ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade General Discussion Area New Way to Inspect?

In Florida a contract inspector while working under contract to the government has the same sovereign immunity as a government inspector.
You sue the inspector, you are really trying to sue the state that is holding up a law that says you can't

Going private seems to me a double edge sword. One of my hats I wear is government electrical inspector. Granted Federal is different from State and state is different from city/munies. I have seen government try to privitize operations and in the end they pay more and get less. Government funtion by contract. The more you put into it, the more it is going to cost you, the taxpayer. the less you put it it, the more you, tax payer will pay in trying to make a contract with holes in it work. The private guys with look out for their employers best interest, do little as humanly possible in order to maximize profit. In theory and there are many who do that work for the government that looks out for employers best interest, the taxpayer.

Being on both side of the fence, I understand way more how the government functions and disfunctions. For those of you who were in the military can better understand what I mean. Everyone one is bound buy rules, regulations and assignment. No matter who you are, we answer to somebody, we are responsible to perform our duties with in the prescribe rules and regulations even if we do not like them. If we do not like the rules and feel strongly about them, there are ways you can change them. At the same time, we live in a democracy so one person does not call the shots despite what some may think.

Good inspectors are in the same boat. The have rules and regs to follow too. Yes there are bad apples out there. There are processes in place to fix that. It is not easy. I founds some regs I must follow that ties my hands which is costing you money. I felt addiment (spelling) about it to the point I have push it all the way through our Washington Office where soon as the red tape settles and three years later, I will be able to do more at less expense.

I feel that the inspectors should stay in govenment. They are the ones who enforce the rules in the building sector like cops who enforce the rules in the legal sector. Can you imagine what it would be like if we privatize the police department? Has anyone seen Robocop?


Our govenment is not perfect. no govenment is. We do have a say in ours unlike other parts of the world. If you govenment is busted, fix it or take it as is. Get involved.

Excuse me while I step off my soap box.

This was the way it was in Pa untill a couple of years ago. The problem is the contractors were paying said inspectors to check there work. Some got better service if you know what I mean. I knew of a firm that would walk down the street of duplexes and make a list of the lot #s each being a $50. fee. never even set foot in the buildings. In some states when the inspector gets money from the contractor it is known as a brib. It has changed now. Things goes through the local municipality but they also add there fee in. and the inspection firms charge more, I guess cause they have to deal with the municipality.

"If it's broke, fix it"

I would not say that's the main goal of this thread, so much as a desire to turn a plain-Jane motor city mediocrity into a magnificent muscle car.

Do our existing methods work? Sure they do. Can they work better? I don't think that's in dispute either; of course they can. The question is: where do we go from here?

Economists from Adam Smith to Walter E. Williams have advocated the 'market' as the best way to address myriad social ills. Assuming this is the case, how does one apply market dynamics to further code compliance?

"Bribery" can be seen as market forces working against code compliance. Insurance premiums can be seen as a way to engourage certain actions: instal sprinklers and you pay less (as an example).

Government is government, no matter the task. I think the approach Missouri has taken with their DMV suggests possibilities as for how to introduce market forces into the equation.

Unlike the example some of you have cited, there is no single private group given a monopoly over any area. You can go to any "DMV" office and accomplish what you need. Indeed, this is what my family does, shunning the nearest office for a better-run operation a few towns over.
This is quite different from -to cite another local example- the way electrical contracting is handled in St. Louis county, where one person reigns like a monarch, deciding who may do electrical work. Whether that person does a good job is not the issue; by all accounts, the person currently in the job attempts to do as good a job as they can. Yet, even saints die- and there's no way to assure that the next one will do as well.

Is the missouri DMV showing us the way to 'change the dynamic' in a good way?

Reno:
We strayed off of your original subject....

Back to DMV; here in NJ the DMV agencies were 'private' operators, answering back to the state. Long story short...it was a mess. It went back to State operated (Now MVC) and it's almost a painless experience! They keep making improvements, all of which are better.

Our motor vehicle inspection stations are privately operated (under contract) and that was a hated experience for quite a while. Our last Gov. (McGreavy) made that a priority, and he got it straightened out, and still private.

In Florida the DMV is at the tax collector's office. At least they are honest about what DMV is.
They do seem to try to make it pleasant.
Personally I think "DMV" should just be managed by the insurance companies. Those are the people who have skin in the game, they already maintain a national database, sharing information better than 50 states and DC and you are required to buy insurance anyway.