I'm quite impressed with this discussion. This is one that could easily become a flame war. See the credentials thread for my background; I don't know that I really have 'place' to speak on this issue.
My take on this is that licensing laws, like all laws, have both their direct intended effects as well as their side effects. Conspiracy theorists like to focus on the side effects as the insidious reason that people actually passed the laws. Me, I like to try to figure out and state clearly what the side effects are, so that others can decide if the side effects are themselves worth supporting along with the law itself. Some of these side effects cause direct harm to good people.
This discussion has provided pictures of both the best and the worst of electrical licensing laws.
festus said both:
"I have seen some results of work by unlicensed individuals, and some of it is frightening and dangerous. "
and
"I have seen electricians of such high caliber and knowledge that if I lived to be 200 years old, I still wouldn't be as good as them. But, They are unlicensed because they just can't pass the exams, or are afraid to take them over fear of failure, or can't get the documentation and affidavits necessary to verify their time in the trade. They are doomed to work for another person and get paid far less than what they are worth.But, no matter how good they are, they are working illegally if they attempt to contract or advertise electrical work."
In my mind the _reason_ for requiring licensing is to provide a minimum standard of skill, knowledge, and ability to make safe electrical installations. Someone who provides this level of service _without_ a licence is not a public safety problem, is not a hack, and is not violating the direct intent of the law.
But they are violating the letter of the law. While not being unfair to their customers, they are being somewhat unfair to those who have taken the time to jump through all the legal hoops while at the same time being providing quality electrical work. There are lots of things that come with proper licensing, including all of the proper permitting and inspections, insurance, taxes, etc. Unlicensed work means that you don't incur a bunch of costs, and also means that you have given up certain safeguards.
As Reno notes, doing unlicensed work means that you've given up a bunch of safeguards that protect you, and this means that even a _good_ electrician, if doing unlicensed work, is open to all sorts of abuse. Here, in my mind, is a major downside of licensing laws: if, for whatever reason, someone has not met the letter of the law, even if their work is good and safe, then they are open to abuse with little protection.
AZsam has also noted that there are licensed contractors who don't do quality work. These are people who meet the letter of the law but not the spirit of the law.
So there are 4 groups advertising their services:
Hacks who violate both the letter and the spirt of the law. They endanger lives. IMHO do everything that you can to through the book at them. Use the licensing laws as they were intended, report them, sue them, etc.
People who meet the letter of the law but not the spirit. People who perhaps put the time it, or are working 'under' someone else's licence, or otherwise are legal, but who are cutting corners, not keeping up with current code, not doing proper installation. IMHO these people also need to be reported, but presumably they have the basic skills, and simply need to 'shape up'.
People who meet both the letter and the spirit of the law. This is the ideal.
People who meet the spirit of the law but not the letter. My guess is that this group is actually few and far between. Being an electrician takes brains, and if you have the skill, then you probably also have the skill to jump the hoops. But I don't know every circumstance. It seems to me that if _you_ as a properly licensed EC know someone who you personally feel is a good electrician, but who is not licensed, then you _are_ being petty to sic the law on them. If someone is violating the letter, but not the spirit, of the law, then IMHO one has a moral obligation to try to 'bring them into the fold'.
-Jon
