CMI and Logo

According to this site NACHI members are eligible to start using the CMI designation. In another thread NACHI provided the Logo. I’m curious to know how many are beginning to use it. Looks to me as though NACHI members could by-pass all the upcoming if’s, and’s, or buts, that may arise if they began using it now.

[size=2]Wouldn’t it make sense for those that are interested to jump on this program now before vendors or outsourced entity’s start charging for it.

[size=2]No requirements exist. No time limits, no minimum inspections, no nothing. Once approved, which it is, they cannot take it away from you.

I like it. Thanks Gary.

You play some pretty hard ball there Gary, you da man, you da man !!! :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:

Hey, the logo works for me!!

You watch somebody from the powers that be is gonna pipe up and say :twisted: “Hey, let go of my LEGO, I, I mean my LOGO!” :twisted: :|.) :|.) :|.)

If it works for John, Blaine, and Gary, it works for me.

Might as well, one day they’ll just be giving this stuff away as door prizes at meetings anyway.

I’m in (that is until they tell me i’m out)

There is great risk in using the CMI designation at this time. I can imagine a plaintiff’s attorney asking you on the stand “Mr. Inspector, what exactly did you do to attain the Certified Master Inspection designation my client relied upon in making his/her decision to hire you?”

It is best we wait until we have clearly established requirements.

Sorry, Mickey - didn’t mean to slight you!:smiley:

oh well, i’m out :shock: :shock: :shock: :twisted: mwahhaahhhaahhhaa:twisted:

I can see that argument under just about any circumstance, unless the requirements are set far above the standards for any state or association.

Wouldn’t the reply be :
“This professional designation is a Registered Trademark and may be used by any NACHI member in good standing, however NACHI has not yet determined its requirements and so use of this professional designation may cause the member to suffer legal liabilities with regard to false advertising. NACHI strongly recommends that members refrain from using this Trademarked professional designation for the time being. Use by non-members is prohibited.”

And any more so than the attorney asking “Mr. Inspector, what exactly did you do to attain the Certified Inspector designation my client relied upon in making his/her decision to hire you?”??

It’s all semantics.

Relax, Nick, I don’t really want to use it - I think the entire idea needs A LOT of work.

Work almost done. I expect to be given the requirements this week.

Funny Nick, I thought we talked about the requirements with Blaine, Paul, and John one night…

I IM’d with Blaine and John. I gave our proposal to Bill and Joe to work on. Like I said, there are a lot of issues with regard to having a Certified Master Inspector professional designation that is both meaningful yet attainable.

Here is what they just emailed me:

All you guys wanting to use the CMI without taking the proper classes are not even qualified inspectors. The CMI can not help guys like you.

Pat Maietta
President NYNACHI

Your right. But it sure looks good on a resume.

Now where does it go? Three out of five of the Executive Committee do not agree with what has been emailed to you. I’m not sure of one other. I would suggest that you send this to the Education Committee and MAB for input.

Give them 15 days to reply to the Executive Committee for decision and policy.

I think that 250 Inspections with a class is a joke. I thought this designation was supposed to mean something, not just be a useless logo to put on your website or business card.

I agree Nick it has to be attainable. But it should also set itself apart from any other designation in the industry. All I see now is a bunch of education vendors making sure there are classes involved so that they can make bank of the members. “Follow the Money and see where it goes”

Pat, I believe I would qualify

21/2 years and 250 inspections is basically what ASHI requires for full membership. The taking of an additional course will not make one a master.

I agree with Nick that the designation must be both meaningful and attainable. I differ in that the designation should not be easily attainable.

This to me is different from a Realtor who takes a class and has a GRI designation. That is a designation simply that the Realtor took and passed a class. Our designation will decree that the inspector is a master, defined as an expert, in the eyes of NACHI, and the inspector will advertise this to the buying public.

A master electrician, plumber, HVAC tech, etc., takes years (4 just for a journeyman license) to attain. On one hand, we are inspecting what they do, while on the other hand we defer to them because we are either unsure, lack sufficient knowledge, or simply want to cover our assets. If we want to carry a “master” designation, read expert, top of the profession, we had better be able to explain the difference between a regular ole inspector who has 7 years and 2500 inspections under his belt and belongs to ASHI or NAHI, and our 3 year wonder Master, who has done 300 inspections and passed a class.

I truly think the bar is too low, regardless of the difficulty of the class or test, and that a master should have at least 1000 inspections and 5 years in the business, among other things.

Then, Master will be meaningful and will be recognized.