How many employees work for your organisation?
Where does your organisation operate? Choose more than one if applicable.
What sector best describes you or your organisation? Choose more than one if applicable.
Do you support the specific proposal for slewing mobile cranes?
Why?
There is a significant difference between wheeled and crawler cranes, being able to operate one does not mean that the operator would be able to safely hop in and operate the other. As an employer looking at a new employee it would be good to know which group of cranes their qualification covers.
If the proposal above was introduced, what impact would it have for you and your organisation?For example, would it keep workers safer? Would it improve WHS or create costs for your business? Could there be unintended secondary risks?
We only operate wheeled hydraulic cranes, provided that the qualifications of existing crane crew were carried forward to the new protocol there would be little impact on us.
If there are other alternatives, what are these and how would they improve crane safety and the operation of crane licences?
We can see value in retaining some capacity limits in the licenses - perhaps up to 60T and then Open. We find that some employees are happy to stay in the 60T and under vehicles also having the extra step would be good when we are training new operators.
Do you support the specific proposal for vehicle loading cranes?
Why?
These cranes are becoming larger in capacity and more complicated. Also, our crane crew have to hold a HRWL for their work so it is logical that these operators should also be licenced.
If the proposal above was introduced, what impact would it have for you and your organisation? For example, would it keep workers safer? Would it improve WHS or create costs for your business? Could there be unintended secondary risks?
This would have no impact on our business providing those existing qualifications continued to be recognised. We own vehicle loading cranes and their operators who operate them already hold CV qualifications.
Do you support the specific proposal for non-slewing mobile cranes?
Why?
Only licensed and competent employees should be operating cranes regardless of capacity
If the proposal above was introduced, what impact would it have for you and your organisation For example, would it keep workers safer? Would it improve WHS or create costs for your business? Could there be unintended secondary risks?
No impact.
Do you support the proposal for practical experience for operators?
Why?
Training alone cannot give a trainee the knowledge that work in the field can provide.
If the proposals above were introduced, what impact would they have for you and your organisation For example, would they keep workers safer? Would they improve WHS or create costs for your business?
This is already how we operate and how we train our dogmen, riggers and crane operators.
What factors would impact the success of a logbook system for cranes? What are the most important considerations in designing a logbook system for you and your organisation?
It would be great if the trainee could access the logbook on their phone, if there were different tasks to be completed. Perhaps they could take photos to prove what they had been doing?
Under the proposal, trainee crane operators who are gaining practical experience will need to be supervised by a suitably qualified competent person in the workplace. What types of qualifications and experience should the supervisor signing off the logbook have?
assuming the "qualified competent person" and the "supervisor" are the same person, they should have the qualification that they are teaching.
Should a person gaining practical experience have to be employed in a business that operates a crane? Are there alternative ways the person could gain practical experience?
They should be employed by a business that has a crane; this is the only way to work often enough with a crane to gain practical experience.
Do you support the proposed new licences for telehandlers, piling rigs and straddle carriers?
Why?
Telehandlers are becoming larger, have greater lifting capacities and have more and more configurations. Of course they should now have a specific license.
If the proposals above were introduced, what impact would they have for you and your organisation For example, would they keep workers safer? Would they improve WHS or create costs for your business?
No impact.
Do you support the proposal for structural changes to align training to specific skills and crane functions?
If the proposals above were introduced, what impact would they have for you and your organisation For example, would they keep workers safer? Would they improve WHS or create costs for your business?
Provided that the qualifications of current crane crew continued to be recognised, the only impact would be extra training required to cover slewing crane, non-slewing crane and vehicle loading crane licenses. Not having the repeat the Crane Safety Fundamentals component over and over would be good.
Are there alternatives, including non-regulatory alternatives, to the proposals proposed? What are these, and how would they improve crane safety?
Operating a wheeled hydraulic crane with its fly jib should be included in the basic qualification, this is not an advanced task.
How much experience should an operator have operated a standard slewing mobile crane before being allowed to apply for advanced elective licences (see Figure 4)?
12 months.
Does the removal of any of the current crane licences and incorporation into the new model create any WHS risks?
Possibly someone who had only held a C6 could now be licensed to operate any capacity of crane.
Do you support the proposal for operating cranes on vessels?
Why not?
Operating a crane from a barge is not that unusual and the qualification should be included in the advanced elective license.
If the proposals above were introduced, what impact would they have for you and your organisation For example, would they keep workers safer? Would they improve WHS or create costs for your business?
If you had this as a separate course, we would have to put some of our crane operators through the course, even though our senior operators are capable of this carrying out this work.
Are there alternatives, including non-regulatory alternatives, to the proposals proposed? What are these, and how would they improve crane safety?
Operating a crane from a barge is not that unusual and the qualification should be included in the advanced elective license.
Which activities/equipment are related and could be combined to be covered in a single licence?
What impact would change to the rigging licence framework have on you or your business?
We believe there should be two rigger qualifications - rigger and advanced rigger. The rigger qualification covers all work that we require as a crane hire company. Advanced rigger covers that work as well as the tasks carried out by telecommunication riggers and stage crew etc.
Published name