively for domestic electrical installation. We emphasise that it is for the Government - not the competent persons scheme operators or local authorities - to ensure the effective and consistent operation of Part P. This Government and its predecessors have favoured the competent persons model for the implementation of building control compliance over a mandatory requirement to use a qualified electrician. The Government has to demonstrate that its preferred model can match a mandatory model.

Looks like they (the select committee) have cast an eye on the government themselves and asked what are you going to do about this situation.

Do you think BS7671 will be made mandatory as well.

(Statutory means by statute. A statute is a law, which is written down.

Mandatory means you must. A statute make certain behaviours mandatory, such as stopping for red lights. A court may also make mandatory orders on its own initiative, such as ordering you to complete your end of a contract.

Bear in mind this advice applies to common law countries only. The words may have different meanings in other jurisdictions.)



You are right jcm256, the Select Committee have given the Schemes and DCLG the ultimatum of providing a Gas Safe system themselves, or having a Gas Safe system without them. So it looks like a Gas Safe System is inevitable.

The Schemes may think they that their political support is stronger than, a Parliamentary Select Committee, but their credibility will be the final nail in their coffin.

Still anything is possible in this long running farce, in June we may see the launch of a single Competent Person Register for the Schemes. With no requirement for the person carrying out the work, to be Qualified or Competent in any way.


Should the Advertising Standards Authority be notified?
.
 19 April 2014 11:01 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mantutu

Posts: 42
Joined: 16 June 2013

As I see it the only difference between the Gas Safe system and the present is awareness. If that is indeed the case, then is it not this awareness that is the problem and not the way the schemes operate.
I would like to see independent assessments which would go a long way to installing creditability to the present system.
Part P only effects the domestic market, and as I have previously stated it is far from rocket science. I also see some people who talk about making it illegal for a DIY'er to carry out work in their own homes. Legally this would be a non starter.
There are short course electricians out there, and providing they stay within their remit I have no problem with them. What does really annoy me, and most others, is the way they then undertake work they are clearly not competent to do.
EICR's are a perfect example most see a danger where non exist. Even to the extent that 16th edition boards are now being declared unsafe.
Another example is from my own experience, I was called by a local factory to have a look at a 3 phase motor which was not working. A previous electrician had changed the motor for a new rewind but still could not get it working. My initial fault finding started at the beginning as is my training. After two minutes of simple checks, and a replaced fuse later the motor was back up and running.
The inexperience of the electrician had cost the factory owners around £500. I must say, I did not feel sorry for them, but it goes to show that not all electricians are indeed electricians.
 19 April 2014 11:53 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



alancapon

Posts: 5843
Joined: 27 December 2005

Originally posted by: mantutu
As I see it the only difference between the Gas Safe system and the present is awareness. . .

That is not quite the case. The Gas worker must work to the legislation and belong to Gas Safe for doing any gas work as a job. This includes the replacement of certain electrical parts where the combustion chamber must be accessed. If they are shown incompetent or not to be a member of the Gas Safe scheme, they will be prosecuted.

. . . I also see some people who talk about making it illegal for a DIY'er to carry out work in their own homes. . .

That is unlikely. The Gas Regulations already have exceptions for the "competent diyer" to carry out certain works in their own house and I would have thought it likely that a similar exemption would be in place for the electrical side.

. . . EICR's are a perfect example most see a danger where non exist. Even to the extent that 16th edition boards are now being declared unsafe. . .

The EICR is designed to show that the electrical installation was safe for continued service on the day it was inspected and to compare the installation to the current edition of the Wiring Regulations.


Regards,

Alan.
 19 April 2014 12:23 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for sparkiemike.
sparkiemike

Posts: 1556
Joined: 24 January 2008

In the recent connections magazine the NICEIC have put out a statement not supporting the committee, text below...

Domestic installer plans warning
Plans to overhaul the competent persons' scheme for domestic installers could prove burdensome for electrical contracting firms.

That is the view of NICEIC and ELECSA in response to Parliamentary recommendations for all domestic electricians to have a qualification equivalent to NVQ Level 3 within the next five years.

"While we welcome many of the recommendations made by the committee, we believe the requirement on all individuals, irrespective of the size of the firm or the work the individual undertakes, to be fully qualified places a huge onus on firms," said Emma Clancy, CEO of Certsure, which operates the NICEIC and ELECSA brands.

"To have all employees up to a qualified supervisor (QS) level will push up costs and reduce the need for apprentices. The industry will suffer in the long term. It is also no guarantee of a rise in standards."

Under the current QS system, which all competent person scheme operators use, a firm must employ at least one qualified supervisor with a qualification equivalent to NVQ Level 3. The QS is responsible for the final checking of work and the sign-off that it has been tested and inspected in accordance with the appropriate standards and regulations.

"The majority of electricians out there, working in people's homes, are fully qualified and competent to carry out the work required of them," added Clancy.


Along with the recent announcement on 3rd party inspections, this industry body seem to be at odds with some in government. It will be interesting to see what changes await electricians?
 20 April 2014 06:34 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



jcm256

Posts: 1946
Joined: 01 April 2006

It will also be interesting to see what United Kingdom accreditation service (UKAS) comes up with into the investigation of competent persons schemes asked for by the select committee. Bit of a blow to UKAS, they should have been doing their job properly in the first place. They are also told to disclose their findings about July?

The draft new APPROACH TO ACCREDITATION OF COMPETENT PERSON SCHEME OPERATORS CIS 7 | EDITION 1 | March 2014..

See web site below:



The club owners will get observation skills check on, verifying reports audits, vertical audits, horizontal audits, process audits and witnessing audits / inspections performed by the certification body.

Another snippet;
However, if a scheme operator undertakes a periodic random inspection of a member's work under condition 12 and notices that any controlled work (outside the scope of the scheme) is not compliant with the Building Regulations DCLG and the Welsh Government would at least expect the CPS operator to point it out to the scheme member.

Maybe they are short of installations to examine with the reduced part p now allowed mock audits, (would that be a test board with all the induced faults)

If the initial assessment of practical technical competence is to be based on simulated work until such time as actual work is available for on-site
assessment, such an approach would be acceptable provided this is clearly described in the scheme, the robustness of such a mock assessment is demonstrated to UKAS and there is a mechanism in place for the installer to notify the scheme operator when the first job is available. Clearly UKAS will need to assess any such alternative approaches by scheme operators on a case by case basis

...
http://www.ukas.com/library/Te...aft%20March%202014.pdf

Edited: 18 June 2014 at 02:55 PM by jcm256
 20 April 2014 09:37 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mantutu

Posts: 42
Joined: 16 June 2013

Originally posted by: alancapon

Originally posted by: mantutu

As I see it the only difference between the Gas Safe system and the present is awareness. . .


That is not quite the case. The Gas worker must work to the legislation and belong to Gas Safe for doing any gas work as a job. This includes the replacement of certain electrical parts where the combustion chamber must be accessed. If they are shown incompetent or not to be a member of the Gas Safe scheme, they will be prosecuted.

I was not aware that I asked a question or stated a fact.

. . . I also see some people who talk about making it illegal for a DIY'er to carry out work in their own homes. . .


That is unlikely. The Gas Regulations already have exceptions for the "competent diyer" to carry out certain works in their own house and I would have thought it likely that a similar exemption would be in place for the electrical side.
I think my next sentence made this obvious


. . . EICR's are a perfect example most see a danger where non exist. Even to the extent that 16th edition boards are now being declared unsafe. . .


The EICR is designed to show that the electrical installation was safe for continued service on the day it was inspected and to compare the installation to the current edition of the Wiring Regulations.

Current regulations also state that previous installations are not unsafe.



Regards,



Alan.



Alan almost everything I posted is out of context in your reply. Reading your post is rather like a Chinese puzzle.
If you are expressing a view then do so without using out of context statements, its just confusing.x
 21 April 2014 05:43 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



John Peckham

Posts: 7627
Joined: 23 April 2005

My view is that the requirement for notification under Part P should be dumped. Leaving the requirement in the Approved Document for domestic, and why not other work, to comply with the current edition of BS7671. In addition have a Competent Person's register that registers individuals as being competent not companies. As there is only enforcement of defective work now the same would apply in the future under my proposed scheme. If a person chooses to use a "Competent Electrical" they can do so by consulting a nominal role on a web site. No notification but the property owner must be handed an EWIC on completion of the work.

I am sure Capita would be keen to run a registration scheme as they already have the experience and infrastructure now with the Gas safe scheme.

All the current bodies would oppose this using some bogus safety case but in reality they would be protecting their income. They are fighting hard to get back the previous range of notifiable work as they make a lot of money out of notification and insurance fees.

-------------------------
John Peckham

http://www.astutetechnicalservices.co.uk/
 18 June 2014 12:44 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



henrysccott

Posts: 1
Joined: 18 June 2014

Domestic electrician will come to your home and test the safety of all of your electrical appliances and your entire electrical system. By having a thorough check of all your electrical systems you can reduce the risk of electrical fires.

Electrician Melbourne
 18 June 2014 12:50 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 11786
Joined: 13 August 2003

Originally posted by: henrysccott

Domestic electrician will come to your home and test the safety of all of your electrical appliances and your entire electrical system. By having a thorough check of all your electrical systems you can reduce the risk of electrical fires.



"Electrician Melbourne"

Does the price include travel time from Oz to the UK? and do the test (no inspections?) follow BS 7671 rather than AS/NZS 3000 ?
- Andy.
 18 June 2014 02:28 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



normcall

Posts: 8178
Joined: 15 January 2005

I always love to see things like:
"While we welcome many of the recommendations made by the committee, we believe the requirement................"

Naturally, 'committee' can also say 'report' or 'findings'.

Thrashing around to provide a solution for a problem that few believe exist in problematic quantities springs to mind.

-------------------------
Norman
Statistics

See Also:



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