Opinions

[matthew.brough]

I see the commission and handover as a last qc, and feel that people shouldn't qc their own work.

I see that, similar to how manufacturers shouldn't be allowed to self cert their products.

Even if it was a 2 stage process I'd question if the 2 engineers were pally, would the commissioning engineer overlook things because it was his mate installed it. James said something to me the other day that contained a lot of truth. We are only as good as our weakest engineer. If we had an installer and a commissioner, if they both have low standards we'd still have systems that weren't up to scratch despite the best efforts from our side to prevent shoddy work getting passed.

Even some of our good engineers seem to go through phases of doing stupid things without having any real explanation as to why. An example was one site I audited. Didn't label any batteries. Audited the 5 jobs before and after this one but all labeled. Also had a spate of leaving competitor bell boxes up but again a usually very particular engineer with high standards just didn't do on these occasions.

[jb-eye]

I see that, similar to how manufacturers shouldn't be allowed to self cert their products.

Even if it was a 2 stage process I'd question if the 2 engineers were pally, would the commissioning engineer overlook things because it was his mate installed it. James said something to me the other day that contained a lot of truth. We are only as good as our weakest engineer. If we had an installer and a commissioner, if they both have low standards we'd still have systems that weren't up to scratch despite the best efforts from our side to prevent shoddy work getting passed. Even some of our good engineers seem to go through phases of doing stupid things without having any real explanation as to why. An example was one site I audited. Didn't label any batteries. Audited the 5 jobs before and after this one but all labeled. Also had a spate of leaving competitor bell boxes up but again a usually very particular engineer with high standards just didn't do on these occasions.

Agree manufacturers is similar but not the same. Our product has to be inspected at more than one level to find flaws from the design. Its not a pass/fail its a check and to this end it dosent matter if eng take it in turn to check each others work as long as each looks from a differing perspective. I am audited by my own staff and pally dosent enter the equation.

Tonight i have a fire system upgrade/addittions completed. Our commissioning guy has knocked it back due to audabilaty i asked was it to low and the reply was to ****** high because the existing sounders were Master Blaters. The install didnt get they werent compliant and because they are existing thought they were fine.

Whos fault?

IMO down to the existing eleci who used them to acheive audability for the fire brigade inspection who in turn refrence his instaltion cert.

Tommorow we have to add a lot of sounder/strobes. Subbie learns something the surveyor wont but its a good job we had more than one person saying OK.

[PeterJames]

We swerve using subbies for installs but did he fill in the paperwork? And if so has he ticked the box that asks if RR has been set up? If he has then deduct the callout from his invoice and send someone to audit the system, (Mind you I would audit anyway)

[Ronnie]

there are some installers (both subbies and on the cards) who i wouldn't trust to wire up a buzzer and a battery on my garden shed.  i think as long as both parties agree to whats expected then it's really quite obvious who is at fault and who should be putting things right.  

 

Paul, if your guy didn't do something which he totally should have then he should cover the cost of the result.  

 

we've broken windows before when subbing and they've been replaced at our cost, we've returned to sites hours away from us to rectify issues which were down to us (i can't actually remember what for but i'm sure we have) and we've even returned to sort something out which blantantly wasn't our fault because it's good for the relationship.

[goncall]

not a fan of subbys,but the question should be why has a subby fitted and signed off a job without anyone going back to check the works he's done,regardless of how good a subby is an employee of the company should be signing the work off.also.is the subbys gear up to the company standards,is his meter calibrated is he wearing the correct ppe,you cant have subbys just sent out like a regular company engineer without checking up on what there doing,imo of course

[james.wilson]

not a fan of subbys,but the question should be why has a subby fitted and signed off a job without anyone going back to check the works he's done,regardless of how good a subby is an employee of the company should be signing the work off.also.is the subbys gear up to the company standards,is his meter calibrated is he wearing the correct ppe,you cant have subbys just sent out like a regular company engineer without checking up on what there doing,imo of course

qfa

[norman]

not a fan of subbys,but the question should be why has a subby fitted and signed off a job without anyone going back to check the works he's done,regardless of how good a subby is an employee of the company should be signing the work off.also.is the subbys gear up to the company standards,is his meter calibrated is he wearing the correct ppe,you cant have subbys just sent out like a regular company engineer without checking up on what there doing,imo of course

exactly, regarding ppe, kit etc, subbies should be treat the same as regular employees, in as much as you are also responsible for them whilst they are working for you, they also require auditing and spot checking for compliance to H&S etc.

[Alarm Protection]

I have used subbys sometimes but it was only to run cable, install conduit and mark cable for installing at panel end.

Then our engineer will install dtection, panel, rkp and signalling. Test and commission... Job done.

Does the subby do all the panel checks/readings and handover to the customer?

I would only let myself or the head engineer do this as it will be done right as we would be liable at the end of the day..... And I can sleep at night lol!

[Ronnie]

exactly, regarding ppe, kit etc, subbies should be treat the same as regular employees, in as much as you are also responsible for them whilst they are working for you, they also require auditing and spot checking for compliance to H&S etc.

 

you all sound like you're making the assumption companies don't do those things!  we are ssaib, we have ipaf/pasma/chas, ppe coming out of our ears, we are audited by our contractor.  I assume (wrongly it would appear) that this is the same for anyone using subbies??

I have used subbys sometimes but it was only to run cable, install conduit and mark cable for installing at panel end.

Then our engineer will install dtection, panel, rkp and signalling. Test and commission... Job done.

Does the subby do all the panel checks/readings and handover to the customer?

I would only let myself or the head engineer do this as it will be done right as we would be liable at the end of the day..... And I can sleep at night lol!

 

what do you think we do on our own jobs?  just because we're installing for someone else doesn't mean it gets done differently..

[matthew.brough]

you all sound like you're making the assumption companies don't do those things!  we are ssaib, we have ipaf/pasma/chas, ppe coming out of our ears, we are audited by our contractor.  I assume (wrongly it would appear) that this is the same for anyone using subbies??

 

what do you think we do on our own jobs?  just because we're installing for someone else doesn't mean it gets done differently..

We do and tend to treat our subbies as we do our own guys rather than an us and them situation as if the subbies are some form of 2nd class engineer but I believe we are in the minority.