Dear fellow NACHI members,
*For two years the Texas Inspector Committee has labored on Standards that promote professionalism. Our opposition was comprised of a very small minority that is politically connected. Although there was overwhelming support, the proposed work was returned to Committee due to the lobby of a minority. *
*The struggle is simple. The opposition believes a prescriptive Standard should tell inspectors not only what to inspect but how to inspect, what safety items to look for with a push to compare older homes to new code. They believe a Standard should be written with specificity to assure the State agency has ample enforcement authority. They think specificity will assure quality. An example of past State enforcement in Texas is the ruling that an inspector was negligent and incompetent for missing a bathtub drain stop. *
*Prescriptive rules state “you shall march this way” and it promotes a “trades mentality”. It diminishes the professional aspect. *
*The Inspector Committee believes inspectors to be professionals capable of defining their own prescriptive Standards through trade associations such as NACHI. If the Standards say “inspect GFCI” a prudent and professional inspector does not need further regulatory language to do their job. *
*Inspection quality cannot be achieved through prescriptive State rules. Inspection quality is a result of individual professionalism nurtured by groups such as NACHI who promote professionalism through education and experience. *
I am sure NACHI members themselves will have different opinions and this is not to say one side is wrong and one side is right. Think hard about your beliefs and follow them. That is all you can do. The following letter explains to the Committee that further work on the Standards is not possible at this time. The effort to professionalize the business has been postponed by politics.
I attended the TREC meeting where they effectively sent the proposed SOP revisions back to sub-committee and I know John was very disappointed in that decision. I have to say that I’m somewhat surprised that his position is now to ‘give up’. I have to think that more work on the proposed changes would be fruitful if the Inspectors Committee addressed one of the main objections that ‘safety’ items had been omitted. Regardless of whether that is true or not is immaterial, more work on the proposals to implement any of the safety items could possibly result in TREC acceptance and approval of the proposed changes. I will send John and the entire Inspectors Committee an e-mail and encourage them and especially John to persevere.
Thanks for your support. I do appreciate it.
Do not think we are giving up. The time line for the Commissioners vote places the Committee in a position that could waste more of their time. The Commissioners do not meet again until December. IF we could prepare a product for them to review by then it is unlikely it would come back from public comment before the Committee has new positions assigned in February.
The committee is not quitting, they are regrouping. This is a project of the Committee and it is supported by a clear majority. Very capable people will carry on without me.
Thanks again for your support.
John Cahill has humbly served and worked tirelessly for MANY years to raise the bar for the inspection industry and all inspectors in Texas.
The rejection of the proposed Standards, overwhelmingly adopted by the inspector members who make up our industry but rejected by the Commissioners, is a travesty to all Texans.
I nominate John Cahill for NACHI MEMBER OF THE YEAR!
Thanks for all you’ve done and are willing to continue to do.
I certainly don’t pretend to fully understand the political machinations that affect the Inspector’s Committee nor TREC. John and the other Inspector Committee members are involved in that on a continuing basis and are even party to it at times I’m sure. I have to accept John’s interpretation of how effective further work on the proposed SOP would be at this time. I would just ask that he and the other members of the Inspector Committee go back to the negotiating table, with opposition leaders, one more time to see if any compromise is achievable and if consensus can be reached. In other words, appease the nay-sayer’s and put some of the ‘safety’ items back in if that’s all it takes. Is that not the biggest obstacle that the proponents object to?
The only time I witnessed a show of support for the proposed SOP was on June 26 at an Inspectors Committee meeting. A motion to send the proposed SOP on to TREC was voted on with 6 members for, two against and one abstaining. The two No votes and the one very vocal, well respected, past Inspectors Committee member doomed the approval of the changes. Interestingly, the negative support comes from the recent past president, the incoming president and a director of the major state wide HI trade organization.
Also, the fact that NACHI has such a weak presence in Texas and provided no show of support or opposition, whatever the case may be, didn’t help matters. The state HI trade organization has 750 members, I have no idea how many NACHI members there are here.
Thanks for the nomination and kudos Barry. This work received much support from Texas NACHI but does not really benefit national. The nomination is a compliment but there are others who have done more for the national organization. Please defer your votes to them and consider me very happy and complimented.