Clean It Up
UK Window Cleaning Forum => Window Cleaning Forum => Topic started by: Trevor Knight on May 16, 2007, 07:21:02 am
-
As you may or may not know, the Association of Professional Window Cleaners has been asked to prepare a consultation paper to provide our views on the implications that future water restriction may have on the window cleaning industry.
One of the questions is as follows:
Q18. Are you able to provide any evidence of business cost impacts arising from water use restrictions during the 2004-06 drought in south east England?
To help us compile our response and to give a fair and acurate representation of the industry would anyone who has any specific issues relating to this question please email their replys to us at the following address:
info@apwc.info
May I, on behalf of the APWC, thank you for taking the time to help us with this consultation.
Trevor
-
With the greatest of respect Trevor, I am rather worried about the apwc's involvement in this for a number of reasons, not least of which what happened at last year's drought order hearings.
I know you weren't on the apwc committee then, so for your benefit and that of new members here, let me explain why I am concerned.
Last year, when the water companies applied for drought orders they held public hearings to debate the drought order and its necessity. All interested parties could attend and make clear any objections or cases which they wanted to put forward.
The FWC sent committee members to speak in behalf of its 1500 or so members, Craig Mawlam attended in behalf of the BWCA (and also spoke in behalf of The Federation, at their request), Glyn Howard of Omnipole attended and put the case for window cleaners forward. I also attended, to report.
Unfortunately, this occurred at a time of some animosity between the FWC and the the fledgling apwc, and I'm sorry to say that it is my opinion that some on your committee, especially your chairman, tried to use this very serious issue to score points, with near disastrous consequences.
A petition was started by your chairman which sought to establish how many water-fed pole users would be in the affected area, and what the impact on their business would be if they were prevented from using water fed poles. On the face of it this might not seem to be such a bad idea, but unfortunatley it had a very predictable and undersirable effect.
Firstly, only about 100 people responded to the petition, which so angered your chairman that he embarked on a name-and-shame campaign against those who had not signed up, and published the petition on the APWC website, including the names and addresses of those who were kind enough to show their support. This was, of course, a breach of trust and was illegal under the data protection act.
Secondly, the data that was compiled in that petition was collected from, not just the affected area, but from window cleaners all over the UK, and so was not relevant to the argument.
Thirdly, and most embarassingly of all, the officer in charge of the drought order hearing pointed out that the petition showed that approximatley 50% of those who completed the petition used ladders, not water-fed pole. He then put forth this argument: "If, as you claim, you are unable to use ladders because of the work at height regulations and health & safety issues, why are half of the people in this petition still using them?"
This argument, to which there was no simple defense, was picked up on by the members of other water companies who were in attendance, and was repeated at each subsequent hearing, and I'm sure it was a significant factor in the secretary of state's decision not to grant window cleaners ANY dispensation on the grounds of health and safety or the Work at Height Regs.
I'm sorry to say it, but the apwc's involvement in this issue last year did significant harm to the window cleaner's case, both because of incompetence and also because of a pre-occupation in using the issue to score points.
The Federation of Window Cleaners attended representing its 1500 or so members. Glyn Howard attended representing his many hundreds of omnipole customers. Craig Mawlam attended representing many hundreds of BWCA members, Ionic customers and The Federation. How many members were the apwc representing? At that time it had about 10 members (including the 6 committee), I'd be interested to know how many you propose to represent now? Is it still about 10? I've certainly got no problem with the apwc being in an early stage of its growth, but with such a small membership I do not believe that you are in a position to claim to represent even a small part of the window cleaning industry.
The tone of your post leads me to believe that once again the apwc will seek to use this issue to try to score points and gain prominence.
"the Association of Professional Window Cleaners has been asked to prepare a consultation paper"
I happen to know for a fact that this is not true. Nor have you been "invited" into the consultation. The consultation is an open process in which anyone with an interest can participate. I am concerned that, once again, we are to see the apwc damage the window cleaner's case in something of a despearate effort to score points and gain some prominence.
I only recount these events because at the time, (as far as I am aware) you were not part of the APWC and probably have not been told about exactly what went on.
I have also heard, and you can feel free to put me right if I'm wrong, that the apwc chairman has recently resigned, along with another committee member, leaving you with no chairman, only three committee members and debts of several thousand pounds.
As an organisation, I'm afraid that the apwc is at present unstable, unreliable and does not have enough members. It is just not ready to represent the window cleaning industry in any matter, let alone one as important as this. This is not to say that this will not change in the future, and I'm sure in the course of time this will change.
If you genuinely care about window cleaners, you should recognize that without first building a strong, credible and well supported organisation, you are likely to do more harm than good, and this has been adequately shown in the past.
-Philip
-
Do you mean you have been asked to contribute with views to the consultation paper?
I doubt very much they would be asking you to write a consultation document.
This is already a lost cause, they are interested in tyeing up the loose ends. The way to go is to ask for grants , tax breaks, technical advice etc on the use of grey water. This would make a lasting contribution to the enviroment and the stated aims of defra in this context.
If you read the document advertised on here the onus is on the householder. Take a look at those Govt ads on the telly about the smoking ban, they would use similar tactics to impose a serious level drought order. The climate of public opinion would not allow us to work anyway.
You are playing at very high level, and you need the best brains.
-
I have just read Philips post and I see that you are up against it. 100 window cleaners 100 different opinions.
The only available strategy, I repeat, is to ask for defras help in making our industry more sustainable. You could get us a good deal out of this.
The obvious argument that you are all concerned with is already lost.
-
The tone of your post leads me to believe that once again the apwc will seek to use this issue to try to score points and gain prominence.
"the Association of Professional Window Cleaners has been asked to prepare a consultation paper"
I happen to know for a fact that this is not true. Nor have you been "invited" into the consultation. The consultation is an open process in which anyone with an interest can participate. I am concerned that, once again, we are to see the apwc damage the window cleaner's case in something of a despearate effort to score points and gain some prominence.
If you genuinely care about window cleaners, you should recognize that without first building a strong, credible and well supported organisation, you are likely to do more harm than good, and this has been adequately shown in the past.
-Philip
Philip,
Firstly I am dissapointed with your approach and think that if you are that concerned then you should telephone me or email me direct. However, with regards to your accusations I would point out the following!
1) - Defra and the Welsh Assembly Government are inviting views on a consultation paper setting out proposals to modernise the scope of hosepipe bans and drought orders which restrict or prohibit discretionary and non-essential uses of water.
They call it a consultation paper, so where am i wrong there?
2) - http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/water-restrictions/consultlist.htm look for yourself, we are on the list the same as everyone else! FACT!
3) - This is by no means seen as an opportunity to get one over any other organisation and it is sad that you feel so threatened by this. My post was simply to understand from a broader perspective what the views were of other window cleaners. If you add the FED/BWCA and Omnipoles members together along with the APWC, this doesn't even scratch the surface of the number of window cleaners out there and the more people who can air their views and concerns regarding this the better chance all of us have at getting a result for the INDUSTRY!
It is a shame that such petty attitudes stop us all from joining together and working as a team instead of this ridiculous tit for tat attitude and quite frankly childish approach. I never have, and never will publicly run down any organisation as that in itself shows a lack of respect and understanding for each other. I respect what ALL of us are trying to achieve and we should all think about that.
Yes you are right, I wasn't involved in the past but you can be assured that I will ONLY act on the best interest of the INDUSTRY and the APWC.
Trevor
-
Philip Hanson also does posts that make fascinating reading...
Trevor's reply should be interesting too....
My personal opinion is that the powers that be should take a look and see just how many people there are out there in any given area using WFP on a daily basis.
Add to that the average amount of water those window cleaners will use in the course of the production of pure water for window cleaning , and the amount they actually use to clean windows.Pure conjecture on my part of course, but at least anecdotally it would appear that the average WFP user uses approximately 300-350 litres per day, and with most R/O systems having a 3;1 ratio of pure to waste (roughly) then they are using around a 1000 litres of water per day.
I know I am only drawing figures out of the air, but in my own town of some 12 to 15 thousand people there are about 15-20 window cleaners and less than half of them are WFP
But if there are in fact 10 of us using WFP, then we are using around 10,000 litres of water a day between us (production and use)
Just one individual in our town with his sprinkler on all day long will use more than all of the towns window cleaners combined.
PERSPECTIVE!!!!
The collective water boards need to get some of it!
To pick on a handful of tradesmen is pathetic, and yes, I am well aware that the handful soon becomes many hundreds as you add in all those from other towns and villages throughout any given county, and so there combined use of water then runs into tens of thousands of litres per day.
which is a useful ploy from water companies to justify window cleaners not being exempt.
But the total use of water they use is still a very tiny fraction of the whole.
And many times there entire use of water per day will not even amount to that lost in a single big leak.
Per head of population what we use is a very tiny fraction.
But we are a visible minority aren't we?
So the government and the water companies can beat us over the head and say, "Look what a good job we are doing cutting down waste."
When it is in fact doing no such thing.
I agree with stopping people watering their lawns with sprinklers (its just cosmetic anyway) and restricting the use of hosepipes to wash their cars with (one person taking 20 minutes to wash his car can use the best part of a 1000 litres)
Things like that make a real saving.
As I said earlier, the authorities need to get a proper sense of perspective...In my opinion.
Ian
Trevor posted ahead of me.....I was right....his reply was a good one......
-
Trevor, I think you have missed my point. I have not made any accusations at all, and I have certainly not suggested that you personally would act in anything but the interests of widow cleaners.
I have merely expressed my concerns as I see them and based on my own experience, which if I may be so bold,on this subject is broader than yours.
You said "the Association of Professional Window Cleaners has been asked to prepare a consultation paper"
No matter how you look at it, that is most certainly not a fact. The consultation paper was prepared by DEFRA. The APWC has not been asked to prepare it. The APWC may be a consultee, agreed, but that is totally different. A previous APWC chairman, Martin Bolt, did something similar to what you have done there, when he made reference to a meeting he had attended at Downing street. As it turned out, theat meeting was totally inconsequential as regards window cleaning, but he made a post on the forum and worded it to make it sound like the apwc was more involved in something at a high level, when of course it was not. The day that DEFRA asks the APWC to prepare a consultation paper, well, you'll be able to relax in the knowledge that you have attained the respect of government. Until then, it is poor form to suggest that you have. Perhaps you didn't mean to come across as misleading, in which case fine. My advice is to be careful not to make statements that are untrue, even by accident.
I find it interesting that you would suggest that I would feel threatened, may I ask why would I be threatened by the apwc? If you look at my history of posts, you'll see I have a long and colourful history with the federation which concluded in me being unceromoniously booted out of it for asking to look at the accounts, but thats another story. I was present when this new association was established, I wrote and published a six page article about it. Has nobody on the APWC committee filled you in on exactly how it even came to be founded and the chain of events that followed? I am quite surprised that you would seem to know so little about it, or how my federation fiasco served as the catalyst for the open forum meeting which directly led to the creation of the pwca, later renamed the apwc.
From reading your posts, Trevor, I have concluded that you are well-meaning and even passionate, and I do admire that in anyone. But I also now realise that you havent been fully informed as to what has happened within the apwc previously. If you were, you would understand better why, as you put it, "petty attitudes stop us all from joining together and working as a team", which is actually quite a succinct way to put it if I may say! What I don't think you fully appreciate, is that very attitude has been evident from the apwc for some time.
I will ONLY act on the best interest of the INDUSTRY and the APWC
I like your spirit, and I believe you would. Let me ask you this. What would happen if what was best for the industry is not best for the APWC? Just hypothetically, what if I was right, and the very best thing for the industry over this issue would be for The APWC to not be involved? Would you bow out?
Ah if only everthing in life was so clear cut eh? I guarantee there will be times when what is best for the industry is not best for the APWC.
Take, for example, water-fed pole systems and the Fed. Nearly everyone would agree that WFP is best for the industry, yes? When they were introduced, was WFP the best thing for the Fed? NOPE! The fed sells traditional equipment, and is unable to fit water-fed pole systems. So in that case, what was best for the industry was not best for the Fed. So what did they do? Did they embrace something that was of benefit for the industry even though it wasn't the best for them? Before we judge them too harshly, let's wonder what would the APWC have done? There are countless other examples.
But anyway, back to the point. I note that you didn't correct me about the resignations and financial position. Ironically, I think that this particular set of resignations is likely to improve the apwc in the long term. However, at present (and this consultation is the present) the apwc does not have enough members to claim to be able to represent the window cleaning industry. Its also clear that your leadership is currently in a state of flux, and financially the position is not good. That is a poor platform to begin any sort of campaign, but especially one where the numbers are everything.
Hypothetically speaking (again!), if you are invited to DEFRA to present any sort of information perhaps based on what you collect here or anywhere else, one of the first questions they will ask is "How many APWC members do you represent?"
How many people you are speaking for is absolutely paramount with issues such as this, if you say "ten", "twenty" or whatever, DEFRA will on that basis form an unfavourable view of window cleaners and their representatives. And, let's face it, who could blame them?
-Philip
-
interesting reading
Philip from the post, i guess you and craig are now " buddy'd up" with the FED now, otherwise why post this, unless craig is planning to start another Organisation ( wasnt he involved in the APWC ?? i guess that didnt work out ?? ), as this post smacks of just trying to rubbish the APWC :( and thats a shame
Trevor is posting on here, as afterall this is the biggest window cleaning forum and even though we may not all be members of the APWC, as he says, they are represnting the industry, not just members , good on him for asking options here
lets leave the name calling and mug slinging to the children eh
-
I'm assuming you are in a position to lobby Trevor. The only thing that will be listened to is a responsible leadership offering to work with government to mitigate the effects of expected future drought orders made more frequent by global warming.
The key to this is sustainability and the more inteligent use of grey water by individual operators. To achieve this a combined approach is required. You've got a winning hand, you just need to play it.
Ps. Has Philip said one word about the actual issues.
-
Philip Hanson also does posts that make fascinating reading...
Trevor's reply should be interesting too....
My personal opinion is that the powers that be should take a look and see just how many people there are out there in any given area using WFP on a daily basis.
Add to that the average amount of water those window cleaners will use in the course of the production of pure water for window cleaning , and the amount they actually use to clean windows.Pure conjecture on my part of course, but at least anecdotally it would appear that the average WFP user uses approximately 300-350 litres per day, and with most R/O systems having a 3;1 ratio of pure to waste (roughly) then they are using around a 1000 litres of water per day.
I know I am only drawing figures out of the air, but in my own town of some 12 to 15 thousand people there are about 15-20 window cleaners and less than half of them are WFP
But if there are in fact 10 of us using WFP, then we are using around 10,000 litres of water a day between us (production and use)
Just one individual in our town with his sprinkler on all day long will use more than all of the towns window cleaners combined.
PERSPECTIVE!!!!
The collective water boards need to get some of it!
To pick on a handful of tradesmen is pathetic, and yes, I am well aware that the handful soon becomes many hundreds as you add in all those from other towns and villages throughout any given county, and so there combined use of water then runs into tens of thousands of litres per day.
which is a useful ploy from water companies to justify window cleaners not being exempt.
But the total use of water they use is still a very tiny fraction of the whole.
And many times there entire use of water per day will not even amount to that lost in a single big leak.
Per head of population what we use is a very tiny fraction.
But we are a visible minority aren't we?
So the government and the water companies can beat us over the head and say, "Look what a good job we are doing cutting down waste."
When it is in fact doing no such thing.
I agree with stopping people watering their lawns with sprinklers (its just cosmetic anyway) and restricting the use of hosepipes to wash their cars with (one person taking 20 minutes to wash his car can use the best part of a 1000 litres)
Things like that make a real saving.
As I said earlier, the authorities need to get a proper sense of perspective...In my opinion.
Ian
Trevor posted ahead of me.....I was right....his reply was a good one......
Ian
Sorry but I'm going to have to pull you up on that one - don't pick on another trade just because yours is being picked on - at least you have been asked to "consult".
Car Valeters as a rule do not use any more water than shiners.
Clean windows are also just cosmetic as well don't forget - just like lawns.
Phil
P.s. I wish my 650 Litre water tank filled up in 20 mins. - thats 2 days useage btw
-
surely the arguement must be to allow us to use water UPSTAIRS and traditional downstairs, this will HALF the water used, which will only be a good thing that we are trying to meet the water boards half way
-
Hi Matt
That is what the federation proposed to its members last year and it was at least a good will gesture that showed that we were trying to meet the water boards half way. Unfortunately i will not get involved this time as i am no longer with the fed.
Steve
-
No. The consultation doc is brilliantly drafted.A govt minister's car cannot be valetted , whereas a taxi which is classed as public transport can.
You can not use a hosepipe(or water drawn from a hosepipe to wash a house). The offence and liability would be the householders and not yours. You can not even use water that you have gotten from an area that is not under a hose pipe ban.
As I say the consultation document is a work of art.
-
I think if they tried to stop you using water from another area they would be on dodgy ground ! And the onus would be on them to prove where you got it from! A bit difficult when its been through an ro and di :)
-
That's what the consultation paper is about tieing up the loose ends. It was drafted by barristers knowing just the sort of arguments that window cleaners, car valetters etc would come up with.
That part of the argument has already been lost. The leadership, and I use the term loosely, needs to salvage what it can.
-
Hi Matt
That is what the federation proposed to its members last year and it was at least a good will gesture that showed that we were trying to meet the water boards half way. Unfortunately i will not get involved this time as i am no longer with the fed.
Steve
i didnt know that Steve, it does show at least we are prepared to meet half way
what happened with you and the FED then steve, i thought you were heading for the head honco position, could get the old un's out ?? ?? ?
-
Hi Matt
Yes its true that i was nominated for Chairman but i refused because for something to change they need to want to and they dont ! Throughout my business carrer i have always tried to run my business in an honest and ethical way and i was not really happy with some of the things i saw :-X
Steve
-
Hi Matt
Yes its true that i was nominated for Chairman but i refused because for something to change they need to want to and they dont ! Throughout my business carrer i have always tried to run my business in an honest and ethical way and i was not really happy with some of the things i saw :-X
Steve
fair enough steve, so i guess they all had there "payday" then ;)
-
Hi Matt
Forgot to say they have also lost Paul Smith and Alan Lillington so are now down to five on the commitee.
Steve
-
Glyn Howard attended representing his many hundreds of omnipole customers. Craig Mawlam attended representing many hundreds of BWCA members, Ionic customers and The Federation.
Or to put it another way the manufacturers will put more into this not because of the individual window cleaner but because the manufacturer stands to lose a lot more.
Any individual window cleaner could adjust his methods or find other manual labour. Stamp out wfp and who really loses?
-
Just a matter of time we are screwed took five years to build up the business , thousands of pounds of investment then comes another winter of little rain water ban follows and im off to the dole que great !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Or to put it another way the manufacturers will put more into this not because of the individual window cleaner but because the manufacturer stands to lose a lot more.
Any individual window cleaner could adjust his methods or find other manual labour. Stamp out wfp and who really loses?
I would!! I have invested alot of time and money into my business! Yes i could adjust my methods, but i would see a massive decline in my earnings!
-
I would!! I have invested alot of time and money into my business! Yes i could adjust my methods, but i would see a massive decline in my earnings!
But it's this "We have your interests at heart" rubbish to make it look good that winds us up. All their intested in is their sale figures, whilst a secondary issue is ensuring wfp users can carry on, which in turn allows them to carry on selling.
Associations must be allowed a view, afterall they are looking after the end user.
-
Everyone is out for themselves. The suppliers are still a business and they would have alot to loose just like me!
-
Hi Matt
Forgot to say they have also lost Paul Smith and Alan Lillington so are now down to five on the commitee.
Steve
i guess they are the 5 who stood to gain with the "golden goose "
no surprises on that 1
-
i just hope that people take it seriously, afterall its OUR livings that are stake not the "system makers" as they have made there money
Philip, as you were at the meeting to report on things, who was it who was being childish and sticking his 2 fingers up and shouting silly remarks at the panel
this might show how serious some took it and some didnt ::) ::)
-
Hi Matt,
I do believe you are becomming cynical in your old age!!
Philip from the post, i guess you and craig are now " buddy'd up" with the FED now, otherwise why post this
I think it will be very long time before I "buddy up" with the federation, I dont mind telling you! Why post this? Because its what I think thats all! Trevor and anyone else at the apwc doesnt have to listen to my opinion, because its just that, my opinion.
lets leave the name calling and mug slinging to the children eh
There was no mudslinging or namecalling matt, I 100% respect what Trevor and the APWC may be trying to achieve, but I do think that there should be a reasonable attitude about it, and I hope that anyone who does get involved in the consultation has the sense and maturity to know when he or she is going to be more of a hindrance than a help.
Helen, you are quite right, manufacturers and suppliers of WFP equipment of course have a commercial interest in opposing any restriction on WFP, and it would be foolish to suggest otherwise.
But that doesnt change the fact that many many window cleaning businesses who have gone to the trouble to invest considerable sums in order to allow their employees the safest work equipment would also suffer severely. And remeber, its not simply a case of "going back to ladders", there are a great many buildings that can now only be cleaned with water-fed pole. How do you, for example, clean over 3rd storey with a ladder? You can't, but many window cleaning companies regularly do so with WFP. In some circumstances, it might be possible to do with powered access, but this is expensive and would likely wipe out any profit made on a particular job. Prevent window cleaners from using water-fed poles, and it could well mean some businesses going bankrupt.
And lets not forget one of the main reasons for WFP in the first place - safety. Working safely is in everyone's interest, and the hse has even acknowledged that if window cleaners who have previously used WFP all suddenly are forced to use ladders, there is likely to be a spate of accidents.
I believe that involvement in this issue will eventually be settled only by the involvement of lawyers, primarily because the argument hinges on exactly what is meant by the 1991 Drought Direction which cites the cleaning of windows by hosepipe.
I'm sure everyone understands that as soon as you involve lawyers to argue the case, it quickly gets expensive, and therefore anyone who enters the debate will have to be prepared to fund that expertise, and therefore getting involved should not be taken lightly. Ultimately my guess is that it will be the federation and possibly a co-operative of suppliers that do this.
-Philip
-
Hi Matt,
I do believe you are becomming cynical in your old age!
Philip from the post, i guess you and craig are now " buddy'd up" with the FED now, otherwise why post this
I think it will be very long time before I "buddy up" with the federation, I dont mind telling you! Why post this? Because its what I think thats all! Trevor and anyone else at the apwc doesnt have to listen to my opinion, because its just that, my opinion.
lets leave the name calling and mug slinging to the children eh
There was no mudslinging or namecalling matt, I 100% respect what Trevor and the APWC may be trying to achieve, but I do think that there should be a reasonable attitude about it, and I hope that anyone who does get involved in the consultation has the sense and maturity to know when he or she is going to be more of a hindrance than a help.
philip, cynical ?? me ??
we have been on here long enough to know posts are made to rubbish others, its all part and parcel, but this is serious and its effects window cleaners lives
the post looked like a advert for the FED, as if you rubbish the competion, then it makes the FED look good ( now i didnt expect to say that )
-
So glad I am not involved with all the political bull poop any more ::) ::) ::)
Andy
-
If a water drought forced WFP users to revert back to (unfamiliar) traditional ladder work and their was a spate of fatal accidents involving the use of ladders would the HSE take any action enforcing the WAHR over the water companies enforcing the ban?
-
I will ONLY act on the best interest of the INDUSTRY and the APWC
I like your spirit, and I believe you would. Let me ask you this. What would happen if what was best for the industry is not best for the APWC? Just hypothetically, what if I was right, and the very best thing for the industry over this issue would be for The APWC to not be involved? Would you bow out?
You have your opinions regarding the APWC and thats your opinion. As an Association we are doing our best to understand and represent this industry and to stand up for what is best for EVERYONE, and NOT just our members, hence my posting on here to give people an opportunity who are not a member of any organisation an opportunity to have a say, what is the harm in that?
Instead of all this "who is doing what" routine it would be far more beneficial to ALL WINDOW CLEANERS and the INDUSTRY for the FED, BWCA, APWC and any other organisations to join hands, let each other know what their members and their feelings are regarding this issue and to present a JOINT response showing that our industry is united as one and will challenge potentially damaging proposals by government and alike!
Ah if only everthing in life was so clear cut eh? I guarantee there will be times when what is best for the industry is not best for the APWC.
Take, for example, water-fed pole systems and the Fed. Nearly everyone would agree that WFP is best for the industry, yes? When they were introduced, was WFP the best thing for the Fed? NOPE! The fed sells traditional equipment, and is unable to fit water-fed pole systems. So in that case, what was best for the industry was not best for the Fed. So what did they do? Did they embrace something that was of benefit for the industry even though it wasn't the best for them? Before we judge them too harshly, let's wonder what would the APWC have done? There are countless other examples.
Philip, for someone who professes to know so much about the APWC if am confused why you made the above point? The APWC does not SELL any products, isn't soley owned by any manufacturer and makes no revenue at all from the sale or recommendation of any product!! So therefore, if the industry was better represented by WFP or Traditional methods or both, as an association, it wouldn't make a bit of difference to us financially?? What we would do is look at what is involved and try and give, honest, un-biased advice based on what information we can gleam from available reasources? So in answer to your question above, the APWC would welcome any change within the industry that is making our working environment a safer place and we would like to try and help everyone, not just our members, be able to source these products at the most competitive price!
-Philip
I have answered the points you have raised and in conclusion feel this is now detracting from my original posting.
Regardless of what you do or don't believe the posting is there not for the benefit of cudous as an association but to give people on here, the most successful forum in the country, an opportunity to express their views regardless of what organisation they do or don't belong to?
I have 15 years experience in this industry, operate a successful window cleaning company as well as being a member of the FED, Clearchoice,APWC,FSB,Chamber of Commerce,Safecontractor so I am confident that my decisions I make are professional, responsible and accountable.
Please Philip, don't tar me with the same brush as others, you don't know me, have never met me and cannot judge me. I could start questioning your knowledge and industry awareness when you produce a window cleaning magazine packed full of information on Electric Razors, Swiss Army Knifes, Playstation 3 consules and glamour models??? I am sure you are doing your best and I respect that but as a professional I see no reason to start mud slinging.
In conclusion, the APWC will represent and always will represent their members and work towards to good of the industry. If any of the other organisations wish to share this information or work together on this proposal and maybe strengthen our case then feel free to contact me or the APWC.
If any window cleaner has a view they would like to share regarding the DEFRA proposal please let one of the organisation know. If we don't know what your wanting we can't take it forward on your behalf!
Best wishes,
Trevor
-
Sorry to keep repeating myself.
If you get the chance push this grey water thing. How can operators collect rain water off the roof of their houses etc and get some kind of certification for working in this manner.
Remember, sustainability.
-
Sorry to keep repeating myself.
If you get the chance push this grey water thing. How can operators collect rain water off the roof of their houses etc and get some kind of certification for working in this manner.
Remember, sustainability.
Noted, Thank you
-
Ian
Sorry but I'm going to have to pull you up on that one - don't pick on another trade just because yours is being picked on - at least you have been asked to "consult".
Car Valeters as a rule do not use any more water than shiners.
Clean windows are also just cosmetic as well don't forget - just like lawns.
Phil
P.s. I wish my 650 Litre water tank filled up in 20 mins. - thats 2 days useage btw
Phil,
I'm not belittling other trades, a car valeter will use very little water to clean a car with and I see no reason why they shouldn't continue the same as window cleaners.
My point is a domestic hosepipe ban is effective and saves a vast amount of water.
I was trying to makes the point that in a town of ten or 12 thousand people, a dozen window cleaners (and a handful of car valeters) aren't going to make a ha'porth of difference.
12,000 people probably equate to what? 3 or 4 thousand houses? And something like 5 thousand cars?
It only takes a very small percentage of those numbers to totally dwarf the kind of water usage that window cleaners using WFP will use.
It is also a very different thing to stick a hosepipe straight from your outside tap into your water tank, if you have reasonable pressure it'll fill up in no time at all.
When connected to your R/O it fills up at a dribble!
It takes my 1000 litre tank at least 48 hours to fill up from empty!
If I put the hosepipe straight into it I can fill it up in under 30 minutes, well under in fact.
Thats what I mean...perspective!
Laywers can and will tie us all in knots of course (and make a fortune in the process >:()
But the bottom line is a handful of traders, be they window cleaners or car valeters are not going to make much of a difference.
How many leaks are there at any one time in a town?
I honestly have no idea, but we all know that something like 25% of our water is lost before it even reaches us.
Just one single leak can waste many tens of thousands of litres a day.
Perspective for gods sake!
We are tiny small fry, but a visible small fry, they'll clobber those in the danger areas and feel good because they've saved a fraction of a single percent of the water being used.
Ian
-
My further suggestions would be:
1. involve an academic, an enviromental researcher, or someone doing a PHD, this would make a very good subject. Ian's calculations, and calculations like them althought ball park correct need to be done properly.
2. Defra and or APWC could part fund/sponsor this research.The aim of it would be to see what percentage of an annual water usage by an operator could be fulfilled via drainage run off and recycling of other waters.
3. Practical designs to come out of this that operators could use. As an example if an operater spent £2000 they might be able to meet 30% of their water usage needs.Some might be able to reach 100%
4.Defra/APWC to offer a 'grey water badge' to operators who meet certain criteria.This would go a long way to silencind critics of WFP on enviromental grounds.
-
Sorry forgot.
5. Look for examples of best practice. In other words someone may be already doing this, get the details of how they do it and how much water is saved.
-
Hi Trevor,
Again with respect, you actually have not answered the points at all, and you still seem to be regarding me with a level of hostility that I find puzzling.
The real point is, the apwc has hardly any members, no chairman and no money. How can you purport to represent an industry in a such a situation? That is the point that needs answering, and you are still ignoring it.
These are important points, because without members, you in fact dont represent anyone except yourself. Without money, you will be unable to sustain the legal challenge when it becomes necessary, let alone any other action that becomes necessary to fund. And without stable leadership, you will lack the direction needed in a complex situation such as this. You can't claim to represent the industry just because you want to, you have to have the numbers to back it up! I know that, DEFRA knows that, anyone in their right mind knows it!
What I'm saying is that if you try to get involved in the debate on this basis, you are likely to do more harm than good, as has happened in the past.
I also think you are totally misunderstanding what I am saying. (Perhaps its my rambling way of posting, others have commented on that in the past!)
You have taken my example of water-fed poles and the fed, and completely missed the point. The point I was trying to make is that, history tells us that on the occasion where what is best for the industry is not best for its association, the association will most likely act in its own interests above that of the industry (as happened fed have done with WFP). I wasn't referring to the apwc, and I would have thought it would be pretty obvious that situation did not apply to the apwc. I know you don't sell equipment!
(Ian Giles, steve lowe old friend, do you understand what I'm getting at here, or am I really not making sense?)
I have 15 years experience in this industry, operate a successful window cleaning company as well as being a member of the FED, Clearchoice,APWC,FSB,Chamber of Commerce,Safecontractor so I am confident that my decisions I make are professional, responsible and accountable.
Again, if you actually read what I have written, you would understand that I am not having a go at you, and I am sure that your motives and professionalism are not in question. There has been no mudslinging, and I have been nothing but civil to you throughout this whole topic.
You seek to collect opinions by means of this forum, but I can tell you with a good degree of certainty this forum does not represent a fair cross-section of window cleaners. Hardly any window cleaners I know use the internet and email, let alone forums. In order to properly collect opinions, you would have to send out paper questionaires.
And there is the problem, to do even a simple exercise like mail out a few thousand questionaires to window cleaners takes money, and for that reason the apwc is unable to do it.
When DEFRA is finished being unimpressed by the number of members the APWC is claiming to represent, next they will question your data and how it was collected. DEFRA isnt stupid, they arent about to make a policy decision with wide ranging implications without first ascertaining that the data its based on is reliable. The question would go something like:
"As you are claiming to represent the industry, other than internet forums, what methods did you employ to collect the opinions of those window cleaners who do not use forums?"
Will you say "um, er, no we couldnt do that becasue actually we havent got any money"
This is what I mean about doing more harm than good.
-Philip
-
Philip,
In reference to your accusations of Debt, I would like to point out that at present the APWC has NO Outstanding debts and should there be a need of any financial investment required at now or at a future date we are suitably represented by both our sponsors and committee.
Please refrain from any further unjustified accusations.
Dave
-
These are important points, because without members, you in fact dont represent anyone except yourself. Without money, you will be unable to sustain the legal challenge when it becomes necessary, let alone any other action that becomes necessary to fund. And without stable leadership, you will lack the direction needed in a complex situation such as this. You can't claim to represent the industry just because you want to, you have to have the numbers to back it up! I know that, DEFRA knows that, anyone in their right mind knows it!
who else will we look to represent US ( and i dont just mean ionics / omni customers or people who have been on some "course" or even some dinosaurs who last year seemed stuck in the 80's and were rubbishing WFP ) the whole of the industry, Trevor has said he will speak for the "industry" personally i dont think trevor has any other motives and i would prefere him to represent me than others who seem to have other idea's to just gain points over each other
-
we need to show we will at least try and cut down on water
1. WFP only when needed ( upstairs )
2. use of grey water
or course, some people will not be happy with this, afterall they have a 800 L tank in the van and use that everyday, why should they change, the salesman promised them they could earn 250 quid a day
-
i just hope that people take it seriously, afterall its OUR livings that are stake not the "system makers" as they have made there money
Philip, as you were at the meeting to report on things, who was it who was being childish and sticking his 2 fingers up and shouting silly remarks at the panel
this might show how serious some took it and some didnt ::) ::)
so i guess philip doesnt want to report this then, as i certainly do not want this type of person representing the industry
-
Defra are looking for ideas and relevant salient points. If Trevor makes them while others argue who the most important or representative person is that's fine by me too.
They know we don't like drought orders, they know that we don't think we should be affected by them, none the less we are going to be. Philip, please say something constructive or pipe down.
-
I must say, I am quite impressed about something that has just happened.
I've been involved in many discussions, some heated, on these forums and rarely has someone I have been in discussion with had the guts (or common sense?) to actually pick up the phone and make contact with me personally.
I am pleased to say that Trevor Knight has taken the iniative to do this, and I have nothing but respect for him for doing so.
We have talked about the discussion you see here, the apwc and other matters relevant to window cleaning, and it is clear to me (more so even than it was before) that Trevor is a well informed and sincere individual who, as I have never doubted, has the best interests of the industry at heart.
May I thank you Trevor, I feel that we have much in common, and are now both able to see each others point of view in a far better way.
Communication must be a key factor in moving any issue forward, and I am very pleased that this topic has resulted in a positive outcome (for me anyway)
-Philip
-
Thank you Philip,
Likewise I am glad we spoke and you now understand what the APWC is trying to achieve.
Any help or advice you may be able to offer is greatly appreciated.
I look forward to meeting with you soon.
regards,
Trevor
-
i just hope that people take it seriously, afterall its OUR livings that are stake not the "system makers" as they have made there money
Philip, as you were at the meeting to report on things, who was it who was being childish and sticking his 2 fingers up and shouting silly remarks at the panel
this might show how serious some took it and some didnt ::) ::)
Not me !! Mind you, I do plead guilty to a brief heckle at the Surrey & Sussex drought order hearing :)
I'm afraid the guy was peeing me off with his suggestion that 6 months without income wasn't too bad. I produced a counter suggestion that when we were all homeless and bankrupt, we could go and stay at his place. Not very productive but if I were in his shoes and threatening to pull the plug on the sole income of thousands of people, I would be grateful that they restricted themselves to one person doing a brief heckle. The idiot deserved it anyway for coming out with such garbage.
-
Thank you Philip,
Likewise I am glad we spoke and you now understand what the APWC is trying to achieve.
Any help or advice you may be able to offer is greatly appreciated.
I look forward to meeting with you soon.
regards,
Trevor
I'm glad you two have discussed this stuff over the phone. Text only media have a bad habit of resulting in garbled communications.
-
So what is the underlying message here?
WFP is '' forced '' on WCers for H & Safety reasons but now the realisation of the reliance of an unlimited supply of water to feed this industry is giving people cold feet!
Grey water! - perhaps for the big boys with unlimited budgets! I dont think so for the average Joe-WCer!
Any other suggestions to how WFPers are to proceed in the future if Water Companies get their way?
-
Excuse me for being a thickie but what is GREY WATER?
Ive heard of MURCKY water tho ;)
-
We have 500 homes been built in this area in the next 12 months but thats not a problem when it comes to water for them.
We have mass immigration but there is no problem when it come to water for them.
Industry uses millions of ltrs every day, again, that fine.
I dont even use 5000ltrs per 4 weeks but they want to ban me from using wfp. No way, we are easy targets that wont make a slight bit of difference, it just looks good for them.
Macc
-
We have 500 homes been built in this area in the next 12 months but thats not a problem when it comes to water for them.
We have mass immigration but there is no problem when it come to water for them.
Industry uses millions of ltrs every day, again, that fine.
I dont even use 5000ltrs per 4 weeks but they want to ban me from using wfp. No way, we are easy targets that wont make a slight bit of difference, it just looks good for them.
Macc
Totally agree!!
-
Can someone with more ability than me put across to the powers that be:-
1. WFP has come about and increased largely due to the increasing amount of Health and Safety regs that restrict the use of ladders on safety grounds.
2. That if a w/c (out of desperation) reverts to ladders and sustains injury then might there be a legal liability because he has had a safer method of working withheld from him?
On the giving side:-
Yes w/c may have to do ground floor work by trad. methods (typically 60% on houses due to more doors/patios at a lower level) in drought situations.
Paying for our water commercially may be necessary. (And being allowed to use it)
On the sustainibility side:-
Having a system for collecting rainwater in the winter and purifying and pumping
it should be encouraged and some sort of certification to say that is what we do.
And a cheaper version of Ionics "suck and vac" system will be developed.
-
Good reply Malc but we are the powers that be ;) , we are in control ? I like the rainwater useage and will try to do more myself.
Quote "And a cheaper version of Ionics "suck and vac" system will be developed"
controversially I use 1/3rd to 1/2 litre per min, on the record as saying I use less than 1/4 bucket per house. All you need is an open mind and a control or tap.
-
A trigger on the pole is what is needed. Gaz was pushing this idea & its great. My avarage days use over the month is less than 200ltrs.
Friday was a long day & i only used 225ltrs, before i fitted triggers to my poles i always used a min of 400ltrs a day.
I think manufactures should fit triggers to poles. I also think we should have them on our poles if its domestic.
With microbore & triggers i have halfed the amount of water i use.
Macc
-
Sorry for bringing this back but all the bodies FED, AWPC, Clear Choice need to set aside their differences and work on this together. Something like this needs to be researched and a detailed report ( not one page with signatures but at least 4 - 5 pages) with graphs showing what impact it will have on window cleaners who have invested in WFP.
This will only work with with these people , you will need to sell it to them and research if they are stopped what compensation you can claim etc... There is always a way and a loophole but you need to do a lot of research.
You are dealing with peoples livelyhoods and therefore please take this into consideration.
Cheers
-
Well said DA
This WC industry is huge and covers the whole country. It is made up of many thousands of individuals of which some have come together from need and formed groups with specific aims which may or may not overlap.
Due to very recent but foreseeable events, this industry and its lively-hood, could be under threat directly from the agencies which imposed its mode of operations ie WFP.
As DA indicates above, this industry needs cooperation, coordination and a joint and well thought out response and approach to the potential problems raised by the threat to question our right to use water as needed in the pursuit of working in a safe environment as directed initially by the EU and fully supported by this Government who now sees problems in the enactment of those directives.
I see serious implications for the use of WFP if certain elements of this industry are allowed to pursue restrictive practices and override the Health & Safety directives with the controlled use of water.
-
The coonsultation was about this country's reponce to expected future water shortages because of global warming.
This responce would be partly in the form of drought orders, and these are predicted to be more common (every year) and last longer. They also need to be more(DEFRA says) far reaching in their effects and enforcement (IE include window cleaners and car valleters).
This is a national issue and it should be borne in mind that during any severe drought it would be daily national news and the climate towards people using water in any way that was percieved as wastefull would be hostile. We could well be viewed with about as much public sympathy as a drunken driver.
Many customers would ask you not to bother, both because of what they thought and additionsaly what their neighbours may think.There is also the possibility that by allowing you to clean (WFP) they would be breaking the law and liable to prosecution.
When laws are enacted they have to be adhered to. Our livelehoods would come very low down on the list of priorities. In a severe drought the public climate could be almost hysterical and rabid towards us.
You will remember also from previous droughts, that these things extend often after we have been having several weeks of heavy rain.
Because of this I think rain water collection and grey water usage are the way forward, and not just for the big boys but for all of us.It may wel cost £2000 to fit a proper harvesting system but if this reduces water bills, gets the enviromental people off our backs and allows us to work unchallenged in even the severest drought order then it has to be the best option.
Pretending that we won't be affected, or argueing that we shouldn't be affected, is sophistry.
-
The coonsultation was about this country's reponce to expected future water shortages because of global warming.
This responce would be partly in the form of drought orders, and these are predicted to be more common (every year) and last longer. They also need to be more(DEFRA says) far reaching in their effects and enforcement (IE include window cleaners and car valleters).
This is a national issue and it should be borne in mind that during any severe drought it would be daily national news and the climate towards people using water in any way that was percieved as wastefull would be hostile. We could well be viewed with about as much public sympathy as a drunken driver.
Many customers would ask you not to bother, both because of what they thought and additionsaly what their neighbours may think.There is also the possibility that by allowing you to clean (WFP) they would be breaking the law and liable to prosecution.
When laws are enacted they have to be adhered to. Our livelehoods would come very low down on the list of priorities. In a severe drought the public climate could be almost hysterical and rabid towards us.
You will remember also from previous droughts, that these things extend often after we have been having several weeks of heavy rain.
Because of this I think rain water collection and grey water usage are the way forward, and not just for the big boys but for all of us.It may wel cost £2000 to fit a proper harvesting system but if this reduces water bills, gets the enviromental people off our backs and allows us to work unchallenged in even the severest drought order then it has to be the best option.
Pretending that we won't be affected, or argueing that we shouldn't be affected, is sophistry.
There is certainly some mileage in rain water harvesting. If I lived in a house I would probably already have the beginnings of such a system in place. Living in a flat makes such a thing impossible for me - not least because there would be no viable way of preventing my supply from being stolen. Grey water is feasible but would really wear out membranes much more quickly unless there is an alternative way of filtering before getting to them. It would possibly be more realistic to set things up so that grey water was used for things other than WFP filtering and the cleaner water (that you have saved by using grey water) could be used for the WFP?
Of course some of the above relies on it actually raining sometimes.
I will probably move from this flat but not for around 3 years. Only then would I really be able to set something up properly.
Of course nobody seems to be suggesting that the water companies should be subjected to any inconvenience. Where I live, 85% of the water supply is dependant on underground water. Only 15% comes from reservoirs. In the warmer weather, the dry ground and plant roots absorb any rainfall. The underground supplies are only replenished during a few winter months - if it rains of course. There seems to be far too much reliance on these underground supplies and really we need a couple of large reservoirs so that more replenishment can take place even in the warmer parts of the year.