Qualified electrician.

[ban-all-sheds]

 

[JohnW2]

Surely even a DI knows that an M4 is a machine screw

... or anything else with an M4 thread! Just as (s)he knows that an RFC is a Radial Final Circuit, a Radio Frequency Choke, a Rugby Football Club - or even, just possibly, a Ring Final Circuit

However, jesting aside, I obviously agree with almost everything which has been said in this thread. It's far from unique to electricians - in most trades, and a good few 'professions', training ain't what it used to be. It can sometimes be, in some senses, 'harder' than it used to be, but usually only in the sense that it has become more academic - often at the cost of things (and particularly experience, and understanding of basic principles) which are really of fundamental importance.

Kind Regards, John

 

[empip]

All associated with screwing - as always.

Explanatory Notes - M4

 

[securespark]

M4

 

[bernardgreen]

Used to be M4

Untitled

• bernardgreen
• 20 Aug 2012
• 1

source and explanation

 

[Spark123]

ill just point out to those who dont know 2391 is a testing qualification.
that anyone can take.
if you were looking for an electrician with proof of experience you should ask for an nvq.

Not necessarily so on both points

'tis true though, is it not, that someone could pass 2391 without ever having had to make off SWA?

Yes, the C&G2391 is a qualification in Inspection, Testing and Certification of electrical installations, it doesn't cover doing any of the construction work - just IT&C of it. All of the rigs are pre-built. You don't need to wire anything up either.

 

[ebee]

Well actually I think you might be being a bit bloody arrogant if you don`t mind me saying so.

"Go and get some M4s"

He asked what they were.
You had not explained it and not used the correct terminology - well shame on you.

If you had asked him to get some 4mm threaded screws from the outset and he was then clueless you would have a point.

We all do it, we all have our "tradespeak" including me.
But to call someone because WE have not explained ourselves properly is OUR fault not his.

That`s why I do not like abbreviations (or too many of them) , just a few might be OK but then clarity becomes obscure.

If we are in a group of like-minded and we use a few generally accepted abbreviations or phrases then OK most of the time but as that list gets larger the chance of ambiguity creeps in.

MP for one
JP for another
CU
Ring final/ring main
Live/Line/load
Ringfire = two very distinct things dependant upon whether you recently ate a curry or have problems with a powerful motor.
M4s as BAS pointed out means different things depending upon context used.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Fair enough on the M4s.

But selling himself as a fully qualified electrician into an environment like that when he'd never worked with SWA before (and what about conduit? Trunking? MICC?) is nobody's fault but his.

 

[JohnW2]

But selling himself as a fully qualified electrician into an environment like that when he'd never worked with SWA before (and what about conduit? Trunking? MICC?) is nobody's fault but his.

It's clearly very unsatisfactory, or worse, but I'm not sure you can blame the individual all that much. Assuming that he had, indeed, undertaken courses and obtained 'qualifications' which theoretically rendered him a 'fully qualified electrician', then the blame surely lies somewhere other than with him?

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Did anybody tell him he was fully qualified, in the context of being capable of working in a commercial/industrial environment?

Did he read in any authoritative source that he was fully qualified, in the context of being capable of working in a commercial/industrial environment?

Or did he just decide for himself that he was?

Even if he'd never heard of SWA etc, let alone seen it, did he really think that as neither his training nor his experience had included large construction sites that he was fully qualified to work on one?

 

[dhutch]

Assuming that he had, indeed, undertaken courses and obtained 'qualifications' which theoretically rendered him a 'fully qualified electrician'....

Without wishing to play devils advocate too much, surely obtaining qualifications in electrical work would render him to be 'qualified electrician' rather than a 'fully qualified electrician', which would have required him to have obtained ALL the avilable electrical qualifications, or at very least, all the applied to the area he was working or applying for....


Daniel

 

[dhutch]

On a more serious note, if hiring a 'qualified electrician' would the hiring body not state WHICH qualifications where required, and where relevent, to which level. And what experience.

Im an design engineer, and in order to eligable for my job I required to have a certain degree at a certain level, and provided my certificate of proof that I had gained that qualification, which, if required, could have been cross referanced with the issuing body.


Daniel

 

[JohnW2]

Without wishing to play devils advocate too much, surely obtaining qualifications in electrical work would render him to be 'qualified electrician' rather than a 'fully qualified electrician', which would have required him to have obtained ALL the avilable electrical qualifications, or at very least, all the applied to the area he was working or applying for....

I guess it's up to you (or the employer/client) to decide what 'fully' qualified means. There aren't many trades or professions in which one can exhaust all possible 'further' qualifications - so, if you're taking things that literally', I guess that few, if any, people would be 'fully' qualified to do anything!

Whatever, I certainly don't point the primary finger at the individuals concerned in these situations. I think more 'blame' should be directed to those who confer 'qualifications' on people who shouldn't receive them and/or to employers/clients who take on someone whose experience and apparent competence (even if only judged crudely at an interview) is inadequate or inappropriate for the job in hand, regardless of what 'paper qualifications' the person may have.

Kind Regards, John