National Register of Fire Risk Assessors

[colin todd]

I will not dignify the above with comment, other than, as always, to correct invalid assertions.

1. I never complained about prescription under the old system. It is a matter of record that, in both private interview with the then Home Office, and public consulation, I advocated the semi prescriptive route of building regs, where you can have prescription or not as you choose. It works a dream.

2. A EN can indeed offer options. It is specifically catered for and often adopted.

3, I referred to workload simply because Cleveland suggested that my lack of response to someone on a statistical matter was because (and I quote) "the truth hurts". The fact was I had no time to even log into Firenet.

I cannot really comment on the worth to society of supermarket staff, as I once visited a supermarket but couldnt find anyone to take my order as used to happen in the Coop, so I never went back again. However, I imagined (perhaps erroneously) that the staff would not be conversant with the underpinning principles of fire safety, but were educated enough to read and dutifully follow guides.

I was not aware that fire consultants are rich, but if its true please do not inform the former Mrs Todd, as she will expect an increase in her maintenance payments.

I have not been to a motorway accident, but I know how car brakes work. Indeed I keep advocating to my daughter that she use hers more frequently when driving in the Surrey lanes.

Lastly on the subject of wisdom, a trully gorgeous dentist in Derry removed a tooth of that description in emergency surgery some time ago. The pain was less than that I sometimes feel in dealing with modern fire safety.

Kurnal, Thank you so much, but sticks and stones....sticks and stones.......

[kurnal]

Cleveland you have a message.

[Clevelandfire 3]

I have replied Kurnal.

[Bobbins]

So how do warrington confirm that the guy didnt miss anything?

Warrington do pretty much the same as the IFE; a detailed review of the submitted assessments with a feedback report.

This report highlights the depth and quality of the advice and findings. They must have some kind of marking system in order to give a grade.

Following the portfolio assessment candidates attend an interview and then accreditation follows (if you pass)

I feel they should also have included the accompanied visit at this stage and not for the purpose of recertification after 4 years But I guess the expense is prohibitive.

However, as Colin pointed out previously the review and interview does provide a ‘Powerful tool’ by which a conclusion is arrived at. I think only 50% of the pilot candidates passed.

The main difference between the two schemes is that the Warrington scheme is written to an International standard and has quality and impartiality built in to it. Plus the checkers are checked via UKAS.

As I have said before all the schemes have some good points and some bad and until we can get some agreement on the best way to assess competence then the whole thing will continue to be a mess.

What we need is a well respected figure in the industry to ruffle a few feathers (which he is very good at) and start a full debate on a national scheme that all awarding bodies could deliver.

Go on Colin         “Unite the Clans”

I look forward to hearing you speak on the subject tomorrow or in the near future.

[colin todd]

Bob. I think that with new certification schemes such as these, there is a need to crawl before one walks and walk before one runs. There is probably a need for dust to settle and see how the schemes work out. Also, competition between CBs is not necessarily a bad thing. Warrington are to be commended if they have a UKAS certificated scheme (but then I would say that as I am a UKAS "industry sector expert"- in the current thread not sure whether to tell you this in case its big headed or not tell you and risk being accused of not declaring a prejudice).

If rationalization (note the Z Messey) is to occur it would probably most appropriately be through BAFE, and then any CB could run it. But thats for tomorrow not today. It is important that the cost of certification is limited. It is a minor cost in the running of a practice such as ours, but can be prohibitive for the one man band, who sees it as a big chunk off the bottom line and his fire service pension.

Ruffled feathers do no harm if it promotes thought and debate. As a lover of Burmese cats, they have a propensity to ruffle, remove and dissect feathers prior to eating them, so I have some way to go .

PS I think the last time somebody tried to unite the clans it resulted in the Highland Clearances, though Princess, being English, when I took her to the scene of the event, described it as a big field and asked me if there were any nice shops in Inverness.

[Midland Retty]

Fair points made Colin.

As you suggest we should perhaps learn to crawl before we walk etc, look to see how the current schemes "bed in"

I also appreciate that cost issues associated with the type of accreditation I want to see implemented would be prohibitive especially for a one man band.

It is a difficult issue. Other posters (some friendly, some not) have put forward sensible argument for and against the current way assessors are accredited.  But something is far better than nothing, and I do apreciate Colin that you and others, Im sure, would scrutinise applicants very carefully.

No "z" in rationlisation though Lord Todd  the "z" is the american spelling. Do stay behind after class.

[messy]

No "z" in rationlisation though Lord Todd  the "z" is the american spelling. Do stay behind after class.

MR. Don't go there with the 's' versus 'z' issue. I did once and lived to regret it!!! (PS American should have a capital 'A', so feel free to join CT in detention)

[colin todd]

Messy, I am so sorry, but I just cant resist it. Alien Chieftain Retty, As I have explained tirelessly to Messey, who now is interested in edyoukayshun following his loss of spellchecking facilities when he handed in his offical issue of chewing gum when he left the greatest fire brigade in the whole of.......London, it is merely a common misconception that the Z form is north american.

Oxford English Dictionary policy used to be that, where there was a choice of s or z it MUST be the z if the word has a Greek root. When Greek was largely dropped in schools (along with, judging by some of the spelling in this thread, English) no one knew how to implement it, so OED dumbed it down. Their policy which you will find clearly espoused in the Retty family dictionary is that, where there is a choice, the Z is the OED style while an s is a secondary spelling. That is why the Z is ALWAYS used in all British Standards, as they use the OED style as a house style.

Messey, Does no harm to hear things twice, given the number of hearing loss claims in the greatest fire brigade in the whole of ..... London. 

Monsignor Retty, I would suggest detention for you at Moreton, but that would be a cruel and unusual punishment within the meaning of human rights legislation.

On the more relevant subject of this thread, the interview principle is an accepted way of demonstrating competence. It is a requirement for registration of engineers at chartered or incorporated level by the IFE, and if it were that easy how come 40% fail? Perhaps the smarties who think it is such a doddle could run mentoring courses for would be registrants.

[Clevelandfire 3]

My apologies to members of the forum for comments I made last night on this thread. My apologies go to Colin Todd in particular. I was rude and took out of context what was said. I respect any one who can give us the benefit of their expertise and knowledge. I know at times we can all ask seemingly daft questions or have weird and wonderful ideas which may make the more experienced amongst us roll our eyes. But we all want to learn and benefit from each others experience and knowledge in order to protect people and property from fire. A common goal on all sides of the proffesion.

Coversely I believe there are those with an axe to grind not only on this forum but within the industry as a whole. It would be nice where differences of opinion existed for moderate and professional discussion to take place without the need to disolve the whole thing into a slanging match or target individuals or tar people with a broad brush or use pointless sarcasm. Banter is healthy of course so long as it is just banter. I am a culprit of that myself I know. I will remind myself that tone in which a comment has been made cant be judged over the interweb. I should learn to shrug off or ignore those I perceive to be making inflammatory statements. Once again my apologies it wont happen again, and I hope I have not put off anyone from using these forums.

To answer your reply above Colin, I don't for one second believe it would be easy to sit an interview, as demonstrated by the pass / fail percentage you quote. But you will agree a person could have a sound theoretical knowledge of a subject but lack the practical experience to carry out the task competently.

[Wiz]

Spot on Clevelandfire 3. Well done.

[Wiz]

........Oxford English Dictionary policy used to be that, where there was a choice of s or z it MUST be the z if the word has a Greek root. When Greek was largely dropped in schools (along with, judging by some of the spelling in this thread, English) no one knew how to implement it, so OED dumbed it down. Their policy which you will find clearly espoused in the Retty family dictionary is that, where there is a choice, the Z is the OED style while an s is a secondary spelling. That is why the Z is ALWAYS used in all British Standards, as they use the OED style as a house style. .......

Thank you for the lesson Colin. Having some time to analyze your concize observations I accept they comprize elements of fact. I hope someone televizes a programme about this matter on the BBC

[nearlythere]

........Oxford English Dictionary policy used to be that, where there was a choice of s or z it MUST be the z if the word has a Greek root. When Greek was largely dropped in schools (along with, judging by some of the spelling in this thread, English) no one knew how to implement it, so OED dumbed it down. Their policy which you will find clearly espoused in the Retty family dictionary is that, where there is a choice, the Z is the OED style while an s is a secondary spelling. That is why the Z is ALWAYS used in all British Standards, as they use the OED style as a house style. .......

Thank you for the lesson Colin. Having some time to analyze your concize observations I accept they comprize elements of fact. I hope someone televizes a programme about this matter on the BBC

So why are they not called Britizh Ztandardz then?

[kurnal]

[Thank you for the lesson Colin. Having some time to analyze your concize observations I accept they comprize elements of fact. I hope someone televizes a programme about this matter on the BBC

Spot on Wis.

[colin todd]

.......... because its only where there is a choice that the Z OED preferred. Dont blame me, I am only relaying facts.

[Mr. P]

Colin, you may have to change your titles - Colin Todd, CZ Todd & Azzociatez.  Then there iz alzo the queztion of uzez of C & S (or should that be Z?)