Hi guys, been re-reading posts regarding the above - We are all ware of the downturn [sacked my bank LOL] but on a serious note it is starting to turn around. Now there was a serious backlog of competence [cards] prior to the credit crunch, and as construction picks up there will be panic out there. I have been asked to set up a training, testing & NVQ centre. Existing staff are very experienced and sitting at home twiddling their thumbs most day? [Good old Mr Gamble eh!]

Our current centre has completed 1 NVQ in a year - why have the hassle the Director states, concentrate on training only? Keeps the CITB lot off our backs!

Please advise... has Balfour Beatty Services said NO to the CPCS muddle and gone to National Plant? Has the MCG packed in due to the Bircham Newton cartel? WHAT IS RECOGNISED AND WHAT ISN'T?

Every where i go i hear "lets go with Lantra" This because they are plant people first and foremost. QAA's are plant experienced, practical and offer every assistance. Our QAA, as mentioned is a chef and his key to fame was that an Assessor can't possibly make an initial judgement of experience through observing an operator operate? Christ, as a competent assessor and IV competence stands out as does inability - an experienced assessor, trainer tester etc can tell quickly the ability of any person before he/she starts judging to the criteria? Our QAA also gets a hard on by making life difficult for the centre and assessors. I have been an Assessor and IV since the conception of NVQs and went through all the changes albeit we are now moving backwards rather than forwards - CAA don't agree with ENTO - this from our QAA - back to basics is rubbish he shouts! Another centre recently had a level 3 sanction. Now with the agreement of thier QAA ONE onservation is adequete to gain an NVQ... our QAA shouts no...that is EWPAR route? We all know an experienced assessor COULD make a judgment PROVIDING evidence is sufficient etc etc... but standards have slipped yet again! As stated before they are working against each other causing centres and US financial hardship as well as the poor old operator who wants to make a living?

So, Sustainer, guys, your feedback would be appreciated. Do i bother or do i stay in retirement? Is CPCS in trouble, should we go Lantra route and also National Plant - or should we go CITB and give management anger courses to our staff?

Guys as usual, there is a wealth of experience and common sense with you guys...sorry to re-start topic again but...well a beach abroad is looking better at this moment.

Appreciated

Sonic

Dear All, If you are about to attend one of the CPCS road-shows for either, training providers or employers please ask the following question of the CPCS Chairman, Mr Gamble or the CPCS Senior Manager, Mr Bodger. When are you going to sort out the appalling errors in the question/answer bank?

Sonic, I've just spent a couple of days with Balfour Beatty and not a "CPCS" card to be seen. Everybody proudly sported their NPORS cards highlighting individual competencies. There is no doubt that some of the major contractors are actively considering opening the door to, NPORS. The HSE have stated that the CPCS now differ from other training bodies since they de-regulated their form of training for plant operators and as a result NPORS and LANTRA are receiving more prominence. e.g, The HSE have gone direct to NPORS and LANTRA seeking their opinions on a possible revamp of, L 117 which might broaden its scope to include plant operations. As for the NVQs for Plant Operations employers are now having severe reservations as to their worth. Certain training organisations, predominantly college based, have clearly joined the, "Gravy Train to Gain" purely for the income and to hell with quality. I'll put some figures on the forum asap highlighting what NVQs for Plant Operators has cost the taxpayer and it makes frightening reading. Despite best efforts by many well intentioned individuals the assessment process for plant operations has not been sufficiently policed, based on the throughput.

Sonic, 1,200,000 started Train to Gain, (T2G) by April 2009. 554,100 completed T2G by April 2009. 4% of all T2G learners are in Plant Operations. Therefore, based on the completed proportion at the National Audit Office, (NAO) aggregate value of, £970.00 you have a taxpayer spend of, £21,499,080 With the T2G value for plant operations at £1,260 for the lower rate and £1,860 for the higher rate and make the assumption that say, 80% were lower rate and 20% higher rate this would bring the expenditure to, £30,586,440............................................................................................................ Based on the above my question is, "Has the T2G expenditure improved the competence of Plant Operators?" Sustainer

I run a successful CPCS/Lantra-NTO/ALLMI/City & Guilds training/testing centre in the south west, who employes 4 full time testers/assessors and also useds up to 10 sub contract testers/assessors throughout the country, we are currently booked solid to the end of September (which in this climate is a bonus).

Currently we are receiving calls from various companies and individuals who have forked out monies for various types of certification including Lantra and NPORS, looking for CPCS cards as their certificates have not been accepted on site as promised.    Although CPCS do have minor problems, you must agree that the new scheme that was launched in August 2008 is a much better scheme and also tests the candidate more thoroughly than before, this should in turn lead to a more competent operator when it comes to the NVQ (assuming they have completed the test prior to the NVQ).

With regard to Lantra, i think you will find that they are predominately agriculture based (formerly ATB Landbase) who decided to go into construction at a much later date.   If you ask me, stick with CPCS, with a few minor changes, there is not another scheme llike it.

Jeremy, Thanks for the update hope you and your team are well. Here's a CPCS problem that a high profile construction company are experiencing. For the record this company has continuously supported the CTA and CPCS scheme for many years. Like many other construction companies they have felt the pinch through 2009 and have had to make many redundant and the remainder placed on a four day week. Nonetheless they are keen to ensure that the workforce have the necessary competence to work on a UKMC site. This week they discovered that due to the turmoil in the industry and the loss of their admin team 3 x Slinger Signallers' red CPCS cards had expired in August 2008. In the intervening period between August 2008 and early in 2009 all candidates achieved NVQs in Lifting Operations at level 2. Despite the latter full measure of their competence in Lifting Operations/Slinging and Signalling being achieved the CPCS now insist that each candidate must do their theory and practical tests again. Additionally they have been told that any appeal would be a "waste of time." The insistence of the CPCS to request that the theory and practical tests are done, yet again, even with each candidate in possession of the relevant NVQ is blatant robbery. There is clear greed from Bircham Newton when they continually bleed construction companies for more cash. They should have given the company a dispensation considering the achievement of the NVQs and given each candidate a "blue" card as a measure of good faith. Is it any small wonder that many companies have deserted CPCS, like Balfour Beatty Utilities, when such treatment is meted out. When you attend your CPCS roadshow put the latter scenario to Messrs, Gamble, Bodger, Pells or Docherty, I would be very interested to hear their response !! Also interesting to note that even though the roadshows are just a week away none of the CPCS Monitors have been briefed on the state of play with the question/answer banks !! Funny that Update 90 stated that there would be an increased effort to improve communications !! Sustainer

Sustainer, We are all good thanks, trust you are well.

Thank you for your feedback, in response, and i dont want to be seen as "bum licking" the CPCS, BUT:-

The candidates in question must have completed their CPCS tests in 2006 for them to expire in 2008, i dont wish to seem tough but surely, the candidates have had the training and have received their cards, is it not their responsability to ensure that their employers are aware of the expiry dates??????

With the availability of T2G funding throughout 2008 the employees would have qualified for these monies as they were all employed, the cost to the employer would have been minimum (Reg, H&S and Card - total £115.00), plus if they were a levy paying company they could have claimed the grant, which as last year would have been £500.00???

Kind regards to you all,

Jeremy