There was a video of the interviews before the English Part P was relaxed, the against Part P stated what was the percentage of people under 65 who get alzheimer's of some sort, and the percentage of electricians thrown off the scheme, and it showed there were not as many people thrown off the schemes as would be expected due to people getting alzheimer's, OK I know people will voluntary give up work when they get alzheimer's, however the numbers thrown off are still very low.
Next question was if the scheme providers talked to each other and black listed electricians who had been thrown off the scheme, and were told it would be illegal to do that, it clearly happens with gas safe as there is only one organisation controlling it, but not with Part P.
As to the safety exams, I had to take and pass the exam with my last job, and I had to answer what they wanted to hear, not the real answer, clearly as an electricians there is a procedure when a faulty item is found, it has to go on the out of service or faulty appliance register, and be stored in a quarantine area, I got in a lot of trouble with HSE for not locking a quarantine area and was well aware of what needed to be done after that.
However for the question what to do if you find a faulty appliance there was option to tick the correct answer, the same with cable heights over walkways and roadways, you could not possibly have given correct answer, there was option to give it.
It is the same with the BS 7671 exams, they ask silly questions, I know now changed, but for so long the "and others" difference between skilled and competent was asked, why, does it really matter? We are not really interested in the ability of the candidate to read, what we want is there ability to interpret what they read.
So with
(iii) take account of danger that may arise from the failure of a single circuit such as a lighting circuit
Question is does this refer to emergency lighting, or needing to run extension leads up down stairs with a failure of one circuit?
(iv) reduce the possibility of unwanted tripping of RCDs due to excessive protective conductor currents produced by equipment in normal operation
The question is what is considered as "excessive protective conductor currents" with a 30 mA RCD is excessive protective conductor currents 9 mA, 15 mA or some other figure?
And I will admit I have still not got a clamp on ammeter able to measure the 9 mA which is considered by many as the limit.
Forms and exams can push us to do the right thing, working through an EICR form prompted one to make the required checks, and working through past exam papers also prompted one to find the right answer, be it how did we arrive at 106 meters of 2.5 mm cable in a ring final or any other thing, it is the interpretations that matters, not the ability to quote 314.1 or any other number.
The big problem is sole traders, as an electrician working with other electricians we discuss what we should be doing, again we a prompted to think about what we are doing, so likely make less mistakes, the government paper on landlord EICR talked about 10 years experience, but I gained more experience as a foreman than years on the tools, as I was involved with all errors, and problems.
And the I always do it this way, because that was how I was taught 50 years ago, does not really cut the mustard. But in some things it is true, I have always done it that way, and never considered the pros and cons, like splitting sockets on ring final up/down, I always did it that way, until a young wiper-snapper questioned it, pointing out split side to side gives a better loop impedance and means if the circuit fails then temporary supplies with extension leads do not need to run up/down stairs, and he was right, but until he pointed it out, never even considered it.
As said it is the working with others that often highlights our errors, and no body is perfect, which is where the sole trader gets unstuck, just resent I saw a web site advertising some ones work, showing a metal consumer unit with two glands for the tails from the meter with no saw cut between them, the guy clearly had no idea what he was doing was wrong. And I can't find a reference in BS 7671 to say you need a saw cut between the holes, if it were a DC supply it would not matter.
But how can you write a law to say an electrician must do a journeyman and work with others for a set time? We know it makes sense, but that brings us back to the 7 year apprenticeship and that could only happen if they leave school at 14 to start the apprenticeship.
