Stupid number of fatalities and injuries 2015

[rope-a-dope]

Exactly, the awesome educators and trainers out there that have made a difference in my short career so far are optional. I was fortunate enough to have learned the basics of safe tree work in an educational setting, only earning credit towards my college tuition. It would be really beneficial for tree work to be reguarded and perceived as a trade requiring high levels of education and training.
I know that some states require arborists to be licenced. That's cool, but even more standards could come from insurance companies or local governments or even the trade associations that illustrate the professionals are smart and skilled and the amateurs are risky and potentially unqualified.

 

[treehumper]

When we realize that it is really knowledge backed by the skills and tools to act on that knowledge that we are selling will we start treating ourselves and the trade associations with seriousness. Then we'll start to protect our profession by demanding minimum standards beyond a pulse and a high risk tolerance in our new hires.

Insurance companies? They are the same people that will show up unannounced on a property and demand a tree or limbs be removed without so much as a valid opinion of a hazard condition being present.

Government tends to regulate in a reactionary fashion based on the amount of blood spilled and public outcry. That's due to the industry, any industry for that matter, pushing back against any sort of imposition of regulations despite the intent. Economics trump human life unless of course the cost weighs in favor of sparing a human.

 

[rope-a-dope]

Yea you're right about insurance and governments, just taking stabs at areas that might be interested in seeing an increase in responsibility.

Wouldn't it make sense if you were insuring a tree service against worker injuries, you would want to see proof of adequate training before covering them?

I have worked in a historical neighborhood that requires all tree work to be permitted by the association. That seems to have been a good way to "raise the bar" even though it's geared towards protecting trees not tree workers.

 

[treehumper]

To a certain extent how you train and manage your safety is factored in when the audit is done. But there would have to be some sort of historical data that demonstrates a clear link between formalized training and claim reduction. Would the insurers attempt to influence the industry of it's own accord? I would think that would happen through the industry associations and that when we as an industry can show steady improvement in accident rates then there could be lobbying to reduce rates.

Cities have also implemented stricter tree work ordinances that are aimed at raising the bar. However that takes enforcement and this is what is sorely lacking in many communities. Where, as in your example, you've got a small group where joining them requires accepting restrictions it can work. Many American towns are unwilling to implement ordinance that may not be readily accepted and cause a voter backlash.