Member Info for jamesslater

Firstly, no, we dont turn anyone away for not having a RAMS. Reason? We have a RAMS register which the site manager is REQUIRED to fill out. ALL RAMS are required by post, fax or email to site 2 weeks before start date on site. This is pretty religiously adhered to. The RAMS is looked at, comments made and passed back, such as not being allowed stepladders on site etc. They are made aware in the pre start meeting usually 4 weeks before of all health and safety requirements and any foreseen difficulties are discussed. It isnt about going by the rulebook, it is about enforcing policy so that people know they cannot get away with anything, and importantly, that there ONE standard for ALL On my sites you will never ever see an exposed dig. You will never see a raised drain.................yada yada. What i'm getting at is, WE fulfill OUR part of the bargain. So on the job where the scaffold came down late, we did not start the next subbie immeadiately, we remdiated the ground first.

I totally disagree. Of course, the REASON we go to these lenghts is to avoid our liability for accidents. But at the same time, I take it seriously regardless of cost or program. I recently told a site manager to put back a watertight date and scaffold strip on safety grounds. If you're a regional manager you'll know the significance of that. toolbox talks a getout clause? Really? I recently sent a memo to all site manager about a scissor lift collapse because of a lack of inspection (the defect would have been clearly visible on a weekly inspection) The response was good with all managers reporting that they did not have to chase plant inspections any more, and that they were being handed in on time. I personally inspect ALL the weekly site manager safety reports, and pick one at random every week to make sure it's actually being properly updated and not just rattled off the PC. Ditto the weekly plant inspections, Whilst I dont look in detail at each one I match the count to the site diary count each week when they are faxed/emailed to me on Monday mornings. Our system is not perfect, I dont claim that, but it certainly is NOT a get out clause.

Lol, I know the law, I'm a regional construction manager. I didn't say it wasn't the site manager's responsibility. Something you might like to consider is CDM2007 which could concievably allow the site manager to argue (for instance) that the client had pressured the program to a degree as to make it unsafe and difficult for him to carry out his duties (I have resisted shortening the program of our build for EXACTLY this reason) But that's by the by, my post below is correct in that everyone has responsibilty for health and safety. My telephone number, as well as the owner of our company is on our health and safety board in EVERY one of our canteens on site so that any operative who feels he is being forced to work in an unsafe condition can go around the site manager and call one of us to look at the problem. This is pointed out in every induction.

What I mean by the comment below is this: When I used to be a site manager, often, you could be extremely busy, so you cannot supervise every last detail. So I would tell people exactly what I wanted..................so I might say, take that plasterboard delivery and stack it in the cabin. Make sure it lays flat. Often, you come back to find the guys have done something totally different for one reason or another despite telling them exactly what to do. Then you have to aks, the guy going into the cabin AFTER............why did he not close the door and report it back to the manager that the boards had been stacked dangerously?

I'm not that ****y about spelling to be honest. I do use it occasionally as a tool to beat someone on the head with, but I fully recognise that it ultimately isn't too important. I know a guy who owns a large groundworks company and has a £15m landbank who can barely write. Re the palsterboard, you may well be right that it was his fault, but as I tell everyone, You are ALL your own safety officer.

P.S. Your last post was perfectly reasonable and I have no argument with it. But you have to admit, the tone of it is VERY different to the first post.

If that is the case, I would completely agree. Throwing someone into a position doesn't make them able to do it. Generally what I've seen is people coming through as trades, then foremen, then site supervisors and on to construction manager.............though of course I have also come across some complete idiots too. With ROK though, it seems we are both speaking from experience...............but in the Northwest, my experience was very good. That said, I have also worked for LOR in the Northwest and they were excellent. I am told they also are not so good in the southern region.

Lol, well I'm pretty much out of funding now. It's all in. Spread around though. It's been frustrating this week seeing so many bargains and no cash to buy.

To be honest, I don't dispute they may be different in other regions. But a company with only 350m of debt and a £900m turnover, making profit with the exception of excetions..........to me it all adds up to a bargain. I didn't get in at 16p I got in at mid 20s................but I'll keep them for at least a year yet. I think if I keep them for 4 years, the dividend alone will pay for the cost price. Certainly not one of the shares I worry about!

I know there's a difference...............pronounced correctly. And as I said, most people do not pronounce them correctly.

Lol, if you want to impress, get a B Eng or B Sc, no a BA. Size of your motor doesn't do it for me.

I don't really see the rellevence of pronunciation to there, their and thy're, since most people say them the same way and these are differentiated in text to give clarity of meaning. Though I supppose you could argue the case more for thecontraction

What can I say? It's what I do ;) Denbee, you might notice that I only ever correct a person if they have FIRST questioned the intelligence of another group or person. I just feel the need to point out the irony. That person wil then either have a think or they won't. I'll let you into a secret about the BMW.............if they fitted adaptive cruise control to a 2l engine, that's what I'd have had. I'm not an engine size queen.

The three projects I was involved with were all on budget and on time too.

And once again, if you are going to **** off site managers for being uneducated, you might want to learn the difference between 'your' and you're' Perhaps while you're brushing up on 'there' , 'they're' and 'their'

My post is not about me, it is about my experience and those I know in the industry. My post was two part, firstly it was refuting your ridiculous claim that site managers who come from a carpentry background are untrained. The second part is also fact, MY experience of ROK in the NW was a very pleasant one. A good company who ran well programmed jobs with good, friendly subcontractors...................ones who lack your 'attitude' and spend their time getting on with the work. I have worked for ROK briefly in the past and was impressed. It takes a lot to impress me. Being the regional manager for a £50m a year construction company I feel I have at least SOME 'qualification' to comment.

I have a MASSIVE ego. But my comments were nothing to do with that. My comments were to do with your broad brush strokes about site managers/chippys. Firstly, there is no site mananger qualification. There is a construction degree............which to be frank is not as comprehensive as 15 years 'on the tools' doing varied jobs. There is the SMSTS, but this has little to do with management skills and is all about site safety. The best managers are the intelligent joiners (around 70% of all managers) and the generally hard working brickies and engineers (around 15%) My other point of contension is that here you are ****ging off managers............who generally work quite hard and you seem to have few of the skills they posses to do the job they do day in day out. I can't comment on ROK in London, but their construction division in the NW had the safest, cleanest sites I've seen, Good programs which even before CDM2007 were left with room so that no contracotr worked around or over another. The contractors (up here at least) showed a friendliness and can do attitude which your posts don't suggest. Re foreign labour, I recently had a German crew do a contract, and while the usual English crew are monosybilic at best, aggressive and contractual at worst, the Germans had a can do attitude, chased the work and finished it a week ahead of program.Hopefully this recession will be a lesson to the large minority of English subbies that the world doesnt owe them a living

Well, speaking as an ex carpenter. I went on to university, then I went back to construction with my own small company...........moved on to construction management and have recently been promoted to a regional construction manager. I have worked for ROK in the past and was very impressed with their setup. And while you are questioning MY intelligence, at least I know the difference between 'there' their' and 'they're'

I haven't bought these, but was watching today and expected a rise. There's no accounting for this market is there!

I wont buy this till the spread closes up a lot. But.......I will keep looking because I am impressed at the reaction to the downturn. The man obviously is hard working and sensible. A bit of a punt but if it can be made to work, he will.