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?
Where the capacity of the crane being operated does not necessarily change the way in which it is operated, ie a 60t Liebherr is predominately operated in the same way as a 130t Liebherr. The type of crane however will greatly change the way in which it is operated such as back-slewing to slow down or hold the slew. Travelling with loads or having the counterweight wanting to take over when the ground isn't level
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?
While it will have no direct impact on my business, it may provide difficulties for RTO's in providing courses for different types of cranes. While these could be used with cranes on the customers premises the other major downfall is the lack of experienced trainers in multiple types of cranes
Do you support the specific proposal for vehicle loading cranes?
Do you support the specific proposal for non-slewing mobile cranes?
Do you support the proposal for practical experience for operators?
Why?
The current system is totally inadequate. No current crane course can adequately train a student to operate a crane to its full potential and yet on completion of a course they are issued a licence. I have spent 20+ years in the crane industry as an operator and the last 6 as a HRW Trainer Assessor and in that time while safety has progressed in nearly every field, the training sector has gone woefully downhill. Prior to obtaining a licence a student should be capable of driving a crane to a job, set it up on various ground conditions, reeve up the main hook and attach a fly jib. The student will learn a lot more on a jobsite with experienced crane operators than they will in a classroom with woefully inexperienced trainers that have no real workplace experience.
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?
While this proposal will have no direct impact on my business it will allow RTO's to focus more on the theory and calculations aspects of the assessment in which a lot of people struggle and allow the practical aspects to dealt with by more experienced personnel using the equipment that they are likely to be operating on completion of the course rather than learning in a type of crane they may never use again that is owned by the RTO
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?
The logbook should not be focused on hours as much as tasks to be completed and signed off by a supervisor when proficient in each task. Tasks could include- Driving the crane to the job, Conducting pre-start checks, setting up the crane, correctly positioning the crane, identifying potential hazards, completing required documentation, selecting the correct boom configurations, correctly using the load-charts, inputting correct configurations, attaching the fly-jib, smooth movement of loads
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?
A minimum of five years practical experience operating cranes
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?
Yes they should be employed by a crane owner to gain experience. I have unfortunately seen a rise in personnel employed by labour hire companies and thrown out into industry without any practical experience.
For each of the following licence or crane types, provide an indication of approximately how long a person should work under supervision before being fully qualified.
| Hours | Days | Months | |
| Dogging | 3 | ||
| Tower cranes | 1 | ||
| Articulated mobile cranes | 6 | ||
| Bridge and gantry cranes | 1 | ||
| Slewing mobile cranes | 6 | ||
| Vehicle loading cranes | 3 |
Please provide the reasons for your views. Are there relevant examples from your workplace that demonstrate why a longer/shorter duration is appropriate?
Dogging is one of the most underrated licences and is consistently being watered down due to the large number of students doing it as they are electrical spotters. Whether you go on to basic or even advanced rigging, 90% of the work still comes down to dogging such as selecting and inspecting lifting equipment, finding out load weights, slinging loads and directing crane movements. The tasks undertaken and loads encountered while dogging can vary considerably and time should be taken to allow for the many different factors encountered.
Slewing, Articulated and vehicle loading cranes can again involve many different factors on different sites due to access restrictions, varying ground types and conditions, interactions with the public, driving on public and private roads to name a few and as such should have more time to allow for the varying factors involved in operating these machines.
Tower and bridge and gantry cranes may not require as much time as other types of cranes but in saying only 1 month that would be dependant on frequency of use in that month in order to fulfil task requirements
Do you support the proposed new licences for telehandlers, piling rigs and straddle carriers?
Why?
A Telehandler is a high risk machine with many inherent risks . They have become a lot more prevalent on sites over the years and are increasing in capacity and function. Therefore anyone operating it must be adequately trained.
Electives to licences such as for a piling rig or straddle carriers is a great idea to focus on those particular areas that differ from the original licence, such as for a piling rig may look at the hazrds unique to piling or different drilling methods
For each of the licences or crane types proposed, provide an indication of approximately how long a person should work under supervision before being fully qualified.
| Hours | Days | Months | |
| Piling rig | 1 | ||
| Telehandler | 2 | ||
| Straddle carrier | 1 | ||
| Telehandler (suspended load elective licence) | 1 | ||
| Telehandler (work platform suspended licence) | 1 |
Are there specific types of plant or models that should or shouldn’t be included in the scope of each proposed licence?
A piling rig should include drilling to avoid confusion
Do you support the proposal for structural changes to align training to specific skills and crane functions?
Why?
Due to the differing nature of different types of cranes
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)?
The advanced Electives should be defined better as use of a fly-jib should be part of any crane training and what is meant by the term complex lift? As what may be defined by one person as complex may be an everyday lift to another
Does the removal of any of the current crane licences and incorporation into the new model create any WHS risks?
The removal of the current CS licence may propose a risk if changes aren't made to the UoC to cover a self erector in the tower crane unit
Should all bridge and gantry cranes (regardless of the number of functions) be licenced?
Should the piling rig licence be separated from the slewing crane base licence?
Do you support the proposal for operating cranes on vessels?
Why?
Due to the differing nature of working on water including allowing for the swell when lifting on/off vessels and/or dumb barges or allowing for the suction and increased weight when lifting items out of the water.
What factors would impact the success of the proposed new crane licence model?
Recognising previous experience
Are the activities and equipment listed still relevant to rigging work or should they be removed from Schedule 3?
Which of the activities and equipment listed could be included in a ‘base’ rigging licence (i.e. activities all riggers should be competent to perform)?
Which activities or equipment listed could be elective licences that only some riggers would need to know how to perform?
Which activities/equipment are related and could be combined to be covered in a single licence?
Published name