MAB - Ethics Committee Draft Proposals

[Nick Gromicko]

Erol, you are in Chicago. Did you vote in this recent election: http://www.nachi.org/forum/f13/international-association-certified-home-inspectors-chicago-announces-results-recent-election-4726/ ?

[jmichalski]

OK - so enough said then. joe F. runs the show and that is all we need to know.

Apparantly, "member driven" is a term that only applies in certain circumstances. I suppose, we rank and file NACHI members are too stupid to understand the brilliance that is Joe Farsetta and hence he is above removal - even if all (or a supermajority) of NACHI thinks it best that he go.

A clear and well thought out plan for ethics proposals was developed and submitted. It is in many ways FAR better for the members of NACHI (accountability, clarity, transparancy).

Once again Nick has has offered a false arguement (independant counsels and internal affairs depatrements are not comparable to an ethics committe of a "member driven" trade association, nor are those they serve comparable to our association) to cloud the issue.

What I can see is that apparantly Joe F. is now in for life as Nick can see no way he will be removed and no other mechanism exists.

He does serve at the pleasure of Nick, not NACHI. NACHI (the members) have not asked him to remain - Nick has.

That isn't member driven it is a joke. All hail Czar Farsetta - above reproach and accountability.

[Nick Gromicko]

Joe M. Please remove the word "Nick" from your above post as some might think you are referring to me. I have nothing to do with the fact that members are best served if the independence of the Ethics Committee is preserved. It is just a fact. It has nothing to do with me whatsoever. Ethics is an independent body... of course.

By the way, hail Farsetta!

[Nick Gromicko]

Joe M. I am careful to put your last name initial after your first name when referring to you on the message board. Please do the same. Some may misinterpret your last post as referring to me, when you know it can't as I have nothing to do with the independent Ethics Committee. Take it up with them.

[Nick Gromicko]

Besides, we all know that making Joe Farsetta run for re-election amounts to firing him. Didn't Richard Nixon fire Archibald Cox in 1973 because of his probe into an Ethics violation (Watergate)?

[ekartal5]

No Nick I didn't vote in the Chicago election since I do not attend the monthly meetings. Pretty clever idea of you to throw this back in my lap.

[Nick Gromicko]

Thanks, Just trying to keep up with you Erol.

[Joseph Burkeson, CMI]

Originally Posted by jmichalski

That isn't member driven it is a joke. All hail Czar Farsetta - above reproach and accountability.

This is why the concept of PlanetNACHI will never become a reality.

Home Inspectors who truly care about the future of our profession will be forced to expand their sphere of influence outside of NACHI into the greater home inspector profession to insure that true member-driven democratic organizations exist, we have such an organization here in Florida called FABI.

I suggest you start a statewide Home Inspection Organization in your home state, furthermore, don't let yourself be defined only by NACHI, broaden your horizons and begin to think outside of the NACHI box for the future of the profession. Think globally, act locally.

[Jay Schwartz]

Nick:

You are using poor judgement. Elections are a must.

[Nick Gromicko]

Joe B. It is the FABI members joining NACHI that have caused NACHI in Florida (with its 1,350 members as of today) dwarf the other FL state associations in every quantifiable category, including membership numbers. Sure looks like Planet NACHI from FL!

Jay, I agree, but they aren't "a must" for similar positions in other organizations. Why would they be "a must" for these positions only at NACHI?

NACHI would be the laughing stock of the world if we forced our independent departments, ESPECIALLY ETHICS, to try and win popularity contests held by the very members the Ethics Committee must rule on issues concerning. The whole ethics complaint process would be viewed as illigitimate. What would people say when Joe Farsetta has to rule in favor of someone who is actively campaigning for him? Think it out. Perhaps you would suggest our independent auditor and C.P.A. also run for election?

[Jay Schwartz]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Joe B. It is the FABI members joining NACHI that have caused NACHI in Florida (with its 1,350 members as of today) dwarf the other FL state associations in every quantifiable category, including membership numbers. Sure looks like Planet NACHI from FL!

Jay, I agree, but they aren't "a must" for many positions in other organizations. Why would they be "a must" for these positions only at NACHI.

NACHI would be the laughing stock of the world if we forced our independent departments, ESPECIALLY ETHICS, to try and win popularity contests held by the very members the Ethics Committee must rule on issues concerning. Perhaps you would suggest our independent auditor and C.P.A. also run for election?

Nick:

The problem is Farsetta believes he is untouchable and acts accordingly. The chair of the ethics committe should be the most professional and ethical towards everyone. Can't say that Farsetta has done that. As far as the CPA and IA goes, you have never shown the books to the membership so why even bring it up.

[Nick Gromicko]

Jay,

First, I don't have NACHI's books. They are maintained by our C.P.A./Attorney who regularly publishes returns for all to see. In fact, I have never once seen NACHI's books or reviewed our tax returns (although I admit I sign them). Deanna emails me a checking account balance each day and she is ordered to spend every penny that NACHI takes in (NACHI is both non-profit and IRS tax exempt and prohibited by law from stockpiling money). Every penny we take in is spent on members.

Second, you have switched your argument from one against the independence of the office, to one against the personality of the person in that office. That is a different argument than the one I have been defeating here. Have you switched to a new argument because you have conceeded the first to me?

[Jay Schwartz]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Jay,

First, I don't have NACHI's books. They are maintained by our C.P.A./Attorney who regularly publishes returns for all to see.

Second, you have switched your argument from one against the independence of the office, to one against the personality of the person in that office. That is a different argument than the one I have been discussing here.

Your books, your business. I am happy with the way the money is spent. Dominating the internet one click at a time.

According to you, Farsetta is the office and you have no intention on making a change. The membership wants change. Let elections take place and if Farsetta comes out on top, then it is what it is. In the meantime, please support the MAB documents as they are written. They have been supported by your ED, President, and VP. A vote of no from you is a vote against their office positions. I do not recall seeing Farsetta involved in the last two conventions doing all of the grunt work. With all the praise Gerry has been getting over the last year, I recall Farsetta attempting to block every move Gerry was making. Lets be real Nick. Its time to move on.

[Joseph Hagarty, CMI]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

After reading both draft proposals regarding the ethics complaint process, authority of the ESOP Committee, its membership, and autonomy, I must say that I cannot support either proposal in its current form.

Just as independent counsel to the president of the US, or BOD of any corporation acts at the discretion of the Chairman of the BOD, so does ESOP. Always has, always will. Additionally, ESOP can never be elected. Members of this committee cannot be chosen based on popularity.

As far as acting on any comlaint, this process must remain squarely in the hands, and within the authority of ESOP. The proposals, as crafted, are not within the purview nor authority of the MAB. The proposals as crafted by the MAB were done so without the counsel or input of ESOP. This, in and of itseld, is most perturbing. In the 3 1/2 years that ESOP has been in existence, it has acted even handedly, and without malice or prejudice. It will continue to do so.

If the MAB wishes to be a part of the process, that is fine. It may do so in an advisory capacity only.

I am recommending that the proposals as crafted be rejected.

The COE, applicability, and administration, including the complaint/resolution process, must remain independent... and shall remain independent; absent of undue influence, private agendas, and political pressures.

Joe Farsetta:

I have not seen the MAB Proposals but your Rejection without posting of the Proposals warrants my Blind Acceptance.

What are you Fear?

[Jay Schwartz]

http://www.nachi.org/mabesopc060504.htm