CDM 2015 What we’ve learnt so far 20 October 2015

1. CDM 2015 What we’ve learnt so far 20 October 2015

2. Agenda • Introduction • Key issues identified • Solutions implemented • Some myths busted • Looking ahead • Questions.

3. Introduction • CDM 2015 transition period ends on 6 October • HSE focussing enforcement strategy around Clients • Setting the tone • Management arrangements • Proportionate approach to risk management • Still much debate as to approach to complying with the new Regs • There is a differing approach to managing CDM15 amongst Client organisations

4. Duty to Ensure • Huge potential impact (particularly for Clients) • Absolute Duty • Must be demonstrable • How do we ensure? • How do we evidence it? • What do we do with the evidence? • What is “reasonably practicable”? • Do we have the competence to discharge this duty?

5. Key Issues Identified • There are a number of issues that have been identified during the transition period. • These have led to a difference in approach to implementing management arrangements

6. Notification of Schemes • Traditional interpretation of “30 day” projects triggering the full scope of CDM • Lack of appreciation of “more than one contractor” differentiation • Occasional perception that there is a reduction in number of “CDM-able” projects due to change in notification thresholds

7. Confusion re Principal Designer Role • Individual v Organisation • Competency requirements • Can only be the Architect? • Can a Client act as PD? • When to appoint • How to evidence competence • Outputs • Approach to Design Risk Management.

8. Maintenance v Construction Work • Lack of understanding of which aspects of maintenance constitute construction work • Confusion as to the approach to term maintenance contracts • How to incorporate design risk management in the maintenance planning process • Lack of relevant competence amongst maintenance contractors to fulfil Principal Contractor duties (where required).

9. Appetite of Designers for PD Role • Not all Designers feel comfortable with undertaking all aspects of the PD role • Clients need to recognise this as a risk (particularly in relation to “Duty to Ensure”) • Many design practices lack the relevant H&S competence to discharge this element of the role effectively

10. Over-complication and Ambiguity • Clients have tended to over-analyse the changes to the new Regs • This has led to a lack of clarity and consistency in approach • Ambiguity in management arrangements is a big risk to Clients • How do they demonstrate “Duty to Ensure” if their management arrangements are ambiguous?

11. How do we structure H&S advice? • Role of existing CDMCs? • What is competent H&S advice? • When do we need to access the advice? • Where does H&S advice sit within the Project Team?

12. Some Solutions • Client to take on PD function • Partnerships between Designers and CDM Practices • Design Practices to expand with H&S competence • PD function to fall within Project Team (for D&B)

13. Client as PD

14. Designer/CDM Partnership

15. Design Practice to upskill • Must have clear demarcation of roles and responsibilities • Ensure that you have clearly evidenced the relevant competence • Skills • Knowledge • Relevant Experience

16. Project Team delivering PD • Ensure CLEARLY DEFINED roles and responsibilities • Identify which element of PD function each party fulfils • Conflicts of Interest?? • Accountability??

17. Some Myths Busted

18. Some Myths Busted

19. Looking Ahead • HSE engagement with Clients • Industry sector guidance being produced • Further development of Principal Designer role as it relates to different Client organisational requirements • Continued upskilling of Duty Holders

20. Thank You Any Questions?