Has there been any progress on the Part P review

[Dunx]

Wondered whether anything had come of this, like abolishing it.....?!

 

[highspark]

more bloody qualifications!!!! arggghhhhhh , thought the point of part p was to show your competence and understanding of the regs, anyone can go and sit in a clasroom for 10 yrs and do as much maths as as they want, DOESNT MAKE THEM COMPETENT!!!!!!!!!!!!

To be honest mate. Qualifications are probably 80% of the way to proving your competence. The other 20% being your on-site assessment for PART P.Anyone can also walk round with their finger in their backside for 10 years gain "easy quals" and still get PART P registered. This is my point. I'd rather be a 17th, 2391, NVQ spark than a 17th, 2392 EAL domestic installer 6 week spark. The NVQ3 goes a long way in proving practical competence and the 2391-10 goes a long way in proving testing competence. You must have a fair amount of technical knowledge to get the 2391-10 - not just any nudger can walk in and pass that! - 2392 and 2382 yes...anyone can pass those.Competence is experience and qualifications all rolled into one. Without either or one or the other YOU ARE NOT COMPETENT.

 

[UNG]

NVQ ? Whats that in proper money then ?

Sorry I know i shouldn't but i could not resit it ! :leaving:

Not and Very make your own mind up on the Q


It amazes me that people expect me to have an NVQ3 now for my qualifications gained over 30 years ago to mean anything now

With regard to Part P what is there to review it's ineffective therefore due to the austerity measures that have been brought in and the spending reductions needed in government sack the committee and make some savings and give us all a break

 

[Harry_Worth]

I for one agree that PART P should stay but it needs to be harder to get in. I think the NVQ3 plus the 17th and 2391 should be a minimum for a QS.

As a newby I'm a bit puzzled. Yes why not 2391 or even 2392 (it's geared towards domestic testing) and 17th but as I understand it - Only commercial work is eligible for attaining an NVQ and 'Part P' is only required for domestic installation work. Or of course, more logically, why not make the C and G Part P qualification a compulsory requirement? (that's if it isn't already with some accreditation bodies)