Money talks, and if there is one way of being able to influence people pretty quickly, it is the threat of receiving less pay for the same amount of work.
That's the approach that one Staines-based brickwork contractor is taking to CSCS cards. It has written to staff saying it will take £10 off their wages each day if they don't hold a card.
Whatever your job, the prospect of ending the week £50 lighter isn't one that anyone would welcome. It is a real stick - rather than carrot - option, but it is one that will certainly work. Given the option of sitting the CSCS test and obtaining a card, or ending the month with £200 less in my pocket, I know which I would choose. There is no doubt that it will work. More workers will apply for their CSCS card, and more will turn up on site with their card.
So should this approach be taken across the industry? While CSCS itself doesn't recommend the approach, it does recognise that it will be successful. And perhaps it's a tactic the Major Contractor's Group could look at as it struggles to get the final 10% of its workers CSCS-carded.
But with 1.2 million CSCS cards in construction, and more than two million people involved in the industry, there are a lot of people yet to sit the test. While the Major Contractor's Group is leading the way, there are plenty of sectors that probably don't even consider it that important. The refurbishment sector - which fared particularly badly in recent HSE site blitzes - would certainly be worth looking at.
Perhaps the £10-a-day penalty should be mandatory. If it helps to improve safety - particularly in a year where the statistics have gone worryingly backwards - it surely has to be considered.
Do you think docking workers' wages for not having a card is a good idea? Take part in this week's contractjournal.com web poll and let us know - you can find it on the home page, and we'll print the results in next week's issue.
Subscribe to CJ's blog by RSS
Comments (5)
The decision by the Staines based contractor to penalise those employees who don't hold a CSCS skills card beggars belief. The MCG aid and abet the naive employer who thinks the "touch screen test" and £25 for a CSCS card will infer competence on site.
Is the brickwork contractor insisting on registration of his bricklayers for a trade related qualification, I doubt it. He's clearly seeking the easiest, quickest and least expensive means of getting his tradesmen physically through the MCG gates.
Ask the Staines based employer how many bricklayers he currently has on the books serving a full apprenticeship in that discipline. Probably single figures!
As ever, the industry's emphasis is with the CSCS/CPCS cards and not the respective qualification. They are foolish to think that a CSCS card for every worker will cure all ills. It is currently no more than a mass registration with little or no "competence" in attendance for a plethora of trades. Tens of thousands of CSCS card-holders are currently on UK construction sites undertaking tasks for which their card does not deem them competent.
Posted by Mick Norton | March 6, 2008 12:41 PM
Posted on March 6, 2008 12:41
I think its a disgrace that the Major Contractors Group has been allowed to hi-jack the CITB, a registered charity, and run it as a private limited company.
I strongly object to being blackmailed into having a CSCS card which are nothing more than a money making racket. I have no objection to the HSE test but to call someone who has worked in construction many years incompetent because he or she has not PURCHASED a CSCS card is a disgrace to freedom of choice and democrocy.
I thought that the closed shop was illegal so the NO CARD NO WORK is disgrace and should be challanged in the courts.
Posted by Iain Camick | March 7, 2008 7:28 AM
Posted on March 7, 2008 07:28
Slapping a pay freeze on non card holders can only be a good idea.
In our business safety and workmanship are paramount, in fact they are a commercial necessity.
It has to be said though that these these cards were only ever intended to confirm a very basic level of personal safety on site. Nothing more, nothing less. The whole of the training in the sector needs to be re-framed to ensure that there is an ongoing "CPD" style arrangement for operatives with regard to H&S.
Hewlett give our clients assurances that our operatives skills have been validated against national standards and they have the required knowledge to operate safely on site - over 90% of our workforce is CSCS registered – but we also supplement the card with additional/more suitable training and 70% of our workforce have also gained additional NVQ qualifications.
Workers have to be convinced that they need to have the card but also encouraged to seek further training. Hitting workers where it hurts….the pocket, is the best way to get them to sit up and take notice. It will make people think more about their role on site and the potential risks that are inherent, and for those without a card, it will be a persuasive argument for them to get one!
Posted by Alan Cooper | March 10, 2008 9:58 AM
Posted on March 10, 2008 09:58
As a training provider who promotes Health & Safety training, for preparation to take the test, I find that the majority of SME's agree in principal that the card system is necessary to ensure their operatives carry out 'best practice' when it comes to Health & safety.
But they lack the committment in terms of financial support until such time they are made to by Main Contractors who insist on a totally carded workforce. Only when it may affect their ability to being compliant do they consider providing the resources to their workforce.
Whilst it is considered the CSCS system is somewhat basic as regards to Health & safety it has to be 'better than nothing'.
Health & Safety training is an investment in your workforces future and should not be perceived as just obtaining a 'passport' to construction sites.
Posted by Lawrence G Vesey | March 10, 2008 6:02 PM
Posted on March 10, 2008 18:02
I agree, Health and Safety training is paramount in any industry or field.
Posted by Tony Starks | June 8, 2008 9:31 AM
Posted on June 8, 2008 09:31