Rigging Tickets and such like

[kerry davies]

Worse for me Paul, got two thirds of the way through FAETC when it stopped and they said start again.

 

Let me try again. PLASA, the employers trade association (driven by the leading riggers) set up a scheme to ensure riggers were up to scratch so their members could employ them with confidence. Any other scheme would be as good as long as the employers accepted it.

 

To assess that other scheme they would need to recruit the very same guys with sufficient experience who founded and assess the NRC. They would also need the Sector Skills Council to accept it and the National Occupational Standards to agree it was the same as the NRC and thousands of quid to do so.

 

There just aren't that many top level riggers available to assess differing schemes and that small number is where the monopoly lies. Give it time.

[paulears]

I don't quite get Brainwave's comment that to go on the course you must have been a rigger for 12 months or so, or you'll fail. If you can't be a rigger without the certificate, but you can't get the ticket without being the rigger, you have to be a rigger and work without the certificate proving you are a rigger to become one - or have I got myself tied up in a mobius loop?

[kitlane]

I don't quite get Brainwave's comment that to go on the course you must have been a rigger for 12 months or so, or you'll fail. If you can't be a rigger without the certificate, but you can't get the ticket without being the rigger, you have to be a rigger and work without the certificate proving you are a rigger to become one - or have I got myself tied up in a mobius loop?

 

The NRC is not a training course. It is an assessment of competence and pretty much requires you to have been working in the sector for some time before you can take the Level 2 assessment. Level 1 still doesn't really exist.

 

Anybody can do the 3-day Total or UK Rigging course. However, this alone won't be enought to pass NRC level 2

 

"To register for Level 2 or Level 3 progression route, a candidate would need to supply witness testimonies and other forms of evidence to provide confirmation of their experience"

[paulears]

Which rather reinforces my original question - if the industry will only employ people with one, then how would anybody get the evidence? Joking aside, surely this means it cannot be the arbiter of entry - or will we be seeing ads for trainee riggers? This will put up the costs of doing a job, if you must have 'qualified' crew, but also have to have 'unqualified' who are gaining their evidence. Why would a production company wish to pay for the training of people who are not yet deemed competent?

[ianl]

its not the whole industry that requires it. its only the big venues and big hire companies that are signed up to only take riggers with a nrc.

 

theres plenty of other rigging jobs out there. I've been a rigger for years and have never worked for any of the venues / companies that are going to require nrc.

 

although the current available levels are for existing riggers who can show previous experience, I believe there will be entry level in the future

[kerry davies]

Rigging courses can be gained through Total, UK and Unusual which lead on toward the NRC but NRC, being work-based assessment, requires practical experience. Hence my suggestion that it is not for colleges or universities but a truly vocational career path.

 

Ultimately it is a brand new scheme and in time will develop and ianl may well be right in that entry level will come to pass. For the present it is more important to certify that those already hanging loads over peoples heads in safety critical situations are capable. Kind of chicken and egg, Paul.

 

Brainy has it right and it should be looked at as informal apprentice style training where you move up the scale slowly and surely from "unload the truck" to "rig screens for U2". I would suggest Telehandler and straight mast forks tickets but he has it right, follow his route and you won't go far wrong.

[trussmonkey]

As Brainwave says the NRC is something you will do in due course. It is not a training course but a test of competency. When I left the UK my employers (PRG/Summit) had taken the decision not to employ riggers who either didnt have their NRC level 2 or at the minimum have signed up for their NRC assessment. More and more arenas will be insisting on all the riggers working in their buildings to have a NRC ticket ( I know the O2 London will).

It is definitely a good thing for the industry. Its is governed by a committee made up of PLASA members and heavy weights in the rigging industry (Chris Walker, Harry Box etc) they have decided the syllabus for each level. PLASA is the awarding body and all the trainers/assessment centres have been trained to the highest NVQ levels. There are no deviousness or other Machiavellian plots going on. It is a genuine attempt to bring order to the Rigging industry by those who have seen it all and who are passionate about what they do. The same resistance to a governing body was present in the construction industry a few years back.

 

I agree that it is not suited to every rigger out there i.e. theatre. There is a plan in the long term pipe line to add in a couple more levels but that is a ways off yet.

 

TM

 

 

P.S - There is no law in England that requires you to have a license for a Cherry Picker etc. Its the insurance companies (and therefore employers) who want proof of competency in the event of a claim. What better way to prove you can do some thing than have a ticket!!

[paulears]

So you have to work for a company who don't require it, to demonstrate you're qualified to take the test to work for the bigger companies.

 

So this rather reinforces the idea that it's a method to control employment - if the only difference is company A wish to only have fully trained people, while company B actually train their people so they are good enough to work for company A.

 

As a complete outsider, this is a joke, isn't it? They actually want people with a specific qualification that can only be gained by the efforts of another firm? So if the so called passport gets extended to all 'professional' rigging firms, nobody can get qualified?

 

My view hasn't changed at all - in fact, I'm even more unsure if this system is actually beneficial. If we take the safety aspect out of this - because it's peoples ability that is important, not the piece of paper - so plenty of non-holders will be perfectly competent, then we could have a system where only ALD members can get a job designing lighting, or only members of the IBS can do radio and TV sound. By only being willing to accept people with a qualification - which appears to be just certification, as no training is provided - the educational term for this would be APL. 100% Accreditation of previous learning is not permitted for normal qualifications, so this puts the PLASA 'test' into a different category.

 

So what, exactly, is the purpose of the test? If it includes a requirement for X months/years of experience, with employer statements as confirmation - where is the reliability and robustness? They worked for a year, did lots of rigging and had no accidents that were their fault? Are we not making the requirement a simple reference - as in they were good? A statement produced by somebody in the office, omitting any niggling doubts because there's no proof - just like no bad stuff in a reference?

 

The more I hear, the more suspicious I get. The only positive comments seem to be from people who passed the test. I'd love to hear from a rigger who failed, to find out their opinion. I bet it may not be quite so positive.

 

It's perhaps a daft comparison, but when employing a musician, you want grade 8 standard, not grade 8 piece of paper. Job ads frequently ask for degree level, and not the degree for exactly the same reason - they don't wish to exclude competent people just for the want of the bit of paper - and this does seem the aim here - exclude everyone who hasn't given PLASA some of their hard earned cash in exchange for the right to work.

 

I have yet to read anything that puts a case for the system being promoted?

[ianl]

the statements from employers and proof of previous work, it gets you into the level 2 (or 3).as part of the NRC you have to demonstrate actual theory and practical knowledge of rigging and safety.

 

whilst I agree that what you suggest is possible, I feel that most of the big companies will still have place for aprentices or junior riggers or whatever they call them.

looking at big venues, they cant expect every tour to have all NRC people on it (especially forieghn tours)so your looking at more likely the senior house riggers having NRC. this doesnt exclude the big venues employing junior riggers who work supervised on the understanding they will work towards an NRC in the next few years.

 

with big hire companies, this will not change the type of person they hire, The standard of freelance rigger they would expect to hire is the sort of person who could easily pass a nrc. If the company employs a full time person who hasnt got an nrc they can then help them to obtain one.

 

although these companies have signed up to the scheme, theyre not going to shoot themselves in the foot by making the situation unworkable for themselves

 

You might be able to tell I'm a fan of the scheme, I got mine because I wanted something to say I'm competant other than just my own word, not because I needed one to get work.

 

also the NRC, rather than just and exam with a pass / fail, is more a scheme that helps you to achieve a standard, the assesors will help you to achieve it by suggesting areas that you need to improve, which you can then go away and improve yourself, and come back and show you have raised your standard in that area.