Electrical installation level 2 and 3

[Matt887]

Is there anyone on here that has become a qualified electrician by only to college on an evening and doing electrical installation level 2 and 3. And completing a NVQ portfolio? Thanks

 

[EFLImpudence]

Anyone may (is allowed to) be an "electrician".

A "qualified" one might only be by way of whatever "qualifications" were required by an employer.

 

[Matt887]

Thanks most seem to say you need the NVQ to show you are fully qualified?

 

[JohnW2]

Thanks most seem to say you need the NVQ to show you are fully qualified?

To the best of my knowledge, there is no explicit definition of a "qualified electrician" (or a "fully qualified electrician") - so, as has been said, it's for each employer to decide what qualification(s) and experience they require of someone they employ asd an electrician.

Kind Regards, John

 

[333rocky333]

Certain sites want you to have an ECS card, the one for an electrician I believe requires you to have certain qualifications

 

[Matt887]

So the level 2 city and guilds diploma in electrical installation isn't worthless. Also the level 3?

 

[flameport]

doing electrical installation level 2 and 3. And completing a NVQ portfolio?

Those are some of the parts required.
The others are that you are working in the electrical industry (which is a requirement of completing the NVQ portfolio), and that you need to do the AM2 assessment.

Full details of what options are available is here: https://www.electricalcareers.co.uk/joining-the-industry/training-routes/

 

[ericmark]

I have been an electrician well before the NVQ came out, and I have over the years taken many courses and exams to keep up dated, up to level 5, worked mainly industrial, including writing PLC programs, but also have done other commercial and also some house bashing, can't remember date completed apprenticeship, but looking at around 40 year plus in the trade, but when I applied to a scheme provider they offered me electricians mate. Even when the industrial system listed me as an advanced electrician.

It is all down to who is employing you, and what they want, there is no bit of paper which shows your an electrician. Now I am retired I don't buy the latest copy of BS 7671 or take refresher courses to keep me up dated, but I would still call myself an electrician.

If I was to be made aware of some thing which is not safe and some one was injured due to inaction on my part, the courts would still consider me as qualified and I would be found guilty due to inaction were as some one with no qualifications would not, I can't unlearn the skill.

 

[JohnW2]

If I was to be made aware of some thing which is not safe and some one was injured due to inaction on my part, the courts would still consider me as qualified and I would be found guilty due to inaction were as some one with no qualifications would not, I can't unlearn the skill.

For what it's worth, I'm not at all sure about that!

In some senses, electrical work is fairly unusual - in many professions/trades qualifications alone are not enough, since there is an additional requirement (in law) to also be registered/licensed/revalidated/whatever (which requires one to have initial qualifications) in order to be allowed to practise.

As far as electrical work is concerned, all the law requires is 'competence', not qualifications at all, let alone registration/licensing etc. If 'incompetent' electrical work results in injury or death (or probably even just damage to property - e.g. fires), then a court could probably find them guilty of criminal offences, regardless of whether or not they had any qualifications or whether or not they claimed to be an 'electrician'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ericmark]

The Emma Shaw case the electricians mate was found not guilty as he did not have the knowledge of skill and the electrical foreman who had never even visited the site was found guilty as he should have known better than to trust the electricians mate to give a factual report.

To be frank it does not seem right to say the electricians mate was not guilty, it is not rocket science to plug in a loop impedance meter and write down the figures shown on the display, why he went into the canteen and fudged up some results I don't know, had he written done OL or what ever the meter showed the foreman would have likely visited.

However the Emma Shaw case does show it does matter how well one is trained as to when courts decide if guilty or not. It was a game changer at the time, as where I worked we also used electricians mates to do recording of readings.

 

[JohnW2]

The Emma Shaw case the electricians mate was found not guilty as he did not have the knowledge of skill and the electrical foreman who had never even visited the site was found guilty as he should have known better than to trust the electricians mate to give a factual report. ....

Quite so. However, as always, the fact that you have to quote a case relating to an event which happened 15 years ago illustrates how incredibly rare such court cases are.

Mind you, as I also often point out, even though the court found the foreman 'guilty', the fact that they imposed a pretty trivial sentence (a £1,000 fine), despite the fact that a young woman had died, presumably suggests that they didn't really regard him as being 'very guilty'.

However the Emma Shaw case does show it does matter how well one is trained as to when courts decide if guilty or not. It was a game changer at the time, as where I worked we also used electricians mates to do recording of readings.

I'm no lawyer, but I think this case was very different from the general situation you were talking about. In this case, I presume that the person without qualifications was not convicted because the work he did was delegated to him by (and should have been 'supervised' by) the qualified person responsible for the safety of the work in question.

In other words, had the person without qualifications undertaken work 'on his own' (i.e. not delegated by someone else) done the work incompetently with the result that someone died, then I strongly suspect that he could have been convicted (of something), despite the absence of any 'qualifications'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ericmark]

I have noted if an error kills a family member it tends to be a very small fine if any for doing substandard work, but if the person making the error was gaining money through their actions the court seems to be far stricter.

There was a case where a pub landlord did some electrics, also his brother-in-law but there were other things also found, including stealing power. So hard to say if the death due to errors was just the stick which broke the camel's back.

 

[JohnW2]

I have noted if an error kills a family member it tends to be a very small fine if any for doing substandard work, but if the person making the error was gaining money through their actions the court seems to be far stricter.

I suppose that, if true, one could just about understand the 'logic' - but where are you finding these 'cases' which you 'note'?

Kind Regards, John

 

[RandomGrinch]

but where are you finding these 'cases' which you 'note'?

There was a case where a pub landlord did some electrics, also his brother-in-law but there were other things also found, including stealing power. So hard to say if the death due to errors was just the stick which broke the camel's back.

Pub owner receives 9 years after boy dies from faulty electrics

Two men were found to be altering circuits at The King Harold pub in Essex have been jailed following the death of seven-year-old Harvey Tyrrell in a pub garden in September 2018.

nationaltradesmen.co.uk

 

[JohnW2]

Pub owner receives 9 years after boy dies from faulty electrics

Two men were found to be altering circuits at The King Harold pub in Essex have been jailed following the death of seven-year-old Harvey Tyrrell in a pub garden in September 2018.

nationaltradesmen.co.uk

Fair enough - but, as I said/implied, my understanding is that anyone, electrician or not, who does anything (whether related to electricity or anything else) sufficiently 'negligent' to result in a death is at risk of facing a prosecution for manslaughter.

Kind Regards, John