Originally Posted By: jmertins This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
exactly…it would not be possible for anyone to make any $$$. If you are in this only to help people you are the better person. I am in this b/c I love it and I make a decent living. It’s the same old thing as last spring… if all involved would really step outside the box and look at these remarks about this topic it’s crazy… very few people really, honestly care about the consumer… it’s about protecting their turf and business. Which is really the truth. Everyone says " I am about protecting the consumer"…then go join a not for profit gig and be happy.
We are here to provide a service that we all have some expertise in many ways, shapes, and forms....and we expect to be compensated for this knowledge. Plain and simple. Don't be a martyr... be honest
Originally Posted By: jpeck This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jmertins wrote:
We are here to provide a service that we all have some expertise in many ways, shapes, and forms....and we expect to be compensated for this knowledge. Plain and simple.
So ... I can put you down for $25 month? 
Quote:
Don't be a martyr... be honest
Not being one, being honest.
There are many people who could make $$$$ on this for other inspectors, and the other inspectors would make $$ for themselves. Not me, but there are others, and it would work. Like you said, you've got to think outside the box, and that mean leaving the negative attitude IN the box, everything outside the box is positive - it CAN be done.
Originally Posted By: jmertins This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Jerry,
Ya know... I often look for your posts on this board b/c you are a wealth of knowledge. I came from a background of working for GC's and real estate brokers and you have given me valuable insights into many topics. Thanks for the cheap $25 comment. You showed me your true colors. I hope your retirement comes soon.
John
heck...I have even dropped your name to a few folks down there when they were looking for inspectors.
Originally Posted By: jmertins This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
alright I missed the It’s late …I’m tired…all is fair in love and war…I just feel this whole arguement that we have here is not really about the consumer and not a lot of people will admit that. The whole “consumer” theory is really the smoke and mirror phrase to really protect thier turf and business. I am just being honest when I state my position. For once and all… we all know we do this to get paid and we love it.
Good night...and "hey, hey, hey..... lets be careful out there"
Originally Posted By: jburkeson This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jpeck wrote:
Under my licensing proposal, there would be a 3 year requirement, and an effective date which would allow someone who started in the business the day before licensing to meet that 3 year requirement on the last day of eligibility from the effective date of the law. Of course, after that (i.e., anyone coming in after the law became effective) anyone coming in would be starting late, but even then, if you started a year into that 3 year period, you would have 2 years already done by the time that eligibility period ended, and you would only need one year working 'under' someone.
OK, is this your proposal or is it's FABI's, because FABI recognizes someone as a RPI after 150 inspections + successfully passing an exam, there is no other requirement apart from CEU's.
So... I would assume that this is the requirements that FABI should in all fairness to their members promote as the minimum requirements for state licensing, don't you think?
Is FABI going to claim that a Registered Professional Inspector (their definition) is not qualified to be also be a state licensed inspector? As far as I know there is no higher designation in FABI above RPI so why would they claim that an inspector need experience beyond RPI?
Would any organization in it's right mind promote licensing legislation that would put their members business in jeopardy and put them out of business? Color me confused, but I am glad Nick is here watching my back.
-- Joseph Burkeson, RPI (Hooperette)
?Anyone who has proclaimed violence his method inexorably must choose lying as his principle.?
~ Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Originally Posted By: Nick Gromicko This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Today… NACHI member/FABI President Jeff Hooper invited me to a licensing meeting in December (to be held somewhere in the middle of Florida).
NWFHIA already got legislation thrown out to NACHI member's benefit. When I needed them they stepped up to the plate for NACHI... if they think they need me at FAPHI (and I'm sure they don't)... I can't turn them down.
With FACHI, NACHI, NWFHIA, FAPHI, a good chunk of FABI, 6 local chapters, 540+ members, and my friend Jeb... we have Florida.
Originally Posted By: jpeck This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jburkeson wrote:
OK, is this your proposal or is it's FABI's
FABI does not have a proposal.
That proposal was watered down by a group of inspectors. Some FABI members, some ASHI members, some NAHI members, and me as an ASHI member/FABI member/NACHI member wearing the NACHI hat that day (just to add diversity). Most of the inspectors belonged to two or more associations.
I no longer wear the ASHI hat, I gave that up when they came after me with that Branding Iron.
My proposal would be for the benefit of the consumers (contrary to what John thinks and says). Hard to make it? Yes, but if it were easy, where would the protection be?
In MY OPINION, if we want to call ourselves PROFESSIONALS, then we must behave like professionals and stop bickering over 'how easy can we make this licensing' and instead look hard at how 'not easy' should it be to offer the best protection.
Then, offer a way in, so it is not exclusionary. Anything less is 'protect my turf' and not what this is meant for.
Do you think people trying to get into the pest control business like having to do 3 years before they can even APPLY for the test?
Do you think people trying to get into the contracting business like having to do 4 years before they can even APPLY for the test?
Licensing should NOT be easy. And, the existing people in the business need to be brought in, just like when pest control came in and when contractors licensing came in. You don't pass the certification? You are still 'grandfathered' in as a special category, you are just not "certified", you can ONLY get "certified" through the process, old timers and newbies alike.
This is one of those 'to get your attention we are going to poke you in the eye' things, and, once we have your attention, you need to take notice.
Licensing is not for, and should not be for, wimps and wimpetts.
You, me, anyone in Florida currently could be grandfathered in and just keep on keepin' on (mostly), but to call ourselves "certified" and take advantage of what is fully offered, we would need to complete the obstacle course. There are also some back door benefits, being allowed (even required) to take test we are not 'allowed' to take now.
Originally Posted By: jremas This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Jerry Peck, you make sense and have the correct vision. Licensing and certification should be earned, not given. You are correct about the issue with the lack of our industry being a “profession”.
Quality, not quantity.
You are on the wrong board to spread your message.
\
--
Jeff Remas
REMAS Inspections, Inc.
Northeastern PA & the Poconos
www.NEPAinspector.com
Originally Posted By: gbell This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Even if the new legislation has a requirement for 3 years and 300 inspections. Anyone with a license from any municipality in the state would be given three years to meet the requirement. If a person was not able to do 300 inspections in 3 years why would they want to be an inspector anyway?
It would be nice to have different types of qualifications. Like ICC certifications and qualifying education. These could be used to reduce the time requirements.
Even FREC is trying to influence the inspection process by their wording in their contracts. I recently had one of the bigger agents in my area call and ask if I had ever read the areas of the contract that dealt with the inspection. If I couldn't write my reports to conform to the contract then no referrals from her. After a bit of conversation she informed me that she was only trying to educate me.
Originally Posted By: jburkeson This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
gbell wrote:
Even if the new legislation has a requirement for 3 years and 300 inspections. Anyone with a license from any municipality in the state would be given three years to meet the requirement. If a person was not able to do 300 inspections in 3 years why would they want to be an inspector anyway?
That is not an unreasonable proposal, but that is not what Jerry is talking about, and that is not how last-years legislation was written. Last year's legislation would have put people out of business, that is why it died in session.
Florida is a right-to-work state and Jerry's proposal would never see the light of day, still it is extremely unreasonable to ask someone who has complied with the requirements of full membership in FABI or even ASHI AND has not been in business for three years to close up shop and go to work for someone for the balance of the three year period, just to meet with the licensing requirements. That is why those organizations will not endorse a proposal worded to put their members out of business, hell ASHI can't afford to continually piss-off their membership and survive.
Like I said in previous go-rounds here and elsewhere over Florida Inspector licensing, maybe Moscow or Massachusetts would be friendly to Jerry's licensing proposal, but not here in Florida, thank God we have a pro-business Governor, who makes it a point not to force people out of business.
Is there anyone out there confused as to why 'W' got reelected?
-- Joseph Burkeson, RPI (Hooperette)
?Anyone who has proclaimed violence his method inexorably must choose lying as his principle.?
~ Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Originally Posted By: jpeck This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jburkeson wrote:
call me slow-N-dumb, but putting everyone out of business
Joe B.,
Guess you can't read?
It doesn't put anyone out of business ... maybe some should be, if they can't read?    
Originally Posted By: dfrend This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Don’t shoot me, I just am wondering:
Quote:
Even if the new legislation has a requirement for 3 years and 300 inspections. Anyone with a license from any municipality in the state would be given three years to meet the requirement. If a person was not able to do 300 inspections in 3 years why would they want to be an inspector anyway?
Is that for existing license holders in municipalities then? If so, how would a new inspector get 300 inspections. Most inspection companies are owner operated and most seem to not want any trainees. So if it is just existing inspectors being grandfathered, how would any new inspectors ever get in?
Originally Posted By: gbell This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hello Daniel
Yes it is for anyone that has a license before the legislation is enacted.
I will try to answer your question.
Many licensed occupations require that an applicant have training on the job before being able to apply for a license.
CPCO- requires that you hold a card for three years. To obtain this card you need to work for someone else.
Building Contractor- there are several different levels for a license. Each has their own time requirements for field experience working for someone else.
Appraiser- requires two years of experience working for someone else before you are able to submit an application to take the test.
Trades- Most of the trades require time on the job before you are able to obtain a license. (plumber, electrician, ac and sheet metal)
All of these also require state approved education.
I assume by your question you feel that no one will be able to become a home inspector once some type of licensing takes effect. The only guide I have is knowing that the ones listed above are not affected at this time by the actions taken. I really don?t know what the short term effect would be if any. I am not trying to create some type of protection for all in business before licensing takes effect. I am just looking at what has been done in the past as that has a high chance of occurring with us.
Originally Posted By: Nick Gromicko This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
There is a problem with comparing other licensed industries with the home inspection industry when discussing indentured servitude. I have been licensed in several trades and licensed in real estate… but those industries have many many multi-employee firms where you can get paid for on-the-job training. I certainly got on-the-job training as a mason, an electrician, a plumber, and a REALTOR. But it is very difficult to get on-the-job training as a home inspector. There are so few multi-inspector firms. The 9 shysters at PHIC for instance never hired a single helper their entire careers until they started suckering newbies into an indentured servitude scheme, and then they didn’t pay… they charged! The H.I. industry can be compared to other industries in many ways but just can’t be compared to other industries when discussing on-the-job training.
It’s late …I’m tired…all is fair in love and war…I just feel this whole arguement that we have here is not really about the consumer and not a lot of people will admit that. The whole “consumer” theory is really the smoke and mirror phrase to really protect thier turf and business. I am just being honest when I state my position. For once and all… we all know we do this to get paid and we love it.
Well being from New York, I can’t talk about Fla. But how possibly can Nick be a negative thing in this,