ATH
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Findlay, Ohio
.
No...titles, longevity, stamps, certifications, etc... should not earn pay - performance does/ should.
Walking shoes.
Call to regulation pros/cons...
- Thread starter Chaplain242
- Start date
No...titles, longevity, stamps, certifications, etc... should not earn pay - performance does/ should.
I used to ridicule unions much like you ATH, but the reality is that there's a limited pool of people gifted enough to match the best in this biz, either short or long term.
Folks workin balls out everyday tryin to keep up with Reg'll get alotta not so gifted climbers hurt or worse.
Dog eat dog gets alotta pups killed.....
My CO used to complain about me goin balls out everyday, stating I was cuttin the whole crew's throat because the owners would come to expect such output as the norm.
Remember what happened to Ole Henry Stamper when he never gave an inch!
en.m.wikipedia.org
Sometimes great notions are just that......
Jemco
Folks workin balls out everyday tryin to keep up with Reg'll get alotta not so gifted climbers hurt or worse.
Dog eat dog gets alotta pups killed.....
My CO used to complain about me goin balls out everyday, stating I was cuttin the whole crew's throat because the owners would come to expect such output as the norm.
Remember what happened to Ole Henry Stamper when he never gave an inch!
Sometimes a Great Notion - Wikipedia
Sometimes great notions are just that......
Jemco
Last edited:
Yes, disclosure I am not confused. I was trying to have the other poster, maybe see that some of what he is saying is hard to follow because statements are made with no conclusions or clear points. A series of random points with no clear connection. We are discussing apples he brings up oranges with no clear transition. Thanks for playing along though.Yes and yes. And the "confusion" was from the other poster. I was just being nice
ATH
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Findlay, Ohio
After having been forced into union representation for almost 20 years in another job , I am not a union fan...but I've tried to not let that cloud my judgement too much as a part of this conversation. (That was as a govco employee - not an arborist...but job title wouldn't have mattered because everyone from the guy flipping the "stop/slow" sign on the road crew to prison guards to professional engineers and foresters all had the same contract.)
Back on the topic at hand... after the quoted reply, I think I am starting to get where you are coming from: If we are going to be regulated, we need to be trained. Is that a fair summary of a starting place?
Then, I think, the next step you are seeing is that the model that you seem to think best fits this is a journeyman program as offered by skilled trade unions?
I can see that.
I happen to disagree that unions offer the best model for training...I know plenty of highly knowledgeable and skilled arborists who did not come through any formal training program.
I'd also argue that knowledge is at least as important as skills to our profession (and that, for the most part this is a "profession" more than a "trade". Think doctor vs. welder...both are great careers, both essential to the advancement of the economy, but they are quite different in both requirements and how you get "there").
Additionally, this is an extremely variable industry, so beyond some basics, it would be hard to have a successful journeyman's program. For example, I think none of the following individual skills are necessary to be a great arborist...you need something, but not all;
*Tree climber
*Crane operator (whether assisting a climber or running a grapple crane - both very different)
*Aerial lift operator
*Spray technician
*Diagnostics
*Tree planter
*Fertlization
*etc....
Birdyman88
Branched out member
- Location
- Arlington
@ wrangler mentioned New Jersey, so here is theirs:
Note that without the degree in the specified fields to shave off some time, you will need 5 years of continuous employment in the field for LTE, or 3 years continuous for LTCO. The info below, copied from their website, is actually backwards from what the actual ACT says for non-degree experience requirement and should probably be revised. But I'm not licensed fact-checker so don't listen to me.
The following requirements must be met in order to be eligible to take the NJ Licensed Tree Expert examination:
The licensed application fee and completed LTE/LTCO Exam Application, including three letters of recommendation, must be received by the Board office prior to the posted deadline.
Any verification documents specifically requested by the board must be received by the board no later than two weeks prior to the date of the examination.
A candidate for the examination must meet the following qualifications. He/she must be:
- a person 18 years of age or older; a person of good moral character;
- provide three (3) letters of reference from professionals in the field of arboriculture or in a closely related field, who have first-hand knowledge of the candidate's work and moral character;
- a graduate of a four-year college with a degree in forestry, arboriculture, ornamental horticulture, botany, nursery production, plant biology, plant physiology, ecology, horticulture, environmental planning and design, landscape architecture, natural resources, or the equivalent (as determined by the Board of Tree Experts) and one year of continuous employment in the practice of arboriculture for one year or,
- a person who has been continuously employed in the practice of arboriculture for at least three years immediately preceding the date of his/her test application or
- a person who has completed two years of college, with passing grades in at least three college courses related to arboriculture, such as botany, soils, plant science, plant biology, plant pathology, plant physiology, entomology, forestry, natural resources, ecology, horticulture, plant propagation, landscape construction or dendrology and has been continuously employed in the practice of arboriculture for at least three years preceding the date of his/her test application.
- Include the License Application Fee of $50.00 with the completed exam application.
The license application fee and completed LTE/LTCO Exam Application, including three letters of recommendation, must be received by the Board office prior to the date of examination.
Any verification documents specifically requested by the board must be received by the board no later than two weeks prior to the date of the examination.
A candidate for the examination must meet the following qualifications. He/she must be:
- a person 18 years of age or older; a person of good moral character;
- provide three (3) letters of reference from professionals in the field of arboriculture or in a closely related field, who have first-hand knowledge of the candidate's work and moral character;
- a graduate of a four-year college with a degree in forestry, arboriculture, ornamental horticulture, botany, nursery production, plant biology, plant physiology, ecology, horticulture, environmental planning and design, landscape architecture, natural resources, or the equivalent (as determined by the Board of Tree Experts) or,
- a person who has been continuously employed in the practice of arboriculture for at least five years immediately preceding the date of his/her test application or
- a person who has completed two years of college, with passing grades in at least three college courses related to arboriculture, such as botany, soils, plant science, plant biology, plant pathology, plant physiology, entomology, forestry, natural resources, ecology, horticulture, plant propagation, landscape construction or dendrology and has been continuously employed in the practice of arboriculture for at least three years preceding the date of his/her test application.
- Include the License Application Fee of $50.00 with the completed exam application.
Last edited:
rope-a-dope
Branched out member
- Location
- Asheville
The regulation/union mixture I think is coming from the perception that both can contribute to the goals that most agree would benefit the industry.
Like higher values for services and higher wages. Or higher standards of safety and/or more boundaries to prevent improper work practices.
Laws are different from place to place. Drive out of a certain neighborhood, and suddenly there is no restrictions on what can be cut.
A national union that applies to the workers rather than the trees might be more effective at protecting tree work standards, but could introduce difficulties in employment.
Its hard to brainstorm on here without running into someone else's bias.
Like higher values for services and higher wages. Or higher standards of safety and/or more boundaries to prevent improper work practices.
Laws are different from place to place. Drive out of a certain neighborhood, and suddenly there is no restrictions on what can be cut.
A national union that applies to the workers rather than the trees might be more effective at protecting tree work standards, but could introduce difficulties in employment.
Its hard to brainstorm on here without running into someone else's bias.
In Jersey the answer is yes.I am a Licensed Tree Care Operator,i do trimming and removals.If i want to do pesticides,fertilizers,plantings,tree risk assessments,diognose trees of declining health,etc. ,then I must meet requirements for Licensed Tree Expert and pass that exam.
ATH
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Findlay, Ohio
Agreed...a certification seems more voluntary while a license is more of a permission to operate.
That is all good IF there is accountability.
You bring up a good question: is it better to regulate the person or the practice? The end result should be the same.
If you are regulating the practice, that probably means each project needs permitted. That would certainly increase what I charge a client...I don't need more paperwork headaches and if they are going to come, I am going to make them worth my while.
If you regulate the person, you set training and testing standards. Probably means you need a way to respond to complaints and address/penalize the individual if the project is outside of standards (A300 - they are already written).
ATH
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Findlay, Ohio
I'm mixed...yes, it should be better for the trees. But I don't like unnecessary regulation. Like I asked early on in this thread: is there an "epidemic" of catastrophic failures related to poor practices that justify this question? If it is just protecting consumers from their own stupidity, then let's push for better education.
Birdyman88
Branched out member
- Location
- Arlington
Back to the original post, can anyone verify the details of the exact rope failure? The title and text keeping using the phrase "felling accident", but the scarce details elude to a limbing accident. With regards to the rope, the forces applied might be very different depending. I still contend that if it was limbing, and negative blocking was involved, then regulation may not have a meaningful effect upon the actual root cause in this case.
Dynamic loading is one of the most important calcs you can do negative blocking, and it is also one of the most complex. In fact, Yale is the only manufacturer I know of that publishes their EA factor. For all others, you have to derive an estimate of it on your own. However, there was thread here on the buzz where there was clearly a misunderstanding of what EA actually is and it's proper derivation and use. You also never hear anyone discussing it. My gut feeling is it's being ignored on jobs. Hope I'm wrong, but we may find that's why the man died in this case. The treeworkers big bad rope just wasn't big and bad enough that day, and nobody ran the load calc beforehand. Maybe they've been dropping pieces that size many times on that rope, maxing the force at 60% break strength, never realizing the forces, and just got lucky all those times before, and the rope finally fatigued.
Maybe it was a pull line, and maybe someone didn't run the force calcs for a lean or weight imbalance. I don't know. But IF it was limbing and a dynamic load was not accounted for, then in reality, is more regulation going to get everyone to start running those dynamic load calcs for the bigger drops? I don't know that answer, but it certainly worth asking. It just seems silly to be talking about unions and licenses when it really comes down to a math/engineering problem that some of us might continue to overlook.
Dynamic loading is one of the most important calcs you can do negative blocking, and it is also one of the most complex. In fact, Yale is the only manufacturer I know of that publishes their EA factor. For all others, you have to derive an estimate of it on your own. However, there was thread here on the buzz where there was clearly a misunderstanding of what EA actually is and it's proper derivation and use. You also never hear anyone discussing it. My gut feeling is it's being ignored on jobs. Hope I'm wrong, but we may find that's why the man died in this case. The treeworkers big bad rope just wasn't big and bad enough that day, and nobody ran the load calc beforehand. Maybe they've been dropping pieces that size many times on that rope, maxing the force at 60% break strength, never realizing the forces, and just got lucky all those times before, and the rope finally fatigued.
Maybe it was a pull line, and maybe someone didn't run the force calcs for a lean or weight imbalance. I don't know. But IF it was limbing and a dynamic load was not accounted for, then in reality, is more regulation going to get everyone to start running those dynamic load calcs for the bigger drops? I don't know that answer, but it certainly worth asking. It just seems silly to be talking about unions and licenses when it really comes down to a math/engineering problem that some of us might continue to overlook.
Chaplain242
Branched out member
Great post - to hear of a case study is gold.
My only concern is the caveat “sincere salt of the Earth type tree guys” - the temptation to corner the market may often be too much for many with their lives invested in tree work and an opportunity to try make it pay, or set barriers that work too well so one must recruit from abroad...
Yup,exactly my point,it’s vital that the people at the top are earnest about helping people who have an interest/passion for this kind of work come into the industry or at least have opportunity to become part of it! Initially I was afraid this was a good ol boys club at the top with intentions of eliminating competition. From what I’ve seen,not the case here,I think they are sincere about improving education,safety,trees,and fairness (Level Playing Field)=better industry!
New threads New posts
-
test
-
-
-
-
Light 14 or 16" narrow kerf bar for 200t or 201t- Started by southsoundtree
- Replies: 9
-
-
