The HSE has clarified the “transitional arrangements” for implementing CDM 2015 next year, telling participants at an open meeting of the Construction Industry Advisory Committee on 19 November that there would be a six-month “grace period” between April and October 2015.
This would mean that any project underway on the implementation date of 6 April would have six months to achieve compliance with the new regulations, including the critical appointment of a Principal Designer.
Chris Chapman, head of CDM at safety consultancy the Building Safety Group, advised Construction Manager that the new rule would prevent unnecessary re-work in projects that only had a few months to run, but that clients for all other projects would have to get to grips with the substantially-changed regulations.
Under the new regime, there will be no longer be an official role of CDM Coordinator. Instead, their duties will fall to the Principal Designer and Principal Contractor.
Chapman told CM: “If a project has started when the regulations change, you will have six months to appoint a Principal Designer. The main thrust of their role is in pre-construction coordination, but they also have a duty to liaise with the Principal Contractor and make sure the Construction Phase plan is implemented and updated, and that the Principal Contractor is complying with the rules on site.
"If a CDMC is appointed now on a project that’s going on site in May for an 18-month build, they should be aware that the regulations are about to change and so should advise the client to appoint a Principal Designer, and to start putting the management systems in place."
Chris Chapman, Building Safety Group
“If a CDMC is appointed now on a project that’s going on site in May for an 18-month build, they should be aware that the regulations are about to change and so should advise the client to appoint a Principal Designer, and to start putting the management systems in place.”
However, one likely stumbling block is that some architects and design firms will not have the health and safety or buildability experience to take on the Principal Designer role.
Chapman said: “The role could be outsourced to someone else, but then that person is taking on design responsibility to a greater extent than a CDMC is. If they weren’t involved in the drawings [as a designer], then they would still have to be familiar with them and ensure they are up to date.
“An architect could keep a separate Principal Designer in the loop from Day 1, or they might need to have an in-house health and safety team [to allow them to take on the PD role]. Or, we [at Building Safety Group] can act as Principal Design consultants, and help to ensure the designers or clients remain compliant, as long as they take our advice. But we can’t be Principal Designers because we don’t hold design qualifications.”
Looking for a new job? There are dozens of new roles at CIOBJOBS now.
Asked what would happen in that situation in the event of an accident, Chapman said that it would be the Principal Designer rather than the PD Consultant that would be prosecuted, but that the PD might then counter claim for any losses against the PD consultant’s professional indemnity insurance, on the grounds that they had taken advice from a competent person.
Chapman said that the new regime was causing confusion among BSG’s clients and contacts, and that more publicity on the implications was needed.
At the open meeting of the Construction Industry Advisory Committee on 19 November, it was also revealed that the new, shortened Approved Code of Practice for CDM 2015 would not be ready for publication until October 2015.
But five “targeted guidance” documents, aimed at Designers, Principal Designers, Clients, Contractors and Principal Contractors, would be published on 6 April 2015.
Very tenuous contractual links between PD and PD Consultant.
Regulation release in April and guidance not available until a further 6 months.
General public still not aware of domestic client implications.
A lot of designers in the industry still unsure of what’s going to happen.
Overall, not the best rolled out set of revised legislation.
In simplicity, what on earth are 1000’s of CDM Coordinators going to do finding out they have been made redundant because of the new regulations by some idiot boffin.
It is the CDMC who has the knowledge of the regulations, which Designers have rarely even considered.
The HSE have got this awfully wrong.
The HSE is putting back construction safety management by over a decade in these ridiculous revised regulations, at a time when fee for intervention makes money .. conflict of interest ?
In a crazy political world, where bats and birds seemingly have more protection than humans for designers to be forced to consider, the poor old endangered competent CDMC is now cut adrift.. not a PD unless qualified to do so.. oh no, not a varying consultant title for cowboys to jump on.. backward step HSE !!
We here at GROT HQ, who wrote the original CDM 94 Regs, didn’t get where we are today by not seeing another opening in the marketplace similar to that completely useless role we created then called the ‘Clients Agent’. Absolutely ripped everyone off for fees, for absolutely no benefit whatsoever. So this PD’s PD, who will not be legally liable, will be able to name their price, so we will signing up all the soon-to-be-out-of -work CDMC’s on pre-contract agreements to then sell on next year, at a vast profit to the unprepared and sulking design practices. Marvellous. Super!
Chris Chapman says: “They (the Principal Designer) also have a duty to … make sure the Construction Phase plan is implemented and updated, and that the Principal Contractor is complying with the rules on site”. Where is this requirement stated in the consultative document?
There are a few misleading comments here, the role of the Principal Designer is not a design role and nowhere in the draft regs does it state design qualifications are required and likewise no H&S qualifications needed, guidance documentation and the final draft might clarify this but based on the past performance by the HSE in this redraft and consultation my expectation is that it will be left to the industry to interpret and implement. The removal of the CDMC role as an impartial H&S and CDM advisor is a step back to 1994 regs when I as a designer was expected by the HSE to take on the role of the Planning Supervisor at no cost or increased responsibility – all sounds a little familiar.
Change is coming and skills will need to be diverted but the CDM legislation will still require these to discharge duty holders responsibilities and competency is a legal requirement in general legislation. Whilst we are all looking at the immediate impact the change in April will have on us as professionals the implications for the construction industry and clients in the small and medium sector is significant this is a sector of the industry that is most vulnerable to poor application of CDM to projects through lack of knowledge and skills required.
There are big opportunities and increased responsibility with the proposed changes and let’s not forget Fee for Fault for which theconstruction industry is a target sector.
M Stowell RFaPS, MIIRSM, grad IOSH, MCIOB, MAPM