ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade General Discussion Area CEU's

"I used to be able to get plenty through my IAEI chapter but no more."

We still have them at NJEIA meetings, you do pay a reduced fee, but usually an hour at each meeting.

"lets hear your ideal on how too lawfully eliminate the "Trunk operators""

You can do what the some of the EC's in Jersey are doing, turning in every trunk slammer they can find, i think they finally had it, with doing things right, only to have some weekend hacks, that defy the laws, do work in their back yard, i don't blame them, the industry has to help police these things, or it will never get cleaned up.

First its pick-up trucks now its trunks.... Kidding... Trunks are bad.

aphares, it seems the e-mail I sent has returned???

You might have missed it during the tangent Roger and I went on???

Anyway, in it I mentioned that your best bet would be to follow the lead and established example of the regulations for plumbers in your state. You have an established model law.... Why they have a state-wide license/journeyman registration and electricians don't is beyond me.... (Better lobbyists?)



If say you got both the Union and Merit shop organizations together from the start (wouldn't that be nice) - they would be more than happy to take over control over entry to the trade through mandatory apprenticeship statewide. And I say from the start, because they have wasted serious amounts of time and money battling for control here - only to come together in the end. The big part is what to do with everyone like yourself now - everyone has to come to the same standard. People who come in new, and people working now.

That, and with some well place re-edjucation from your consumer board to let people know about the law requiring electricians to be trained and registered with the state, and you might see a demand for more qualified people. Especially if there is a penalty for the consumer, EC or GC who hires the unlicensed or certified/registered. (Something I think is lacking in my own state is any penalty or enforcement.)

Aphares you are welcome.

Mark, back to the Mike Holt link, per you own admission it appears as though it is correct.

Now, I still don't understand how continuing education and crooked contractors go together as you and Reno make reference to, please explain why CE causes, breeds, or supports crooked contractors

Crooked contractors are going to be around with or with out continuing education.

I also don't understand why a bitter neighbor reporting moonlighters (even suspected moonlighters) is a problem, she may be a pain to live next to, but why does she bother you so much? I still see her as being an ally to the licensed contractors.

Whether continuing education makes a better contractor or not may still be out in the hands of the jury, but as Iwire pointed out, it does make people open a book.

I don't mean to be arguing or putting you in a defensive position, but I really don't understand what the problem is.

As far as the CEU providers charging a fee, so what, I have to continuously buy new tools and test equipment to stay where I need to be on a yearly basis.

It's just another cost of doing business that ultimately will be charged to the customer as it is in the books as an overhead expense.

Roger



[This message has been edited by Roger (edited 09-18-2006).]

Since my last post I have been laughing hysterically.....

The IBEW and ABC could split the cost of a TV ad.

Ad starts with two guys...
"Hi Im Bill" (IBEW)
"And I'm Will" (ABC or other)
(Both) "And we're Electricians!"
(Bill) "You can hire us to work on your home or buissiness."
(Will) "And you won't be fined $10,000!"
(Both) "Or you could hire Bob..."
(Bob shown removing collapsable aluminum ladder and Home Destructo bags from trunk of Trans Am)
(Bill) "And Bob will burn the place down." (Sad face)
(Will) "And you'll still be fined $10,000!" (Big Grin)

Roger, feel free to kill my last post there I was loosing contreol and it took me 8 minutes to write....


They are two seperate un-related subjects....

*For the record...

Quote

Mark, back to the Mike Holt link, per you own admission it appears as though it is correct.

The Mike Holt site is wrong, California now requires 32 hours - there is just no information on what if anything is "approved" - the site says, "Continuing Education Requirements: None"

And my nieghbor, is the freind or ally of no one.... Pure satan there.... Like I said, she (and an Inspector told me this) uses the DBI as a weapon. If she could find a way to harrass the very sun itself she would.

*edit to add for the record

[This message has been edited by e57 (edited 09-18-2006).]

Mark, I actually know a few people like this too, truly friends of the devil, I understand.

Roger

Back on the topic of CEU's, what I fear may happen in my own state is that a bunch of these fly by night schools making "Guaranteed to pass" promises will pop-up, and be legal as they are here for licensing and end-up being bogus give-you-the-answer shops. Whats worse is they will all charge top dollar... Why, because you have to take a course! It wont matter what the content is, or even who it is done by, because it will be the bare minimum from all equally. In Californias case, there does not seem to be that there will be any re-testing, just go get a stamp from A, B, or C.

OK, I'm at fault for "linking" CEU's to matters of integrity. Here's why:

As I see it, the State has little right to regulate commerce. Public Safety- OK, I can see minimum qualifications, bonding, and insurance.

However, going beyond that has been argued by Milton Friedman, Etal..., interferes with the free operation of the market, which will quite efficiently eliminate the incompetent. I agree with this thesis.

Every regulation is put forth with the idea that it will somehow "make things better." Well, for the CEU issue, we now have enough experience to be able to tell if the measures have any effect.

If such cannot be demonstrated, then the State has no right to require them. It has exceeded its' mandate.

The connection between CEU's and crooked contractors is built into the propaganda that an unlicensed contractor is, by definition, unethical. Require CEU's, and the guy without them is now unlicensed, thus lumped in with the unethical.

More to the point, unjustified requirements only add to the burden faced by the law-abiding.... giving the "trunk slammer" an edge. Qhich seems to be quite the opposite of what was intended.

What?

Roger