Before I start, can I say that in principle, the idea of the CSCS system is a good one. However, it has a major problem.
Yesterday, I met a couple of painters fortunate to be working on a site where the Principal Contractor does not require CSCS cards. Each had 15-20yrs. experience but NO CSCS card.
I looked at their work. It was a good, commercial painting standard, but with no CSCS card, they are restricted to only being able to work on certain sites.
Here lies the real problem with the CSCS card system.
Why is it that a newly qualified NVQ level 2 college trainee with only 2-3 years experience, can be issued with a CSCS card, and yet a highly experienced painting 'subbie', with no NVQ can't even get to work on many sites?
Now don't get me wrong, I fully support the 'health and safety test' bit. It's important that all site operatives have a basic knowledge of health and safety, but surely some account should be taken of 'experience' in the industry?
I know experienced painters can go down the On-Site Assessment and Training route, but where do you find time/money to do this?
It seems to me that too much reliance is made on the NVQ level 2 to demonstrate 'competency' and this is the real failure of the CSCS system.
Why should the NVQ level 2 be the only means of assessing a painter's competency?