17th Edition Question

[ukiri]

He just has to be competant in his job, which his ongoing empolyment by the company would indicate. And fill in IEE pattern forms to record any new installs or minor works in house. I`ve worked maintenance on and off for 40 years for various companies as inhouse or for sub contractor company and that`s all they everdone.

 

[DPG]

He just has to be competant in his job, which his ongoing empolyment by the company would indicate. And fill in IEE pattern forms to record any new installs or minor works in house. I`ve worked maintenance on and off for 40 years for various companies as inhouse or for sub contractor company and that`s all they everdone.

He also needs to keep up to date with new regs and amendments though.

 

[lozarus]

With respect I think it's a bit excessive to start questioning and comparing job roles. Every company is different - massively so. And roles can even adapt and change. Case in point; I started in another role before becoming an Estate Manager with my employer. I undertake my role differently to my predecessor and my successor will likely make it a different role too. My predecessor was much more office/paperwork based. I prefer to be on the tools more than half the time. With an electrical background, it was obviously noted I had a bias this way - I undertake work to this effect and it's now reflected in my terms of empoyment following an annual review.

Obviously I'm in a funny position, because being the Manager, it's ultimately my job to also decide on the competencies required to undertake electrical, and other work at our site (and to this effect I have relevant qualifications, partly supported by my employer) - but my point is, Maintenance in one Employer may be very different to somewhere else.

 

[Midwest]

With respect I think it's a bit excessive to start questioning and comparing job roles. Every company is different - massively so. And roles can even adapt and change. Case in point; I started in another role before becoming an Estate Manager with my employer. I undertake my role differently to my predecessor and my successor will likely make it a different role too. My predecessor was much more office/paperwork based. I prefer to be on the tools more than half the time. With an electrical background, it was obviously noted I had a bias this way - I undertake work to this effect and it's now reflected in my terms of empoyment following an annual review.

Obviously I'm in a funny position, because being the Manager, it's ultimately my job to also decide on the competencies required to undertake electrical, and other work at our site (and to this effect I have relevant qualifications, partly supported by my employer) - but my point is, Maintenance in one Employer may be very different to somewhere else.

Correct there.

Our national estates manager takes the view, that it makes more business sense to employ a contractor, than for me to carry out electrical installation (or any other qualified works). They don't have to send me on courses, provide insurance, and concern themselves on how to do I keep up expertise & knowledge on the subject, doing works perhaps once every 6mths. Unless you can provide a cost benefit analysis, to prove otherwise of course.

No offence meant, but some 'maintenance people' just seem to want to gain qualifications, to show how clever they are to fix things.

 

[mainline]

The regs exams are not difficult to pass, and don't really indicate competency, so don't put too much value on them. A low pass or fail would indicate incompetency however.

Put it this way, if I had a choice of employing someone who had the 18th ed at 75%, or the 17th at 95%, I know who I'd choose.

I agree with you, the guy with the 18th as they will have the newer kit