The World Demolition Awards shortlist has thrown up a questionable internal battle.
Before I say what I am about to say, let me just make a few facts clear and then leave you to make up your own minds. I am about to call into question a set of awards run by a competitor so please feel free to dismiss what I am about to say as sniping and petty rivalry. I am also about to question the ethical stance of a trade association for which I used to work so please feel free to dismiss the following as sour grapes.
It is that time of year when the World Demolition Awards shortlist is drawn up, when tradition requires me to question the UK bias of the shortlist. You’ve heard it all before and I have no intention of labouring the point (although if someone can explain why the company that did THIS is not in the running, I’d love to hear it).
What did catch my critical and cynical eye, however, was the coveted Safety/Training Award category. This year, it will be another all-British affair contested by Cantillon (an NFDC and NDTG member), Erith Group (an NFDC and NDTG member), Keltbray (an NFDC and NDTG member)….and the NFDC/NDTG!
To make that clear to overseas readers that aren’t au fait with UK acronyms, that is three members of the National Federation of Demolition Contractors and National Demolition Training Group competing against their own trade federation and training organisation.
In order to be considered for such an award, the three contractors will likely have racked up hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of man hours without an accident or reportable incident. Such a track record requires considerable investment in training and procedures that might take months or years to take effect. It requires a root and branch change in perceptions and responsibilities across all levels of a company and across multiple sites.
I haven’t seen the NFDC/NDTG entry but I’ll take a wild guess that it is based around the new high reach simulator developed in conjunction with Volvo.
Now let’s be under no illusions here. The simulator has the potential to make a major contribution to site safety. It also has the potential to benefit multiple individuals across multiple companies. It will, without question, be for the greater good of the industry. Indeed, given the nature of these events, the high reach simulator is likely to be a shoe-in for the big safety/training prize.
But is a “product” really the equivalent of a step change within a demolition company? Is a one-off purchase really as valid as an all-encompassing and positive change in the mind-set of hundreds of demolition workers? Is the promise of future safety contributions from the comfort of an office really the same as actual on-site safety achievements at the sharp end of the industry? And should a pair of trade bodies funded by their members then compete against those members for an industry award?
Sour grapes? Maybe. But when the awards are announced later this year, the chances are that three well-deserving contractors will be dining upon that same bitter fruit.
