Accreditation proposals look impossible - but BPB commits not to create a monster It just looks that way …
The BPB has released a bundle of documents containing the practical aspects of version 2 of the proposal to accredit council employees. Representatives of depa had met with BPB Chair Sue Holliday and CEO Neil Cocks and, while we continued our historic position opposing the principal and the concept of accrediting council staff, we made a number of practical suggestions to reduce the impact of their softer version 2.
At our meeting on 9 July, the BPB Chair and CEO made it clear that they did not support the idea of accrediting the councils but they did support the idea of allowing councils to make recommendations to the Board about the level of accreditation they believed appropriate for their staff. This would allow councils to take into consideration qualifications, experience and also the difficult questions of staffing, access to expertise in remote areas etc. We left the meeting believing that the BPB, while they still wanted to accredit council employees, was prepared to accredit to the level sought by the council. We liked the sound of that because it respects the right of councils to make their own judgment about the allocation of work.And, of course, there really is no evidence out there that this practice has failed in the past.
We now have a bundle of 12 documents which constitute the "Council Accreditation Kit". Circulated to the Committee of Management earlier this week, the response from members of the Committee was that the proposals were administratively complex and time-consuming but, more critically, requirements on practical experience and qualifications would mean that many, many councils would not be able to continue doing what they do now with the staff they have now. (If you would like these 12 documents via email please contact Sally at sally@depa.net.au).depa e-mailed Neil on 29 September …
We said that the Committee was:"horrified at the complexity of the arrangement and the very clear instructions that certain people are not to be accredited. It is not as we understood the way the system is to operate because our impression after talking to you and Sue was that you would take recommendations from the relevant Director or whoever at the Council and provide the accreditation level sought.The detailed proposals will require considerable time and effort and, I understand, are very similar to the proposals operating in the private sector. There is some scepticism that these proposals are really an attempt to kill off building surveying in local government as there may only be a handful of metropolitan councils where employees will get A2 level and virtually nowhere the other side of the Great Dividing Range.I think we need to have an urgent meeting with you and Sue about this. It's almost like you had suckered us in with a relatively soft version 2 but now, based on the material you sent to me, you are making it impossible and will kill off the ability of councils to continue doing what they are doing now". And Neil said … he was happy to meet and for us to distribute the guidelines for comment. He said "nothing is set in stone"."I can say that the reason the Board wanted to consult on the guidelines was because of their own concerns about possible impacts.The Board are (sic) not bound to this model, they really want to discuss it to see what the impact will be.The issue which the model tries to address is objectivity in the assessment of staff.
By creating objective standards for assessment, we should get consistent outcomes, no matter who in Council is doing the assessment. This was thought to be important because the accreditation model was changed to allow transferability between councils of accredited staff. If we don't have such standards the assessment process becomes more subjective, with possible inconsistent outcomes, potentially undermining the accreditation process.Having said that, the Board will not commence something that is impossible to make work. (Our emphasis)
If you have particular people that have identified issues, are interested in this, and have some ideas about the way forward, we might be able to have a workshop to discuss the possibilities."We took this to mean that the Board was not going to create a monster.Embedded in this issue of depaNews are two documents supplied yesterday by the BPB. There is a summary document being circulated in the industry but it is obsolete. This is, as they say, hot off the press having been e-mailed to us yesterday afternoon.The first document is headed Council Accreditation Criteria and the second is headed Authorities conferred on Accreditation Categories. If you are involved in building and development control and potentially affected by these proposals, you must read them now.
COUNCIL ACCREDITATION CRITERIA The Categories of Accreditation are listed in the Table below together with the Criteria for each. Table
Category
Criteria
A1 - Building Surveying Grade 1
One of the following:
- Diploma in Environmental Health and Building Surveying TAFE NSW
- Associate Diploma Applied Science (Health and Building Surveying) TAFE NSW
- Associate Diploma in Health and Building Surveying TAFE NSW
- Associate Diploma in Health and Building Surveying
A2 -Building Surveying Grade 2
EITHEROption 1 or Option 2
Option 1
Two (2) years practical experience relevant to this category.
AND
Qualifications
O One of the following:
* Diploma of Building Surveying and all previous versions of this qualification offered by TAFE NSW (or equivalent) provided they included a Building Surveying component e.g.:
- Associate Diploma in Health and Building Surveying TAFE NSW - Associate Diploma in Health and Building Surveying
OR
Option 2
Three (3) years practical experience relevant to this category.
A3 -Building Surveying Grade 3
Experience
One year’s practical experience relevant to this category.
and
An approved Specialty qualification listed in Schedule 3 of the Building Professionals Board Accreditation Scheme for categories A1, A2 and A3.
A4 - Building inspector
One of the following options:
Option 1 : Working and continuing to work under the supervision of another category A1, A2 or A3 accredited certifier and undertaking a building surveying course recognised as satisfying the qualification requirements for A1 or A2 or A3 above.
Option 2 : Completed a building surveying course recognised as satisfying the qualification requirements for A1 or A2 or A3 above.
Option 3 : One year’s practical experience relevant to this category.
Option 4 : Completed a Certificate IV building course with six (6) months practical experience relevant to this category.
Option 5 : Completed a Certificate IV Pre-purchase inspections course with six (6) months practical experience relevant to this category.
9. GM/CEO/DELEGATE RECOMMENDATION
(Print full name of applicant)
accordance with the Guidelines provided by the Building Professionals Board.
p A1 (Unconditional)
p A1 (Conditional 1: The applicant must not carry out certification work as defined by section 3 of the Building Professionals Act 2005 in relation to buildings including existing buildings that incorporate Alternative Solutions relating to fire safety.)
p A1 (Conditional 2: The applicant must only carry out certification work as defined by section 3 of the Building Professionals Act 2005 in relation to buildings including existing buildings that comply with the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions of the Building Code of Australia.)
p A2 (Unconditional)
p A2 (Conditional 1: The applicant must not carry out certification work as defined by section 3 of the Building Professionals Act 2005 in relation to buildings including existing buildings that incorporate Alternative Solutions relating to fire safety.)
p A2 (Conditional 2: The applicant must only carry out certification work as defined by section 3 of the Building Professionals Act 2005 in relation to buildings, including existing buildings, that comply with the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions of the Building Code of Australia.)
p A3 (Unconditional)
p A3 (Conditional: The applicant must only carry out certification work as defined by section 3 of the Building Professionals Act 2005 for Class 1 and 10 buildings.)
p A4 (Unconditional)
p A4 (Conditional: The applicant must only carry out critical inspections or inspections during construction work for class 1 and class 10 buildings.)
p A4 (Working under supervision.)
…………………. ……………………. ……………………. …………….
Signature Name GM/CEO/Delegate* Date
* If Delegate, please provide evidence
of delegated authority
Category of Accreditation
Authorities Conferred
A1 - Building Surveying grade 1
.
A2 - Building Surveying grade 2
A3 - Building Surveying grade 3
that achieve compliance with the Performance Requirements of the BCA by complying with the Deemed-to-Satisfy provisions of the BCA. This does not, however, include the issue of any of the above certificates where compliance with the performance requirements of the BCA is achieved by formulating an Alternative Solution.
(a) Building work for which compliance certificates can be issued by accredited certifiers accredited in categories of accreditation C1 to C16 inclusive.
(b) Any matters in the BCA Volume 1.
(c) Any matters in the BCA Volume 2 Section 2.
(d) Matters in the BCA Volume 2 Section 3 in relation to AS 1170, AS 4100, AS/NZS 4600, AS/NZS 1664, AS 1720, AS 3600, AS 2159, AS 3700 (over 3 storeys) or AS 2327.
(e) Any matters relating to heritage significance, hydraulic fire services, electrical fire services, structural engineering, mechanical services, energy management (except for class 1 buildings), civil engineering, building acoustics and subdivision work.
A4 - Building Inspector
that achieve compliance with the Performance Requirements of the BCA by complying with the Deemed-to-Satisfy provisions of the BCA. This does not, however, include the issue of any of the above certificates where compliance with the Performance Requirements of the BCA is achieved by formulating an Alternative Solution.
We need to maximise the number of councils responding to this request so that our meeting with the BPB next week has information about the impact of these proposals. Your cooperation is essential.
Ian Robertson
Secretary