On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 23:02:36 -0000, Tx2
mused:

In article , Lurch
of , felt we'd be interested in the
following...


Competent by what measure? I get that you think he's competent, but
say someone was killed by a faulty appliance tested by this person,
would your opinion on his level of competence carry any weight in a
court of law?

I couldn't be considered as a professional witness, so I doubt my
opinion would count for anything in a Court of Law.

So really then, you're decision on his competence shouldn't count for
anything here either.

As for measuring competence, see my answer below, which reflects an
answer I gave some while ago about personal interpretation.

Righto.

Out site manager has the competence, experience and training to carry
out the task, or train others to do it.

And his competence is gauged by what, your opinion as an untrained (by
any recognised standard relating to PAT testing) employee of the same
company as him?

No, my knowledge of the fact the he used to work as an electrician, had
his own electrical installation business with electricians working for
him, is the site Health & Safety officer having attended various courses
concerning such, is the site manager with pretty high standards for work
carried out and so on.

To my 'untrained' eye, that makes him competent enough to do the job,
and train others whom he considers competent enough to also do the job.

Right, so he's probably as competent as many PAT testers out there
then.

This slightly long, off topic, splinter thread just goes to show that
without knowing all the facts then some generalisations come out that,
whilst being correct, may bear not a great deal of relevance to the
topic in hand.

Some valid points raised but I'll leave it there.
--
Regards,
Stuart.