CDM REGULATIONS 2015: FIVE MINUTE SURVEY · 2015-11-29 · 33 CDM Adviser 11/11/2015 12:20 PM 34...

CDM REGULATIONS 2015: FIVE MINUTE SURVEY

Information contained in the following 18 pages was

collected between 9th and 29th November 2015 using the Survey Monkey© online survey tool. Many thanks to all

who took the time to respond.

We intend to repeat this survey one year after CDM 2015 came into operation on 6 April 2015.

If you have any questions or comments please email:

[email protected]

Please visit our website for free News and Comment on CDM 2015 and construction project health and safety

PP Construction Safety Ltd www.ppconstructionsafety.com November 2015

Q1 Which CDM 2015 duties apply to yourorganisation?

Answered: 258 Skipped: 0

# Other (please specify) Date

1 None as I am Canadian, but we like the HSE 11/25/2015 4:57 PM

2 Former CDM-C Now H&S Advisor 11/25/2015 11:26 AM

3 Trainer, consultant 11/24/2015 4:31 PM

4 CDM Advisor 11/24/2015 3:52 PM

5 CDM Advisor 11/20/2015 3:56 PM

6 Employer's Agent 11/19/2015 10:18 AM

7 Client safety advisor 11/19/2015 10:06 AM

8 Small company doing all aspects of build 11/19/2015 8:05 AM

9 CDM Adviser 11/18/2015 7:32 PM

10 CDM Consultant 11/18/2015 1:57 PM

11 Regulations 11/18/2015 12:37 PM

12 H&S Consultants 11/18/2015 12:01 PM

13 Client Advisor and Principal Designer Advisor 11/18/2015 11:04 AM

14 advisor to PD 11/18/2015 10:43 AM

15 CDM/Construction H+S Consultant 11/18/2015 9:46 AM

16 CDM / H&S Consultant 11/18/2015 9:44 AM

17 CDM Consultant 11/18/2015 9:39 AM

18 CDM Advisor 11/18/2015 6:41 AM

19 H&S Consultant 11/17/2015 12:22 PM

20 CDM Consultant 11/17/2015 8:37 AM

21 h & s adviser 11/16/2015 9:41 AM

22 Safety advisor 11/14/2015 10:18 PM

23 CDM consultant 11/13/2015 10:22 AM

24 Health and safety Consultant 11/13/2015 10:21 AM

25 client adviser 11/12/2015 10:27 AM

26 Worker 11/11/2015 6:20 PM

27 Construction Safety Consultant 11/11/2015 3:55 PM

Client PrincipalDesigner

Designer PrincipalContractor

Contractor Other(pleasespecify)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

30%

62%

41%

53%

23%17%

1 / 18

CDM REGULATIONS 2015 - FIVE MINUTE SURVEY SurveyMonkey

www.ppconstructionsafety.com

http://www.ppconstructionsafety.com/newsdesk/category/latest-news/cdm-2015/

Philip

Typewritten Text

Philip

Typewritten Text

Philip

Typewritten Text

Philip

Typewritten Text

Philip

Pencil

28 Health and Safety professional 11/11/2015 3:46 PM

29 CDM Advisors to Client and / or PD 11/11/2015 3:46 PM

30 All of the above 11/11/2015 2:23 PM

31 Not in contract this moment but normally client or PC 11/11/2015 2:05 PM

32 All on different projects 11/11/2015 2:02 PM

33 CDM Adviser 11/11/2015 12:20 PM

34 CDM Adviser 11/11/2015 12:09 PM

35 Health and safety advisor 11/11/2015 11:58 AM

36 safety professional supplying guidance and suppirt 11/11/2015 11:56 AM

37 CDM Advisor 11/11/2015 11:11 AM

38 advisor 11/11/2015 11:11 AM

39 Project manager, QS, Town planning 11/11/2015 11:04 AM

40 SUB CONTRACTOR 11/11/2015 11:04 AM

41 Health & Safety Consultant 11/11/2015 10:58 AM

42 Monitor 11/11/2015 10:53 AM

43 Safety consultant 11/11/2015 10:19 AM

44 CDM ADVISOR TO CLIENT AND PD 11/11/2015 10:11 AM

45 Client and Principal Designer CDM Advisor 11/11/2015 9:28 AM

2 / 18



Philip

Typewritten Text

Q2 How would you describe the size of yourorganisation?


Large Medium Small Micro0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

44%

27%19%

10%

3 / 18



Q3 What construction project work doesyour job involve?



1 planning the pre-construction phase H&S arrangements 11/25/2015 5:45 PM

2 educator 11/25/2015 11:32 AM

3 Estimating 11/25/2015 11:27 AM

4 Rarely project related. Usually more strategic. 11/24/2015 4:32 PM

5 Quantity Surveying 11/19/2015 10:19 AM

6 Steel erection 11/18/2015 10:49 AM

7 Asbestos Removal 11/17/2015 8:39 PM

8 Shopfitting 11/17/2015 8:00 AM

9 Quality, Environmental and H & S 11/13/2015 12:00 PM

10 Construction and Maintainence 11/11/2015 6:30 PM

11 M&E plus Geoenvironmental 11/11/2015 3:48 PM

12 architects, urban planning & design 11/11/2015 2:33 PM

13 Temporary Events 11/11/2015 11:06 AM

14 Monitoring 11/11/2015 10:54 AM

15 Project Management 11/11/2015 9:42 AM

16 Adviser 11/11/2015 9:29 AM

17 quality / environmental / legal compliance 11/9/2015 12:03 PM

Design

Planning

Surveying

Engineering

Production

Health andSafety

Finance

Other (pleasespecify)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

45%

40%

24%

25%

15%

86%

10%

7%

4 / 18



Q4 What is your principal role within theorganisation?



1 educator 11/25/2015 11:32 AM

2 Principal 11/25/2015 11:27 AM

3 QHSE manager 11/17/2015 11:12 AM

4 Cdm consultant 11/17/2015 6:05 AM

5 Project manager, CDM Advisor, Designer, Engineer, H&S split evenly 11/16/2015 8:40 PM

6 consultant 11/13/2015 10:23 AM

7 Associate 11/12/2015 2:36 PM

8 Group Head of SHE (Director Status) 11/11/2015 6:18 PM

9 Surveyors Assistant / CDM Admin 11/11/2015 3:48 PM

10 Building Surveyor 11/11/2015 2:47 PM

11 Senior Architect + CDM Advisor 11/11/2015 11:12 AM

12 CDM Adviser 11/11/2015 11:06 AM

13 Monitor 11/11/2015 10:54 AM

Director Manager Supervisor

Designer Engineer HealthandSafety

Trade Other(pleasespecify)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

16% 12%

1% 5% 1%

60%

0%5%

5 / 18



Q5 How does CDM 2015 compare to CDM2007?


# OPTIONAL - Please add any comment Date

1 im out of a job 11/26/2015 8:55 AM

2 by degrees it excludes projects that would otherwise have been notifiable and hence better managed 11/25/2015 5:47 PM

3 Role is given to different peopel 11/25/2015 4:58 PM

4 Too early to say until PD role up and running 11/25/2015 12:21 PM

5 Dutyholders do not carry out their duties 11/25/2015 11:28 AM

6 SOme bits are good yet others are not easy to implement, PD roles still are still problems in Construction sitesespecially in D&B projects

11/25/2015 10:43 AM

7 It's caused a lot of confusion, client areas dont know who to turn to for advice and support (they think that this is thePD's role) and design houses dont want to take on the PD role/functions - they don't understand what is required.

11/25/2015 10:11 AM

8 Still not fulfilled the purpose 11/25/2015 10:05 AM

9 Not just the regs but the maturity of industry and the regulator giving a chance for a step change 11/24/2015 4:33 PM

10 Brought into line with the Directive, aims to integrate H&S with business function. Not dissimilar with other recentrevision of standards etc.s

11/24/2015 2:48 PM

11 Designers are now even more confused than before and I have come across many different interpretations of theregulations.

11/23/2015 2:56 PM

12 It has changed but too early to assign better or worse - bit of both 11/20/2015 2:03 PM

13 Although the tightening of the Client's role is welcome,the implementation is much less well defined 11/19/2015 12:44 PM

14 Backwards thinking. All the good bits of CDM2007 is not in CDM2015. 11/19/2015 12:01 PM

15 some aspects (the removal of the overly complex competency requirements are an improvement. Others (removalof CDM coordinator) are worse

11/19/2015 11:51 AM

16 Naming Principal Digners as a role under CDM 2015 is confusing for most clients 11/19/2015 11:40 AM

17 The Designers / Contractors look on the changes as a means of relinquishing repsonsibility. Most of them don'tunderstand the changes

11/19/2015 10:22 AM

18 Mandating of safety by design is good but lack of clarity in other areas poor. The term principal designer isconfusing as is the term preconstruction. Should be something like design project safety manager and designproject safety management

11/19/2015 10:10 AM

19 We are now having to apply CDM 2015 to more projects therefore paper work has increased which is worse but it'sbetter from a H & S perspective

11/18/2015 4:38 PM

20 I would have preferred that the position of Health and Safety Coordinator would have been introduced to complywith the Directive

11/18/2015 4:36 PM

Significantlyimproved

Improved No change Worse Significantlyworse

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

5%

34%

22%28%

10%

6 / 18



21 a big non event. Silence from clients is deafening! 11/18/2015 4:14 PM

22 Clarity still needed on actual operation of regs 11/18/2015 2:49 PM

23 A retrograde step for safety. 11/18/2015 1:58 PM

24 Confusion accross industry. Design and build contractory statements in Regs 11/18/2015 1:53 PM

25 I am Canadian 11/18/2015 12:39 PM

26 Still early days and the aim of greater involvement from the client and designers is yet to be achieved. 11/18/2015 11:31 AM

27 Until we get Designers to accept the principle ... CDM is a good intention only. 11/18/2015 10:46 AM

28 Rushed out, so that duty holders had insufficient time to prepare for the changes. Still awaiting draft of ConstructionClients Group guidance for clients and "Busy Builder's" leaflet for domestic clients - and why would a householderbe looking for such a document. Q6 compliance varies enormously from VG to nothing.

11/18/2015 10:03 AM

29 Designers are still only paying lip service to the requirements and dont seem to be fully embracing the changes 11/18/2015 9:48 AM

30 Lots of confusion regarding principal designers roll and qualifications, particularly design and build projects withnominated designers not wanting to take on the role of principal designer, and as a principal contractor without anin house design team we do not have the right skills, knowledge, experience or training to take on the role asrequired under CDM 2015

11/18/2015 9:47 AM

31 ACoP and min. 'competence' standards needed 11/18/2015 9:46 AM

32 More work involved with smaller maintenance type projects 11/18/2015 9:22 AM

33 I approve of the increased onus on construction clients but don't think the domestic client arrangements will work. 11/17/2015 9:59 PM

34 Too early to say. Test will be how much resource money clients put into PD role. 11/17/2015 8:52 PM

35 They have not thought through the licensed asbestos abatement industry requirements. 11/17/2015 8:40 PM

36 I find it easy to interpret however there are a few gray areas however I am still finding it difficult to get the companyto fully understand their responsibilities regarding the new changes.

11/17/2015 7:28 PM

37 Removal of the CDM coordinator role is inane........ 11/17/2015 11:13 AM

38 Very confusing and vague piece of legislation 11/17/2015 9:47 AM

39 I feel the dutyholders are confused and do not realise their responsibilities. The domestic side of things is chaotic. 11/17/2015 8:39 AM

40 The introduction of the 'new' regs has raised awareness with our Clients in the Insurance reinstatement sectorhowever they have rewritten our contract within them to ensure we take on the role of Principal Designer and insome cases the Client as well. Although this has been disputed by all principal contractors on these networks theyare digging their heels in with these new contracts and fell that the new regs are not being implemented as theywere intended.

11/17/2015 8:27 AM

41 In terms of paperwork 11/17/2015 8:01 AM

42 It has the potential to be an improvement, not sure it will play out that way though. PDS are being asked and (andare willing) to assist treatment Client with their duties and others within the industry are seeing this as a re badgedCDM which was not the intention.

11/17/2015 7:00 AM

43 much confusion still. Some clients still trying to opt out of their duties by appointment of pd.. 11/17/2015 6:07 AM

44 I understan it however, others in the organisation do not and I am in the minority 11/16/2015 8:42 PM

45 As H&S professionals, we know what has changed. The duties are still there but the re-organisation has causedwidespread confusion and misunderstanding among the duty holders.

11/16/2015 6:05 PM

46 The CDM-C role never really worked, as all to often they were appointed too late to affect the design stage 11/15/2015 1:53 PM

47 A number of onerous areas 11/15/2015 8:57 AM

48 It has highlighted gaps in design process, hazard elimination and decision making 11/15/2015 8:53 AM

49 now deskbound more paperwork and less outside making inspections where it counts 11/14/2015 12:16 PM

50 Confusing - especially when clients and lead designers want some real else to carry out their duties 11/13/2015 10:01 PM

51 Minor maintainance jobs requiring so much paper work is rediculous, RAMS yes but CPP, HSF maybe, itsometimes so much more time consuming than the work to be undertaken with very minimal risks involved.

11/13/2015 10:20 AM

52 Although much confusion in understanding as less prescriptive 11/12/2015 4:45 PM

53 There is still a period of adjustment to be made 11/12/2015 4:23 PM

54 This box isn't big enough to begin to explain! 11/12/2015 2:38 PM

55 Improved but harder to understand and open to various interpretations in places. 11/12/2015 10:53 AM

7 / 18



56 still lots of confusion in industry 11/12/2015 10:29 AM

57 Removal of appendix 4 11/11/2015 9:20 PM

58 Too many legal loopholes for Clients to get through. 11/11/2015 6:20 PM

59 It is ill thought-out, with the only intention being to remove the CDMC, but has created new problems. Also,whoever authored the Regs is legally illiterate.

11/11/2015 5:21 PM

60 Not as prescriptive but has lost its way in the final drafting 11/11/2015 4:44 PM

61 greater emphasis on client duties and responsibilities. 11/11/2015 4:17 PM

62 CDM-Cs masquerading as CDM advisers. 11/11/2015 3:58 PM

63 Some confusion perceived by people who were not conversant with CDM 2007. Principal Designer name causesconfusion. An ACOP would give some comfort to many.

11/11/2015 3:51 PM

64 Confusion especially as Clients assume PD just means CDM C and fail to understand far more duties now apply tothem. Designers didn't want to role previously and still don't so CDM advisor is now one removed from decisionholder through designer appointments which makes designing in H&S to the process more difficult

11/11/2015 2:49 PM

65 Improved clarity for dutyholders 11/11/2015 2:25 PM

66 Too complicated too many grey areas 11/11/2015 2:07 PM

67 only time will tell, as we all get used to it 11/11/2015 1:54 PM

68 depends on what youre looking at, have they impacted significantly on safety within construction? I dont think so,has the ambition to hold designers to account made differences? probably not, have they reduced the cost andburden of compliance - no, rather than pay for a CDMC the client is now paying additional fees to someone to dothe PD role and also another consultant to performe client duties

11/11/2015 1:48 PM

69 Requirement to produce Construction Phase Plan is time consuming and frustrating for small jobs lasting a day ortwo

11/11/2015 1:11 PM

70 Some misunderstanding of who can be a PD. 11/11/2015 12:20 PM

71 Confusion caused by new duties and lack of appetite within design roles to take on the additional PD duties 11/11/2015 12:11 PM

72 Too early to say 11/11/2015 12:08 PM

73 perceived by many to be avoidabl as the control is weak and the abiluty to "deny liability" and pass the buck toreadily available

11/11/2015 12:03 PM

74 It has made health and safety far less important in the planning and construction process 11/11/2015 12:00 PM

75 Overly beaurocratic! 11/11/2015 11:59 AM

76 there is concern that the client is not so well supported in checking competency 11/11/2015 11:24 AM

77 In some cases better, others worse. It hasn't really taken into account projects with no real design element but thestipulations remain the same.

11/11/2015 11:18 AM

78 Generally little change - just job scopes changed + more confusion. 11/11/2015 11:13 AM

79 currently their appears to be little or no change whatsoever. a number of clients have been a little confused /bemused by the changes.

11/11/2015 11:13 AM

80 no clarity with respect to roles or competence to undertake the roles. 11/11/2015 11:13 AM

81 Due to the loose wording, clients are even more confused with all of the different interpretations on what should behappening and the associated permutations on appointments etc

11/11/2015 11:10 AM

82 Confusing. 11/11/2015 11:10 AM

83 No as clear as it should be and little clear guidance especially in the events industry 11/11/2015 11:07 AM

84 no great change as a client for having maintenance or small works undertaken 11/11/2015 10:56 AM

85 With the exception of the need to include domestric projects in order to ocmply with the EC Directive I don'tunderstand why the HSE thought it necesary to chnage the 2007 Regs, which inmy opinion were working well. Insome areas the 2015 Regs are a backward step. O

11/11/2015 10:14 AM

86 Lack of clarity and use of confusing guidance. 11/11/2015 9:47 AM

87 Apart from the obvious changing roles projects are carried out the same 11/11/2015 9:42 AM

88 i have no issues with the construction section, but the pre-construction element has been muddled, partly in theway it has been drafted and in the acceptance of the Principle Designer role. Some practices have addressed itwell, but there are too many examples of poor application.

11/11/2015 9:34 AM

89 Passes responsibility onto unqualified clients. Designers will not accept PD role. 11/11/2015 9:31 AM

8 / 18



90 confusing title Principal designer 11/11/2015 9:25 AM

91 The full range of duties (and liabilities) are still poorly understood throughout industry. Many Architects see the PDrole as a box ticking exercise and want to charge for this. We, as Client, think otherwise.

11/10/2015 9:41 AM

92 PD role is not clear and not consistant 11/9/2015 4:57 PM

93 as long as we get rid of client advisor / pd advisor and pqq burden 11/9/2015 12:05 PM

94 Principal designer role has improved focus on designer compliance. 11/9/2015 10:23 AM

9 / 18



Q6 To what extent are dutyholderscomplying with their CDM 2015 duties?


Very Good Compliance Good Compliance Adequate Compliance

Poor Compliance Very Poor Compliance Don't know

Client

PrincipalDesigner

Designers

PrincipalContractors

Contractors

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

3%

7%

4%

3%

4%

12%

10%

10%

3%

7%

29%

31%

27%

8%

17%

31%

27%

39%

31%

44%

18%

18%

14%

40%

22%

6%

7%

5%

16%

6%

10 / 18



Q7 How does the Principal Designer rolecompare to the CDM-Coordinator?



1 Will only work if clients engage them early 11/25/2015 8:19 PM

2 Those acting as the PD have little idea of what is required and don't want the additional responsibilities 11/25/2015 5:50 PM

3 Principal Designer - not on site 11/25/2015 4:59 PM

4 in theory 11/25/2015 11:33 AM

5 PD does want to do any thing to do with H&S issues, Nor there is any qualification requirements for H&S 11/25/2015 10:46 AM

6 Most that I've come across are not yet capable of fulfilling the role 11/24/2015 4:21 PM

7 Theoretical only, HSE involvement will ultimately determine the level of application as intended 11/24/2015 2:52 PM

8 Now asking someone who has trained as a designer to undertake a significant health & safety role. 11/23/2015 2:58 PM

9 do not yet have the skills needed 11/20/2015 3:59 PM

10 There is scope for this role to work better than CDMC but too early to say categorically 11/20/2015 2:04 PM

11 Early days but to many clients wanting to just pass to PC 11/20/2015 12:36 PM

12 improved in that it now involves the party in charge of leading design but why not just call the role 'Architect' orsimilar

11/20/2015 10:29 AM

13 It should be an improvement but it is not working out that way yet. One reason being that large clients are retainingthe old CDMC as a CDM Adviser on the mistaken belief that they, as client, are somehow protected. Theysometimes seem to think that this new CDM Adviser is an appointment.

11/19/2015 3:16 PM

14 The difference is in the lack of clarity about the role and some slack use of english in the wording of theregulations. The objective to reduce paper generation has not been achieved.

11/19/2015 12:47 PM

15 Not yet fully aware of their responsibilities 11/19/2015 11:02 AM

16 The PD's have little or no idea what the changes mean or how to implmenet them 11/19/2015 10:23 AM

17 In principal better because fully engaged and leading the process 11/19/2015 10:12 AM

18 How can someone with no experence or skills be better 11/19/2015 8:08 AM

19 We are now having to apply CDM 2015 to more projects therefore paper work has increased which is worse but it'sbetter from a H & S perspective

11/18/2015 4:39 PM

20 Principle absolutely correct, quality of output and influence over Designers ability or willingness to apply riskreduction principles has yet to be proven.

11/18/2015 2:56 PM

21 Wrongly named, and sometimes being appointed too late to do any use. 11/18/2015 2:02 PM

22 Designers have never taken the duties seriously. They are unprepared for the role. 11/18/2015 2:01 PM

23 PD role should be restricted to those with a design input on the project. 11/18/2015 1:09 PM

Significantimprovement

Improvement No change Worse Significantlyworse

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

8%

29%22%

29%

13%

11 / 18



24 its all re timing of appoitntment by the client. Also no one to act as an intermediary when info not forcoming fromclient

11/18/2015 10:47 AM

25 Works as a highlighter 11/18/2015 10:47 AM

26 most cdmc have taken on role of PD 11/18/2015 10:19 AM

27 No longer explicit duty to support the client. Flexibility of procurement that was a stated objective in theConsultative Documents prior to CDM 1994 and 2007 not repeated in CD261, so clients effectively precluded frome.g. appointing a framework CDMC to enable consistent delivery over a programme.

11/18/2015 10:07 AM

28 Providing minimal information, not advising Clients with regard sto there CDM Duties, H+S/CDM still bottom of theTo Do List

11/18/2015 9:59 AM

29 PD has too many other pressures to focus on H&S 11/18/2015 9:50 AM

30 See previous comments 11/18/2015 9:49 AM

31 There is no clear indication of who can be the Principal Designer and the advise from HSE appears to alterdepending on who you are talking to which causes confusion for Clients.

11/18/2015 9:42 AM

32 Many designers taking on the role do not have the Skills Knowledge and Experience to do the role effectively andare relying on former CDM-C's to help them

11/18/2015 6:44 AM

33 Designers simply don't want the role so it's still a separate role anyway, which the client isn't necessarily appointing!It's a mess.

11/18/2015 12:02 AM

34 Designers have been slow to recognise the additional duties that the PD role brings. 11/17/2015 10:02 PM

35 Really too early to tell. Large designers like Arups will be fine. Smaller practices recruiting CDMCs who arerebranding. Downfall with CDMC is that Clients didn't properly finance the role. Lots of consultants paid by the houreasy to cut out or back. PD may suffer in a similar manner

11/17/2015 8:55 PM

36 The big mistake is the job title, Principal Designer doesn't work. 11/17/2015 8:20 PM

37 They don't have the construction experience required however I keep informing them to contract them to assist 11/17/2015 7:36 PM

38 Same people cutting corners & avoiding issues 11/17/2015 12:25 PM

39 PD's are not necessarily competent in the H&S of a construction project / site 11/17/2015 11:15 AM

40 It should be an improvement- putting DRM at the heart of design and early -but again- late appointments of allCDM parties

11/17/2015 9:51 AM

41 In theory it should be an enhancement on the role of CDMC. However it is a little too early to determine how thePD fully implements this role and indeed how clients embrace their responsibities.

11/17/2015 9:07 AM

42 Lack of H&S knowledge/legal requirements poor communication 11/17/2015 8:02 AM

43 Too early to say. The Regs are provoking much discussion in industry. As PD I am involved much more at earlierstages reviewing hazard management with design team and p.contractor

11/17/2015 6:11 AM

44 The Design Risk Management function is little changed. Most of those that we know that have actually acceptedthe PD appointment are obtaining assistance from third parties.

11/16/2015 6:12 PM

45 Theoretically 11/15/2015 7:25 PM

46 Please see previous answer 11/15/2015 1:54 PM

47 The PD still has no "teeth" and cannot stop works on site 11/15/2015 8:59 AM

48 More integration with design team but less support to client 11/15/2015 8:56 AM

49 I'd get my P45 if I told you 11/14/2015 12:16 PM

50 If the client does not give the PD teeth and clout, together put into contracts the designers must comply with reg 9 -the role is not only useless - but puts the PD and Client at risk

11/13/2015 10:07 PM

51 If the CDM-c role was being carried out correctly in the first place, I don't think there is much difference in my lineof work

11/13/2015 10:25 AM

52 No teeth in either role and now domestics are included, issues will only get worse! 11/12/2015 2:39 PM

53 As there is a lack of continuity and split duties with client 11/12/2015 11:13 AM

54 Better that it (in theory) incorporates design risk management from the beginning, but still cases of lateappointment

11/12/2015 10:56 AM

55 There is no appetite from design organisations to take on the role. Those who do are not assisting the client in anyway.

11/11/2015 7:48 PM

56 Only an improvement if given powers to ensure design safety decisions are included at early stages. 11/11/2015 6:23 PM

12 / 18



57 It simply removes the professional role and advice etc provided by the CDMC. The whole thing has not beenproperly considered.

11/11/2015 5:25 PM

58 Inappropriately titled should have been Project Manager or Construction Program Manager as title implies toClients the duty holder must be a designer but in reality not sure if this was the intention clearly far wider remit butall with necessity was to have some knowledge of design

11/11/2015 4:53 PM

59 The Client would benefit from the advice previously given by CDMc's. 11/11/2015 4:00 PM

60 The PD's don't understand and don't want to take responsibility 11/11/2015 3:49 PM

61 CDM C role 50% to PD and 75% (yes more) to client but industry confusion and lack of interest in taking on CDM 11/11/2015 2:54 PM

62 In so far as more onerous 11/11/2015 2:48 PM

63 The CDMC role was clear cut and the duties known by all. The PD is an unknown duty where people who arequalified have difficulty accepting the duty.

11/11/2015 2:12 PM

64 concept of role being carried out by existing designer on small projects seems better 11/11/2015 1:56 PM

65 Theoritically/long term the PD role may improve integration of health and safety into the design process, butimproved but in practice/initially there has been a lot of initial confusion from Clients and Designers on the new roleand a lack of appetite and competency standards demonstrated by Design teams to take on the responsibilities ofthe Principal Designer. Design and build appointments, novation and contractual arrangements have furthercomplicated the issue.

11/11/2015 12:18 PM

66 Should not be anyone outside of the design team 11/11/2015 12:13 PM

67 designers dont want the responsibility and liability ph 11/11/2015 12:05 PM

68 no one wants to do it - it encompasses two totally different disciplines and fields of expertise - and those that do areuntrained for the role

11/11/2015 12:02 PM

69 Sounds more impressive; but most miss the CDMC independent role 11/11/2015 11:17 AM

70 Before I knew exactly what my job involved, but now I have to keep checking what my appointment and scope ofservice involves as clients all want different things in order to comply with their responsibilities

11/11/2015 11:16 AM

71 The independent role was better suited to the construction industry bt should have ad more responsibility andaccountability.

11/11/2015 11:14 AM

72 A lot of designers have CDM-C employed and so retain their services as advisory 11/11/2015 10:57 AM

73 Very hard to judge at this time but I have seen more designers becoming involved with H&S teams recently 11/11/2015 10:11 AM

74 It's mainly the new title that causes a lot of confusion in the industry 11/11/2015 9:47 AM

75 Most PDs have little real H&S knowledge of regulations 11/11/2015 9:45 AM

76 Role needs more definition 11/11/2015 9:45 AM

77 Still requires client to acknowledge need and appoint at early stage - not enough client's do this 11/11/2015 9:39 AM

78 Designers do not want the responsibility or understand. 11/11/2015 9:32 AM

79 confusing - over burdoned 11/11/2015 9:26 AM

80 pci still could improve. RIBA reluctance to embrace design risk registers is a blocker to progress 11/9/2015 12:08 PM

13 / 18



41% 106

46% 118

46% 118

62% 161

27% 69

57% 146

34% 89

29% 74

14% 36

7% 19

Q8 Which of the following reflect yourexperience so far?


Total Respondents: 258

# OPTIONAL - Please add any other relevant experience Date

1 PD fees currently OTT & CDM Advisors are trying to occupy the entire role, which architects practices allow themto do so. HSE must give better clarity as to what 'Good' looks like in the PD role.

11/25/2015 8:19 PM

Clients arefailing to...

Clients arefailing to...

Inappropriateorganisation...

Designorganisation...

Fees sought bythe PD excee...

Confusion overwhat the PD...

HSE guidanceon the PD...

Behaviour ofthe PD is no...

Increaseddemands from...

None of theabove

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

41%

46%

46%

62%

27%

57%

34%

29%

14%

7%

Answer Choices Responses

Clients are failing to appoint a PD

Clients are failing to properly resource the PD function

Inappropriate organisations are being appointed as PD

Design organisations are reluctant to accept PD appointments

Fees sought by the PD exceed those charged by the CDM-C

Confusion over what the PD must do to comply

HSE guidance on the PD function is inadequate

Behaviour of the PD is no different from that of the CDM-C

Increased demands from PD on designers or others

None of the above

14 / 18



2 Designers will still not comply with their duties until a designer is prosecuted. 11/25/2015 12:56 PM

3 during transitional projects, Client weere reluctant to give additional fees for for the PD duties, PD lacked H&Sknowledge. We had to give them contacts & arrange the H&S consultants to back them with H&S knowledge

11/25/2015 10:46 AM

4 PD role is what professional Design Management role should be. What have they been doing all this time? 11/24/2015 4:35 PM

5 Design co-ordination is inadequately described through any resource I have yet to encounter after a BSc, NDip,NCC and CDM 3 day course by the APS approved trainers. It is significantly different from construction hazardcontrol, and conveying the message to designers who have been largely unchecked.

11/24/2015 2:52 PM

6 Former CDMC's are taking on the role of PD even though they have no design role. 11/23/2015 2:58 PM

7 The guidance does not elaborate for multiple PD role. Just appointed a Demolition contractor as PD because theclient want to remove the building. The site will be left barren for years. Domestic designers/architetcs are advisingthat they complete the design for planning only and that they are not PD for the works and will not be PD for theworks. so the bricklayer is told he is by his consultant. He then advised that he has not enagaged all trades thehomeowner has and he has since left site. Qs how does he transfer it the guidance need to clarify all of theenclosed. I could go on for hours but need to get on with work.

11/20/2015 9:52 AM

8 I have found a great deal of confusion and people still think it is the CDM coordinator with a different badge. 11/19/2015 10:12 AM

9 Early days yet but some poorly written regs muddy the waters over the PD role and whether it includes an elementof practical site audit / supervision.

11/18/2015 2:56 PM

10 Issues with e.g. PD control over contractor appointed temporary works designers. 11/18/2015 10:07 AM

11 Designers appointed as PD are failing to provide adequate Pre Construction Information - e.g. advising Clients thatthey need to arrange for Asbestos Surveys for example

11/18/2015 9:59 AM

12 As before too early to tell 11/17/2015 8:55 PM

13 Reduced requirement for notification means PD not appointed 11/17/2015 12:25 PM

14 I am a PD and notice that the wheels of construction roll on irrespective of the latest bit of legislation. Theres asense of legislation fatigue

11/17/2015 9:51 AM

15 Too little publicity regarding cdm15 from the hse. So little is known of the major implications on smaller scaleproject work.. FFI claims, looking cynically at hse way to recoup costs?

11/17/2015 6:11 AM

16 Clients are appointing themselves as PD and appointing a third party to assist them with their Client and PD duties 11/16/2015 6:12 PM

17 New PD role does enable task to be retained in house as opposed to CDM-C being generally an externalappointment and therefore a potential cost saving

11/16/2015 5:56 PM

18 PD and Designers knowledge is very good but their H&S experience is not what it should be 11/16/2015 2:18 PM

19 PD role is organisation and design teams do not have the skills 11/15/2015 8:56 AM

20 Mis selling, misunderstanding of their duties, outsourcing, in correct advice 11/13/2015 10:07 PM

21 All roles cleary understood and performed 11/13/2015 12:13 PM

22 Few in the Industry can really see what the PD role is all about. The CDMC role was well-considered and providedsafeguards. The PD role is a potential recipe for disaster.

11/11/2015 5:25 PM

23 Transition period considered too short. SME's and smaller consultants builders etc, unsure of CDM15requirements and will in reality not be subjected to HSE scrutiny unless a significant safety event occurs whichagain in all reality may go unrecorded or not notified.

11/11/2015 4:53 PM

24 SOME design organisations seem reluctant to accept PD appointments. Many Clients have poor workingknowledge of CDM Regs.

11/11/2015 4:00 PM

25 In addition we now have CDM advisers 11/11/2015 3:59 PM

26 CDMC community are misleading clients to maintain their status 11/11/2015 3:18 PM

27 Even this questionaire is not addressing client role to produce PCI, provide information, notification 11/11/2015 2:54 PM

28 PD going over the top in requirements 11/11/2015 2:48 PM

29 Removal of the CDMC was to lower cost in construction and now there is no advisor to the client, nobody wantsthe PD role and risks furthermore there has been an increase in cost by PD appointment

11/11/2015 2:12 PM

30 varied experiences, but no significant problems to date 11/11/2015 1:56 PM

31 Clients are incorrectly assuming PD duties cover the previous CDM Co-ordinator function including assistance withcompetency reviews, F10 notification, Construction Phase Plan reviews

11/11/2015 12:18 PM

32 Designers not accepting the change from CDMC. 11/11/2015 12:13 PM

15 / 18



33 Clients are doing the PD role because no one else will and don't understand its ramifications or what they have todo

11/11/2015 12:02 PM

34 Former CDM H&S Coordinators are proposing to be Principal Designer but are not part of the designteam/process. This is adding cost with no benefit to the Client.

11/11/2015 11:42 AM

35 There needs to be a return to the threshold of appointing a PD in relation to time and not number of contractors. 11/11/2015 11:19 AM

36 Large projects - no problem. SMEs - much confusion + revolt. 11/11/2015 11:17 AM

37 The HSE have been totally inflexible, e.g. the F10 which makes no allowance for anyone other than the clientsigning it, when APS have issued appointment documents that clearly expect that others will take on aspects ofthe clients role.

11/11/2015 11:16 AM

38 there have been instances where insurers have been refusing to cover design practices whom wanted to undertakethe P.D. role.

11/11/2015 11:15 AM

39 The PD for our Projects is contact name only as the PD role is carried out by the Client 11/11/2015 10:43 AM

40 A number of CDMC's have taken on the role of PD, but are not necessarily managing the design process, which isthe main function of the PD, as they are too far removed from the design process

11/11/2015 10:18 AM

41 Too early to comment 11/11/2015 10:11 AM

42 Most PD's dont want the role or understand it 11/11/2015 9:45 AM

43 Domestic clients should be treated as commercial clients...no dispensations! 11/11/2015 9:45 AM

44 title of Principal designer is WRONG causing the confusion 11/11/2015 9:26 AM

45 external pd is not as effective as pc being pd on d&b projects 11/9/2015 12:08 PM

16 / 18



Q9 How is the Principal Designer roleworking?



1 not sure yet 11/26/2015 9:38 AM

2 Engaged clients and large projects are OK but smaller end of construction is not benefitting from the improvementsthe PD role can bring.

11/25/2015 8:19 PM

3 Too early to tell. It is still a role that will be kept at arms length 11/25/2015 12:56 PM

4 Give it time! Only just fully in force. Would expect it to be inadequate for a while 11/24/2015 4:35 PM

5 Too early - come back in 2 years. 11/24/2015 2:52 PM

6 Architects who take on the PD role are subbing out to former CDMC's and not actually taking on the resposibilitythemselves as they are not competent to do so. It is a mess!

11/23/2015 2:58 PM

7 There are still a number of clients that do not know what the role of the PD consists of. Some PDs seem to besettling into a sit back and watch role leaving the PC to do all the donkey work.

11/19/2015 3:16 PM

8 Too early to tell 11/19/2015 10:12 AM

9 For the most part the job is outwith there capability 11/19/2015 8:08 AM

10 Far too early to say! 11/18/2015 2:56 PM

11 Not achieving the stated aims. 11/18/2015 2:29 PM

12 Appointed too late or appointing PC as PD. Client trying to offload as mush as possible do negating duties. 11/18/2015 2:02 PM

13 PDs largely incompetent at role. No leadership from poorly advised clients. 11/18/2015 2:01 PM

14 PDs I have had the pleasure of working with lack confidence, probably due to lack of experienc and qulification 11/18/2015 9:59 AM

15 Still early days but some PDs do not have the H&S 'competence' to do the role properly 11/18/2015 9:50 AM

16 Some conufion regarding role within industry 11/18/2015 9:23 AM

17 Not being appointed or just CDM-C 11/17/2015 12:25 PM

18 Working adequately when advised by the PC 11/17/2015 9:21 AM

19 Too early to say. As previous comment. 11/17/2015 6:11 AM

20 Not enough time yet to comment 11/15/2015 7:25 PM

21 It's going through a learning curve on key deliverables. 11/15/2015 8:56 AM

22 Doesn't get involved at all, health and safety low priority 11/14/2015 12:16 PM

23 Depends upon client and their design team and which contract route 11/13/2015 10:07 PM

24 Very well 11/13/2015 12:13 PM

25 Not really had any significant dealings as yet. 11/11/2015 6:23 PM

Well Adequately Inadequately Poorly Do not know0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

5%

31%27% 28%

10%

17 / 18



26 too soon to say 11/11/2015 6:22 PM

27 How can it work well when the Industry doesn't understand it? The HSE's role in this has been disastrous. 11/11/2015 5:25 PM

28 Overall assumption made as no real evidence without effective cross-industry feedback 11/11/2015 4:53 PM

29 Little seems to have changed from the CDMc role in practical terms, apart from the Clients additional duties. It islikely that the PD role works better on large projects than it does on small or medium ones.

11/11/2015 4:00 PM

30 This is only part of the CDM function which designers are still appointing CDM consultants for support which isgood as often their H&S knowledge in minimal. Our function is on large scale commercial projects so I am notrefering to domestic

11/11/2015 2:54 PM

31 Capacity of some designers to act as PD is very limited. Others are very good. 11/11/2015 11:42 AM

32 Designers still think of PDs as CDMCs not as authoritative colleagues. 11/11/2015 11:17 AM

33 We are doing our best, but still taking on dual CDM Advisory roles as clients are not trying to abrogate theirresponsibilities, but need the assurance of proper CDM /H&S advice to ensure compliance. As a result ourappointments are multiplying and so time for each project is reduced

11/11/2015 11:16 AM

34 too early to comment 11/11/2015 10:11 AM

35 for the above reasons 11/11/2015 9:45 AM

36 too early to tell 11/9/2015 6:42 PM

18 / 18



CDM REGULATIONS 2015: FIVE MINUTE SURVEY · 2015-11-29 · 33 CDM Adviser 11/11/2015 12:20 PM 34...

Documents

Transcript of CDM REGULATIONS 2015: FIVE MINUTE SURVEY · 2015-11-29 · 33 CDM Adviser 11/11/2015 12:20 PM 34...