| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dusty
Senior Member
Australia
439 Posts |
 Posted - 19 Feb 2007 : 10:42:43
|
Iain, I do have the odd client who asks me not to park out the front. Many who have termites swear me to secrecy, whereas I would rather leeaflet the street in the hope that a (paid) inspection will locate the offending nest site.Main reason for this is that knowledge of termite damage can devalue the home by easily 20%
Mind you, I still have the odd client who insists that I knock at the tradesman's entrance.
Again you seem to have the wrong grasp on foreign pest control. Less than 40% of my clients engage me for anything relevant to termites. Many merely have spiders treated on an annual basis, others are occasional clients for fleas, roaches, ants etc.
Had one client who refused to accept she had mice, as she felt that was a social stigma. She insisted she had shrew lol (we dont have shrew)She even insisted that I rewrite an invoice changing the wording to shrew
As far as signwritten vehicles, it is mandatory in my state (NSW)
Don't feed them, get Rid of them - visit us on www.ridpest.com.au |
 |
|
|
NickA
Hyperactive Member
United Kingdom
797 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2007 : 11:39:04
|
Carrying on with self perception, Surgeons used to be Barber surgeons,Dentistry was part of barber trade.
It gradually evolved dare I say because a few thought that it should.
Even Sanitation Inspectors became Environmental Health Inspectors and took on other duties.
These changes came about because people lobbied, even Councils do this to central government.
We use the warning triangle because we carry pesticides what if that under Health & Safety has to become the size of HazChem boards on lorries with additional wording. It could happen, then what will happen to dicrete.
Pests are smart - We're smarter
www.rpcwildlife.co.uk |
|
|
|
NickA
Hyperactive Member
United Kingdom
797 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2007 : 13:49:36
|
Money Splatman.
Eagle in 2001 wages were.
Level 1 �8,000 - �12,500 Trainee Technician not qualified.
Level 2 �12,750 - �13,250 BPCA part 1
Level 3 �13,400 - �13,750 BPCA part 1 &2
Level 4 �13,900 - �14,400 BPCA part 1 & 2 + 8 in house training course points.
Level 5 �14,450 -�16,500 as level 4 + company appointed tech rep for a minimum of 2 training modules
Technicians earned between �14,500 - �18,500 with high earnings of �22,000
Don't know if that is of any relevance as 6 years old.
How does that compare to other companies then or now.
Pests are smart - We're smarter
www.rpcwildlife.co.uk |
|
|
|
DaveM
New Member
USA
14 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2007 : 14:12:19
|
Iain,
Not really sure about attitudes here regarding pest control in the commercial sector but lots of home owners have a pest control service for the home and garden, so we see pest control vehicles around all the time.
Florida licencing is run by Florida Dept Agric and Consumer Services. For commercial pest control both the business and the individual must be licenced, although individuals working under direct supervision of a licenced applicator do not necessarily have to hold their own licence. My licence is in the Public Health Category and I am limited to types of work defined in that category, there's CPD points and all that and the State is good at running seminars etc. at which to get these points.
One thing that always amazes me here is the range of products that can be bought at DIY and farm stores. There seem to be few limits to DIY pest control here, this includes rodenticides as well as squirrel and mole products. |
|
|
|
Iain
Moderator
United Kingdom
220 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2007 : 17:31:28
|
Dusty,
Was the 'shrew lady' a Pom? 
I'll admit that I know next to nothing about pest control in Oz or the States. I was simply trying to get my head around why you have a licensing system, which must cost the Government (State and or National) significant money and we don't.
I'm not sure about other European countries, but the impression I get is that, with the exception of the Scandinavians, things are even less regulated than they are here, though I could be wrong.
Even when we had some fairly hairy chemicals we didn't have any licensing. Now such products have virtually all gone, there seems to be even less pressure on Government to introduce such a scheme.
Pre 1986 our products didn't even need to go through any Approval scheme - it was all on a voluntary basis (the Pesticide Safety Precautions Scheme), though most manufacturers did comply. At least we now have formally Approval products and do have the occasional proscecution of less than 'competent' 'professional' users.
But licensing - I just can't see it happening here.
Dave,
It is comforting to see that you also have the same issues regarding 'amateur use' products. |
|
|
|
Jonathan Peck
Member
United Kingdom
65 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2007 : 17:56:30
|
Iain
I agree with you that there is little desire within the regulatory authorities for formal licensing. Why is that? Because whatever we say, our industry actually has a very good safety record when it comes to handling pesticides and the perception in Whitehall is that the present system is working well. Do we want to talk up the problem into a public health safety issue? Be careful what you wish for - it may come true!
With regard to licensing, I am all in favour of higher standards of professionalism. However, I am not convinced that licensing will produce the answers that we want.
At the moment, it is illegal for someone in the UK to operate as a pest controller without adequate training and competence. That is in the regulations. The law exists to stop the cowboy element already. If it isn't working, it is because it is not being enforced.
What is not laid down in the UK regulations is the need for a formal qualification such as a licence, as in the USA. Does this work? I know of at least one company in the USA which is carrying out fly control but whose operators are "working under the supervision of a licence holder". The fact that the licence holder works for a supplier of goods and lives out of state shows that the system is no better than ours.
In my opinion, the true answer lies not in the type of qualification but in the enforcement of the existing legislation. That does not require new legislation but a better system of policing.
The best system would be self-regulation but how could we persuade BPCA, NPTA and HSE to develop such a system. We would be happy to set up an open forum at which PCO's could come and express their views, with positive suggestions. Any takers?
Best wishes
Jonathan Peck
Killgerm Group |
|
|
|
Dusty
Senior Member
Australia
439 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2007 : 20:50:51
|
Jonathan, obviously no one is born knowing all, so even in Ausralia we have trainee pest controllers.
A trainee is issued with a card type document that nominates a desgnated mentor. A mentor can not currently have more than two trainees. As there is a formal training program, a trainee is allowed 18 months to pass all the required units 5, 6, and 18)After 18 months, and with sufficient reason that time may be extended , but no guarantee.
Obviously levels of competence will vary from person to person, but it is a guarantee that when fully licenced, the tech has received a certain level of training and has a aquired a specific amount of knowledge. Experience is another matter.
It matters little to me if UK has licencing or not. If you all think open slather works for you, then power to you all. From an outsiders point of view, I see specific pest control questions asked on forums that should not need to be asked. We can kind of excuse that as one slipping through the cracks, but it is the collective replies from others that suggests the system is not really working all that well.
It would be remiss not to point out that you also have some very good pest controllers who know their craft well.
Don't feed them, get Rid of them - visit us on www.ridpest.com.au |
|
|
|
splatman
Junior Member
United Kingdom
26 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2007 : 21:42:32
|
jonathan,
It's always a good idea to have open forums, question is, will anyone listen??????? |
|
|
|
ABPest
Senior Member
United Kingdom
196 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2007 : 21:45:45
|
James, I'm not quite sure why you keep referring to questions that are asked on forums. Surely it is better for pesties to ask questions before they commit themselves.
Questions are asked on the Aussie forum. What does this indicate?
Some one once said to me :-
The definition of an intelligent person, is a person who knows what they do not know! You can guess at the rest of the definition for people that think they know it all!!
Quotation of the day over!
Adrian.
|
|
|
|
Dusty
Senior Member
Australia
439 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2007 : 08:09:50
|
Adrian, I mention it because it bothers me.
Forums are there to ask questions, no problem with that, however it should be expected that a practicing pestie, or any other calling for that matter, should at least have a basic understanding of their chosen career
One doesnt have to know all to identify those that are lacking in basic knowledge.
If you are having dificulty identifying the questions I refer to, I would be most happy to recommend a very basic, easy to understand pest control text book, and as always,will be happy to help you out with the tricky bits.
Don't feed them, get Rid of them - visit us on www.ridpest.com.au |
|
|
|
Dusty
Senior Member
Australia
439 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2007 : 08:11:53
|
Iain, the "shrew" lady wasnt a pom, just another stuck up from the colony
Don't feed them, get Rid of them - visit us on www.ridpest.com.au |
|
|
|
NickA
Hyperactive Member
United Kingdom
797 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2007 : 09:39:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by ABPest
The definition of an intelligent person, is a person who knows what they do not know! You can guess at the rest of the definition for people that think they know it all!!
Quotation of the day over!
Adrian.
There is too much knowledge for one person to absorb, but the difference between the intelligent person and the ignoramus is that the intelligent person remains open to learning.
The ignoramus is a closed book. He reacts with anger and indignation if someone tries to insert a bit of new knowledge into his head.
Pests are smart - We're smarter
www.rpcwildlife.co.uk |
|
|
|
blatta
Senior Member
United Kingdom
133 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2007 : 10:52:37
|
Errrr... what was the question?
Licensing of PCO's.
Still unsure of my position on this since I can see both arguments and points of view.
Blatta
Sitting on the fence |
|
|
|
Dusty
Senior Member
Australia
439 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2007 : 13:01:37
|
Excellent answer Blatta, it leaves us still in with a chance to lure you over to the dark side lol
Don't feed them, get Rid of them - visit us on www.ridpest.com.au |
|
|
|
blatta
Senior Member
United Kingdom
133 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2007 : 15:43:21
|
| It looks grey on both sides from up here on the fence! |
|
|
|
NickA
Hyperactive Member
United Kingdom
797 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2007 : 16:30:15
|
Not a hope!!!
Well it seems some in Europe have submitted ideas for common license and standards and not just for agriculture.
Page 25 Part C Document a good read if biased.
http://www.pan-europe.info/downloads/direct.pdf
Lewis be careful on that fence have you done a sitting at heights risk assessment.
Thought of splinters.
Pests are smart - We're smarter
www.rpcwildlife.co.uk |
Edited by - NickA on 20 Feb 2007 16:32:05 |
|
|
|
ABPest
Senior Member
United Kingdom
196 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2007 : 18:26:17
|
Dusty please send me a very basic book on general knowledge because you have me at a total loss. It's either that or you speak in Australian |
|
|
|
splatman
Junior Member
United Kingdom
26 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2007 : 18:58:54
|
Nick,
Have just read it, maybe I read it wrong but the clause you quoted pertains to pesticide labelling? As an asides, the heading of the document is "suggested text" remember this is a pesticides action group who want a blanket ban on most pesticides (which will never happen. Even so, the footnotes are interesting... "apply IPM standards at all times and eliminate pesticide use in public areas where high risk of exposure to children"............ Hardly life changing stuff is it? |
|
|
|
ABPest
Senior Member
United Kingdom
196 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2007 : 19:03:56
|
As this is potentially an important topic, I have briefly looked at the posts that have been made.
The "pertinent" answers break down ( and this is a quick analysis so forgive me if it not accurate ):-
Iain posted the question and has posted 2 replies.
Nick has posted 3 replies.
Spotlight Kid 3 replies.
Dog rat 1 reply.
Dave M 2 replies.
Splatman 1 reply.
J.Peck 1 reply.
Dusty 4 replies ( But poles apart in Australia ).
I point out these are what I call pertinent replies. You may disagree.
I don't know how many people have read the thread and not posted, but the evidence appears to be a lack of interest!
This is NOT a derogatory posting. I admit I expected a great deal more debate.
Where does this leave us?
Adrian.
|
|
|
|
NickA
Hyperactive Member
United Kingdom
797 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2007 : 20:01:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by splatman
Nick,
Have just read it, maybe I read it wrong but the clause you quoted pertains to pesticide labelling? As an asides, the heading of the document is "suggested text" remember this is a pesticides action group who want a blanket ban on most pesticides (which will never happen. Even so, the footnotes are interesting... "apply IPM standards at all times and eliminate pesticide use in public areas where high risk of exposure to children"............ Hardly life changing stuff is it?
Part C: Minimum knowledge requirements for pesticide operators
The examinations to determine whether a natural person is qualified to be licensed as a pesticide
operator shall test that person�s core knowledge and understanding of all of the elements in Parts A
and B.
The specific categories in which a pesticide operator can be licensed may include:
a. Agricultural pest control.
b. Forest pest control.
c. Seed treatment.
d. Aquatic pest control.
e. Right-of-way pest control.
f. Public health pest control.
g. Rodent regulatory pest control.
Notice it includes Public Health
That could mean you or me.
Proposals are just that, but its shows that Europe listens to others and using the "Nasty pesticide" logic could force change.
Licensing I feel will come in by Europe as have most of our laws now. Europe is the Supreme Court.
Pests are smart - We're smarter
www.rpcwildlife.co.uk |
Edited by - NickA on 20 Feb 2007 20:18:24 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Licencing of PCOs? Not a hope!
