Re: Kitchen/Bathroom Installers

Miles,
Wow! You really do get hot under the collar whenever we raise this issue and I respect your opinion but the fact is that, despite your view, that installation should be carried out by

seperate trades, consumers, I believe, would prefer to employ a team capable of the multi skills required both for convenience and cost.
This is the method utilised by a majority of companies and the reason why most positions vacant request Corgi Registered kitchen fitters with NICEIC approval.
I don’t believe however for a minute that carpenters with kitchen fitting experience would be ruled out of the equation because, as you rightly state, a number of companies prefer to

undertake installation employing seperate trades.

What still remains, and the reason change is necessary, is that to set up as a multi skilled kitchen installer currently requires no qualification and that is where the problem lies.

A large number of opportunists with no skills and aware of the rewards do just that and give those capable of the slills a bad reputation.

Accreditation for each seperate trade module required for the fitting of kitchen and bathrooms, not unlike the Corgi criteria, is, I believe, the way forward.
This would benefit you and would distinguish you as a bona fide installer albeit a cardholder of only certain modules. You could if you wish obtain the other modules to allow you to

undertake other relevant work in the kitchen/bathroom. Corgi accreditation for work relevant to the kitchen installer only includes a number of the modules and these could be

incorporated into any training for installers.

The Corgi example has proven a success for both the consumer and the installer and there’s no reason why an equivalent would not benefit yourself.

Everyone is now aware that to employ a Corgi registered installer for gas work is a legal responsibility apart from the loophole we’ve discussed before.

I think it’s time Miles that you use your obvious experience and skills to contribute to a way of achieving a method that will look after your interests and those in a similar

position and at the same time eradicate those who are able to set up as kitchen installers without any skills whatsoever and who prey upon the vulnerability of the consumer.

How do you see a solution to the problem of non qualified istallers otherwise?

Training and accreditation is the only way to determine the chaff from the wheat.

Your poll answer suprised me. I thought you would agree that the manufacturer has a responsibility to offer training in the correct fitting of their products. It has to be a good

thing that all work is carried out in accordance with the instructions set by the maker and can only enhance the reputation of companies who are currently at the mercy of any Tom,

Dick or Harry wishing to ply their trade as an installer.

Mo,

Allow me to clear up the confusion firstly by saying that you are not one of the opportunists I referred to in my previous post.
To underline what I wrote I referred to those with no skills and you obviously do not fall into that category. There remains however, a number of “kitchen fitters” whose customers

would welcome your skills more as a fireman to rectify the mess they’ve been left in.

I agree that paper certification can mean very little and I recognise that there are many capable and skilled diy’ers that can complete the task of fitting a kitchen or bathroom

hence my articles to pass on the knowledge to assist them. I don’t see my encouragement via the articles as being contradictory to my views on standards but merely as an extension of

the standards required.

Far from exclusion I would positively welcome the inclusion of any person who has a pride and passion in the quality of their work to any new initiative.
The fact however, remains that we have reached the stage where training and/or assessment is necessary because as you rightly state “it would give the general public somewhere to

start from to look for a bona fide fitter” Unfortunately we reached this stage by the actions of those I allude to and we have to pay the price for their activities.

I am full of admiration for your success in our profession since leaving the fire service and it would be fitting for those with your dedication and commitment to become among the

first qualified kitchen installers in the country.

Customer satisfaction shouldn’t be the only criteria we aim for as kitchen doors can hide a multitude of sins and I would personally like to see an element of social skills training

incorporated into the new initiative.
There is a lot of money to be earned as a kitchen installer as no doubt many consumers who vist this site can atest to so it isn’t financially beyond those who wish to become part of

an accredited scheme.

My articles do suggest it is not beyond those with manual dexterity to complete a kitchen but you have misunderstood my aims in promoting installer standards. I have no goal to ensure

it remains exclusive, if so, exclusive to who? We are all currently entitlted to call ourselves kitchen installers whatever our skills. Anyone can ply their trade as a kitchen

installer regardless of their ability. By the way the phrase “it’s so easy a monkey can do it” could do me lasting damage unless I explain it is the concluding line of a humorous

slant on my first installation – very tongue in cheek I can assure you. Safety is of paramount importance and my articles emphasise this point.

For multi task fitters read multi task teams. Fitting kitchens will be a very short lived profession if you attempt to do it alone and although many try, the heavy nature of the work

can be extremely damaging to your health. I and no doubt many retailers would see co-ordination, time and scheduling to be the major downfall in trying to achieve this using seperate

contractors but I accept this is nevertheless achievable. It may be that training in plumbing and electrics can be confined to the kitchen/bathroom environments not unlike the

accreditation available from ACOPS for cookers and hobs. As you say, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing and that’s why I am in favour of training that includes plumbing and

electrical services.

Land Rover don’t have a responsibility to make sure you can drive before selling you a car but they do expect their vehicles to be operated by competent drivers? The promotional

aspect of manufacturers offering training in the installation of their products is not lost on me but I think it’s a logical step to ensure they are installed correctly and Franke

have already expressed an interest in offering training in the proper installation of their products. For every installer who takes time to carry out installation to the letter there

are a number who fit them to a standard only they approve of. This reflects on the reputation of both installers and manufacturers.

The common factor with any new initiative is that most of those affected are up in arms at the additional costs they incur to maintain their status. The same was true of Corgi when it

was compulsory to join but registered installers are content with a status that provides them with healthier incomes than previous.
Mo, the power to make the profession more reputable in the eye’s of the public is to create a new standard and continuing discussion as we are will help to achieve it.

Miles,

I hope that all who enter this discussion can find common ground on the right way forward but it’s good to see this issue evoking a passion to get involved and the more views we have

the easier a concensus will be formed so come on forum readers, have your say.

I’ve replied to your comments point by point Miles.

Someone wrote:

I think that the way forward is to exempt City & Guilds craftsmen from the scheme. Or to award them their particular module free of charge.

Providing they are assessed as capable of completing the specialist kitchen fitting tasks I agree with waiving a relevant module of training but this should apply to any person with

the skills required.

Someone wrote:

Also companies who use City & Guilds craftsmen for each aspect of fitting a kitchen, should also be exempt.

Standards for companies is another issue but I would expect a company may wish to promote itself on the fact that they use only assessed and qualified fitters.

Someone wrote:

With the need to be Corgi registered and from next year, registered for electrical work, (part p building regs), with the need to also be registered to fit kitchens

that is going to pass a huge yearly outlay onto the fitter before he even earns a penny.

This wouldn’t affect you in your method of using seperate trades to complete the kitchen but it will be a matter of choice for many to undertake all the skills training necessary. I

feel that as CITB are already the experts in offering specialist training in both plumbing and electrical services it isn’t beyond the pale to incorporate the necessary elements into

a kitchen/bathroom fitters course.

Someone wrote:

Perhaps registration should be free of charge to all fitters who qualify. The manufacturers want this training and registration, so let them pay for it.

Miles, it isn’t the manufacturers who want the training it’s a necessity brought about by the consumer who has a right to expect quality work for the substantial financial outlay

associated with fitting a kitchen.

Someone wrote:

I do agree with you 100% Tim, there are cowboy kitchen fitters out there, just as there are cowboy customers and cowboy DIY’ers. There always will be.

You’re correct in stating there will always be cowboy fitters out there but it is the responsibility of dedicated and skilled installers to ensure their workload dwindles.

Someone wrote:

Perhaps the manufacturers would be better to put on a national advertising campaign to educate the public in the ways to avoid these bad fitters. But they won’t

because that would cost them money thus reducing their profits. However, to regulate us and charge us is going to make them even more money. They don’t care what happens to a kitchen

when it leaves their factory, this registration is just good business sense on there part.

Manufacturers would not need to develop a national advertising campaign if an industry standard existed. As a qualified and card holding installer you would not need to educate the

public to your existence they would learn of it when they bought their kitchen and through media coverage.

Someone wrote:

I still cannot see why manufacturers should be responsible for how there kitchen units are fitted. After all this is all they supply, for a kitchen re-fit.

You can’t have it both ways Miles. You believe the manufacturers want this training and should pay for it yet exempt them from allowing their products to be assembled and installed

by an untrained person. If they feel they have a responsibility here, and a growing number do, why should we complain.

Someone wrote:

After all Armitage Shanks are not responsible for how bathroom suites that they manufacture are installed, are they?

No but unfortunately a number of vulnerable consumers find this out to great cost and induction and product training offered by the manufacturers is a good way of diminishing that

possibility.

Someone wrote:

I think this is a non starter, but I wish something could be done about bad tradesmen whatever the trade. Also foreign workers on site who clearly are not

qualified.

Something can be done Miles and you are part of the solution and although you will incur a cost for the training or assessment, a greater cost will be incurred by the unskilled

opportunists who made training necessary in the first place.