SOC is not very good at hitting reply-to-all.<div><br></div><div><br>---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b>Hinako Shiraishi 19</b> <<a href="mailto:soc-president@guild.uwa.edu.au">soc-president@guild.uwa.edu.au</a>><br>Date: Monday, 27 May 2019<br>Subject: Re: [committee] UCC 'test-and-tag'<br>To: Grace Rosario <<a href="mailto:20483992@student.uwa.edu.au">20483992@student.uwa.edu.au</a>><br><br><br>
<div>
<div dir="auto">
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Hi Grace,</p>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"> In final response to your queries about the testing and tagging.</p>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Firstly, we are organizing this in bulk for all tenants because we can save the tenants time and money – you are most welcome to organize this yourselves but we believe there are significant savings through
our supplier.</p>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">If you are to organize this yourselves, we require a copy of the testing report for our records. You can go ahead and arrange for this to be done, and have it compliant to AS/NZS:3760, however it is stated <u>in
the standard</u> that it must be completed by a <u>competent person</u>. As such, if the report is not supplied by a reputable company or service provider, we will also require a copy of the certification of the person(s) performing the testing.</p>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">As the landlord to the tenants, I have a duty of care to ensure that the environment meets safety standards and that those who occupy and visit the areas are safe to do so.</p>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">In terms of insurance, if anything were to happen as a result of faulty equipment that was not tested and tagged correctly, there is no basis to make a claim and so insurance would be void. As this is going
to be a risk for us, as a landlord, I cannot allow you to continue to occupy the space.</p>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">In short, the options at the moment are:</p>
<ol start="1" type="1" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px;margin-top:0in">
<li style="margin-left:0in">Have us arrange testing and tagging;</li><li style="margin-left:0in">You can arrange your own testing and tagging with a person qualified to do such testing; or</li><li style="margin-left:0in">Look at vacating the space.</li></ol>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">If there is any more dispute, you can take it up with Tony Goodman in a face-to-face meeting.</p>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"><br>
</p>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Regards, </p>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Taco Shiraishi</p>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Tenancy Chair </p>
<p style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">SOC President </p>
<br>
<div class="gmail_extra" dir="auto"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 23 May 2019 09:33, Grace Rosario <<a href="mailto:20483992@student.uwa.edu.au" target="_blank">20483992@student.uwa.edu.au</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution">
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hello SOC,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
I'm not sure if this (picture attached) really constitutes a response to our email, since it didn't get sent to the committee, just to one member, and used a personal Facebook account to communicate. So I'm pretty sure, at least, that this is not an official
response.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'm not sure that we were clear enough in our last email, but could somebody please link us to the safety standards of the guild, which are apparently separate from the UWA regulations. I have looked on the guild website and this information is not available
to me anywhere that I can see.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The UCC committee would like to view the policy that they are being asked to comply with.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best regards,</div>
<div>Grace Rosario</div>
<div>UCC Secretary</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div><img alt="image.png" height="558" width="314"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">On Wed, 22 May 2019 at 23:47, Timothy Chapman <<a href="mailto:22483878@student.uwa.edu.au" target="_blank">22483878@student.uwa.edu.au</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">Dear SOC,<br>
<br>
Speaking on behalf of the UCC committee, we have recently received your request to 'test-and-tag' all of our plugs. We would appreciate it if you could please outline why this is <i>necessary</i>.<br>
UCC has (as you would expect) a very large number of electrical devices, and so, such a requirement is exceptionally onerous for the club — to the tune of several hundred dollars per year.<br>
<br>
Examining the <a href="http://www.safety.uwa.edu.au/topics/electrical-safety/testing-tagging-guidelines" target="_blank">UWA Electrical Safety Guidelines</a>, we were able to identity the section of the requirements this seems to be a result of.<br>
<br>
<i>"UWA uses a risk management approach to determine where specific testing of electrical equipment is necessary. This is achieved by defining workplaces as hostile or non-hostile electrical environments and then specifying the required frequency of either
Visual Inspections or Testing and Tagging"</i><br>
<br>
While it seems good for the clubs on UWA to follow the UWA safety rules, we note that the regulations split environments into two categories: Hostile and Non-hostile.<br>
The requirement of "Testing and Tagging" <b>exclusively</b> refers to "hostile environments". According to those regulations a <b>non-</b>hostile environment is defined as follows:<br>
<br>
<i>"This is a workplace that is dry, clean, well organised and free of operating conditions that may result in damage to electrical equipment or the flexible supply cord."</i><br>
<br>
We are strongly of the impression that UCC firmly fits into the category of <b>non-hostile</b>, and as such this requirement seems to be unnecessary.<br>
>From your request, we can only conclude that you have classified UCC as a hostile environment. <br>
<br>
Would it be possible to get a thorough and well justified explanation for why UCC has been singled out and identified? <i>(see email from Taco Shiraishi on May 15)</i> Since if we were to go ahead with the tagging, UCC appears to be expected to pay a significant
sum out of pocket for superfluous electrical testing.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Looking forward to your reply,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Timothy Chapman</div>
<div><font size="1">UCC Ordinary Committee Member</font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
List Archives: <a href="http://lists.ucc.asn.au/pipermail/committee" target="_blank">http://lists.ucc.asn.au/<wbr>pipermail/committee</a></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br></div>