Who may work on an electrical installation?

[douw]

Hi all, I'm new to the forum and joined specifically to ask for some opinions and your interpretations on the new EIR's.

So here goes:

The way I understand it, the regulations seems to aim to prevent anyone who is not a registered person, or supervised full time by a registered person, from undertaking any electrical work (reg. 6(1), 6(4)(b) and 5(4)).

That seems fair for new installations and commercial electrical work. I'm just wondering what this implies for all those 'bakkie' contractors doing fencing, pool pumps, plumbers installing geysers, etc. Also what happens if I replace or install my own pool pump, or install some new lights on the stoep. BTW I'm a millwright so I should be able to install a pool pump or some lights, as is many, many DIY'ers with more or less adequate skills to perform their own electrical work who are not regestered persons.

I realize that some or all of these regulations are not new, I was just reading it now because it was updated and these questions came to mind. Reg. 6(4)(b) combined with 5(4) implies that you can't get a registered person after the work has been done to test and certify it though, which I think is a new development or at least not the norm in the industry at the moment.

What are your responses?

PS: Moderator, if you think this should be a new thread plase move it or let me know and I'll repost.

[murdock]

in south africa anyone can work on an electrical installation...until they start policing the industry which could take a few years still to get "skilled people to perform the task who dont look after their buddies"

the electrical industry is a joke.

[Dave A]

I think the idea is to try to clarify the legal situation as opposed to what is actually happening...

[douw]

Thanks Murdoc.

Everyone I talk to seems to be in agreement with you about the state of the industry. It just seems strange to me that all electricians you ever meet outside of work are always beyond any reproach and "will never stand for substandard work on their sites", yet I never seem to see any of their work anywhere except on industrial sites where everything is inspected by knowledgeable people and you don't get paid if your work does not conform.

I think what is happening is the same as the current trend in Gauteng to run red traffic lights; everyone does it so if you can't beat them, join them. No one gives a sh!t anyway and your chances of getting caught is so slim that you can ignore them. This is a system wide problem in South Africa with everone complaing about the crime and coruption while they are speeding, ignoring traffic sign left, right and centre and bribing traffic cops. There is just no respect for the right way things should be done.

Thanks Dave thats why I asked these questions, as I have been doing my own work forever and always wondered about this. I just think we should at least know what the law is, even if no one will adhere to it.

BTW. the reason I do my own work is because come time to have something installed or fixed you are hard pressed to find any small contractor that knows an Amp from a kWh.

[murdock]

I think the idea is to try to clarify the legal situation as opposed to what is actually happening...

there is no "legal situation in SA" hence my reply...the AIA try to act like they are some superior organisation but when it comes down to what is actually happening out they all the same...money talks and sh!ts walks.

i wear blinkers everyday and dont see or hear no evil anymore...just do what is required of me...get my money and move to the next project

[murdock]

to back up my statement about the electrical industry...this pic was taken in december 2009

[Dave A]

I'm genuinely interested in what the legal position is exactly. I've found in my time in the electrical contracting game (NOTE: I'm the financial director, not the technical director) there is a gap between what the law/regs say and how they are interpreted. There seems to be too much reliance on habit and hearsay and not enough grey matter being applied.

For example, I'm told by my techs that additions to an existing installation must be done under the "control" of an accredited person, but repairs to an existing installation (replacement of components) can be done by anyone. Now I have serious reservations about this.

Another one is in construction. How many of these installations are actually being done under the "control" of an accredited person?

And what can be considered "control" seems to be another can of worms

I think these are excellent questions:
What exactly is the legal situation?
How is the legal position being policed/enforced?

There is an old adage that regulation that can't be enforced shouldn't be written as it penalises the honest and gives the dishonest an unfair advantage.

[douw]

Reg 5(4) states:

A registered person shall exercise general control over all electrical installation work being carried out, and no person may allow such work without such control.

"installation work" is defined:

(a) the installation, extension, modification or repair of an electrical installation;
(b) the connection of machinery at the supply terminals of such machinery; or
(e) the inspection, testing and verification of electrical installations for the purpose of issuing a certificate of compliance;

not much room for interpretation there.

So that leaves the "control" can of worms Dave mentioned above. That is what is not defined clearly in the regs. and that is what needs to be clarified, regardless of current convention.

[123]

So that leaves the "control" can of worms Dave mentioned above. That is what is not defined clearly in the regs. and that is what needs to be clarified, regardless of current convention.

The "general control" clause as published in the government gazette, 6 March 2009 is actually very clear on that issue: "in relation to electrical installation work that is being carried out, includes instruction, guidance and supervision in respect of that work."

Not really a grey area, if you sign off a CoC and did not instruct, guide and supervise (the wording of the clause is "includes"), you cannot legally sign off a coc, and if it can be proven that you have signed off a coc and not exercised the "general control" required, that coc is invalid.

Fitting a piece of conduit and saddles unfortunately is installation work, so is fitting a gland to an inspection box. If it was not supervised, you would be breaking the law.

[Jacques#1]

The "general control" clause as published in the government gazette, 6 March 2009 is actually very clear on that issue: "in relation to electrical installation work that is being carried out, includes instruction, guidance and supervision in respect of that work."

I would argue this, it is still grey... Instructions is an "order"/"request"/"demand" that you make to someone and they must respond in a form i.e. doing work, an instruction can even be a written document.

Guidance....if you show up every minutes or so, check what they've done, show them how to correct the mistake and see them do it right, you have supervised as well as taught/guided. If a person is "untrainable", then they must do work that is repetitive only, with minimal possibility for error.

Supervision can be any given time or level. If you return to find something wrong, then instruct and guide the labourers how to do it right, and it is done right there and then, you have supervised.

Think of an operator on a hazardous installation, busy working on a piece of machinery (I use this example seeing I were in the explosive manufacturing business for 8 years). He merely has a std.8 /9 /10 certificate. He is working on a machine that is so hazardous the smallest mistake will take himself, others and the building out. The explosives act calls for training, guidance, supervision etc. If you constantly stand and monitor this person, you are no longer a supervisor, rather an operator, as you are constantly at his place of work, helping and assisting him. This being said, why do you keep him on then, let him go and do the work yourself.....once all the contractors do that, and 10 000 labourers are out of work, you'll see a clearer definition...

A new guy, yes he needs 100% supervision. When he learns more 80% and so on. As long as you inspect all the work done and correct it, I believe you supervised what was needed.