New CMI Requirement

[Henry Valenzano, CMI]

Originally Posted by jburkeson1

We are in general a young profession, that fact aside it still might be best to at least take a cursory glance at what qualifications other professions and institutions use to measure when one of their peers passes from the ranks of the merely professionally accomplished to the status of master.

We know that within the world wide accepted university system a student must first spend four years in college before being eligible to enter any Masters program and then it takes approximately another two years to fulfill that commitment and be recognized.

Within most skilled professions one must apprentice for five years before entering the journeyman ranks and the master designation comes through peer review at a much later date.

All in all I know of no other program where someone would be considered a master with only three years experience no matter what their combined education & experience level was.

In conclusion I find the old measure of 1,000 inspections/hours to be less revealing in regards to the inadequacies of the CMI program then the hard mark of three years which will surely be held up to ridicule by the rest of the profession and anyone who has truly fulfilled the requirements of any currently accepted Masters program.

Young! Speak for your self. The rest is good.

[lcapaul]

[QUOTE=cbottger]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

I struggle with 3 years guess that is just the old military coming out in me. Time in grade was the primary before one was allowed even to take a test.

Yes this is not the military but they sure had fine quality's Just look they produced me
</IMG></IMG>

In the military you not only had Time in Grade Requirements, you had Time in Service, which John just added to CMI, the Military as you noted also required a test for advancement, and the written evaluation and recommendation by a supervisor/trainer that you were qualified for the next level or promotion.

CMI would make everyone a Sargeant Major or a General, just by hanging around long enough. and of course paying a fee for the promotion.

[Charley L. Bottger]

[QUOTE=rcooke]

Originally Posted by cbottger

Sorry to say a person does not have the experience in three years is in my case is wrong.
Every person is different .
I did 100 inspections and all the courses I needed and some extras.
50+ years in constructions as Electrician and working for companies that did very many other things added much to my knowledge.
From the get go I charged more then any other Home Inspector in my area . I also feel I had more knowledge and experience then many who had been in business for years.
Using your thoughts how many years do you think are enough.
Some areas of our country it is impossible for a inspector to do 100 inspections in a year .
In other areas some do 400 or more .

Roy did you become a master electrican in 3 years think not.

I did not become a master HVAC Tech in 3 years just thought I was.

To answer your question I personally think it should be 10 years but realistically perhaps 5 to 7 depending on your background education coming from the trades or construction not from behind a desk job.

[Henry Valenzano, CMI]

CMI is still young. John has just given it its addition. and i think as it grows the requirements will get higher. You have to start some where and i think we have a good starting point. My suggestion is if you can pass the bar. Join and try to raise the requirements from the inside. If i were Nick or John I would listen to my membership before any one else.

[klott]

Originally Posted by hvalenzano

CMI is still young. John has just given it its addition. and i think as it grows the requirements will get higher. You have to start some where and i think we have a good starting point. My suggestion is if you can pass the bar. Join and try to raise the requirements from the inside. If i were Nick or John I would listen to my membership before any one else.

Henry, it would not be fair to raise the bar by recommendations from inside membership, it could be construed as a means to suppress competition by making it harder for them to attain CMI status, than it was for current members. The standards should be set by someone with no personal interest. IMHO

[Donald R. Peterson]

The CMI organization is starting a new era under John's leadership.
We have had a major change ONE DAY after John took the reigns.
As an organization evolves and matures, change is inevitable. Not all changes will coincide with the beliefs of all within the organization and certainly not with any of the critics outside the organization. There is a reason that some choose not to become a part of the organization, but change will ONLY come from within the organization itself. We can line up many critics to take pot shots, but what is the point of listening to them. NONE! Some people just feel like they must be heard, because their opinion is sooooo valuable.
I see some that post with an emotional response to this subject. If the CMI evokes such emotion from you, please join, and do some good. Otherwise can't you find something else to complain about, or are you just voicing your sooo valuable opinion.

[Donald R. Peterson]

Originally Posted by klott

Henry, it would not be fair to raise the bar by recommendations from inside membership, it could be construed as a means to suppress competition by making it harder for them to attain CMI status, than it was for current members. The standards should be set by someone with no personal interest. IMHO

So, Ken
would you let Congress set the eligabilty for entrance into NACHI?

[Charley L. Bottger]

Originally Posted by hvalenzano

CMI is still young. John has just given it its addition. and i think as it grows the requirements will get higher. You have to start some where and i think we have a good starting point. My suggestion is if you can pass the bar. Join and try to raise the requirements from the inside. If i were Nick or John I would listen to my membership before any one else.

Hank I hope CMI does grow into something meaniful I am not trying to put anything down. When you become president of a org be it new or not there is no cinderalla time given this is a tough BB.

Just look at past posts who does the most answering to questions posted CMI's or just us nobody's. My way of thinking if you are a master you should take the lead.

I see a lot of answers to post that just make me laugh and yes some from CMI's I make some stupid replys myself.

Just to mention a few guys on the answer end of this board that have my respect and should be considered as CMI's if not already.

Mike Larson
Will Handley
Brian Kelly
David Valley
David Anderson
Paul Abernathy
Dale Duffy
Jeff Pope
Jae
Marcel Cyr
Carl Brown
Tom Dietrich
Doug Edwards

And I could probally list 20 more guys that Really have their crap together just drawing a blank at the moment but I will add you to my list

[whandley]

[quote=cbottger]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

In an effort to ensure that each person who holds the CMI designation
does indeed have superior qualifications and experience, a new condition
will be added to the list CMI requirements .

Effective August 1, 2007:

All applicants for the CMI designation will be required to have a
minimum of 3 years actual home inspection experience.

quote]

To be honest John do you think 3 years is sufficient to become a CMI. Three years is the mildstone to find out if you have the business and professional savvy to even be a HI. Are you looking for numbers or professionals. Just a question

I would think John means 3 years experience in addition to the other existing requirements. It is no doubt an effort to ensure that teaching professionals and or educators with no field experience will not be able to obtain the CMI designation in the future.

Sounds quite logical to me....

[whandley]

Hey John,

Have you posted this thead on the CMI bb? It would be nice to get this information out to all inspectors, regardless of association affiliation.

Nice start!

[Henry Valenzano, CMI]

Originally Posted by cbottger

Hank I hope CMI does grow into something meaniful I am not trying to put anything down. When you become president of a org be it new or not there is no cinderalla time given this is a tough BB.

Just look at past posts who does the most answering to questions posted CMI's or just us nobody's. My way of thinking if you are a master you should take the lead.

I see a lot of answers to post that just make me laugh and yes some from CMI's I make some stupid replys myself.

Just to mention a few guys on the answer end of this board that have my respect and should be considered as CMI's if not already.

Mike Larson
Will Handley
Brian Kelly
David Valley
David Anderson
Paul Abernathy
Dale Duffy
Jeff Pope

And I could probally list 20 more guys that Really have their crap together just drawing a blank at the moment but I will add you to my list

You are right there has been a lot of B.S. talk, questions and answers. with no leader ship to put things in perspective. Hopefully John will take an active part in CMI not like the last Prez. We have enough CMIs out there to make a CMI stand out and get rid of the bugs. But it could not be done with out leadership. I am not Prez material but i can sure as hello help John.

Ken

Henry, it would not be fair to raise the bar by recommendations from inside membership, it could be construed as a means to suppress competition by making it harder for them to attain CMI status, than it was for current members. The standards should be set by someone with no personal interest. IMHO


That is the is exactly the point. When you hold a designation you don't want someone to get in that is not qualified and tarnish your image. So you work to raise the bar. Or would you let all the 95.00 inspectors in?

[James E. Braun, CMI]

This post just proves that John M. is our man. John done more in one day than Rowan did all together. Great Job, John!

[John Bowman]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

Lewis,

If I may make a suggestion:

if you dont like it here, join another association.

I agree. Perhaps you should consider joining the ranks of the designated CMI and drop your NACHI dues. Look at the benefits:

1. No more annual dues.
2. No more annual testing.
3. No ID requirements.
4. No attend a chapter meeting requirement.
5. No committees to contend with.
6. No CE requirements.
7. No requirement to belong to an association or society.
8. Less Vendors involved.
9. Insurance Breaks.
10. Prestige.
11. Power.
12. Promotional Prowess.
13. Prominence.

NACHI is obviously not concerned if you drop your NACHI membership and dues for the CMI organization. NACHI in fact, encourages all of our members to join the ranks of the CMI organization as soon as you qualify.

[Donald R. Peterson]

Originally Posted by jbowman

I agree. Perhaps you should consider joining the ranks of the designated CMI and drop your NACHI dues. Look at the benefits:

1. No more annual dues.
2. No more annual testing.
3. No ID requirements.
4. No attend a chapter meeting requirement.
5. No committees to contend with.
6. No CE requirements.
7. No requirement to belong to an association or society.
8. Less Vendors involved.
9. Insurance Breaks.
10. Prestige.
11. Power.
12. Promotional Prowess.
13. Prominence.

NACHI is obviously not concerned if you drop your NACHI membership and dues for the CMI organization. NACHI in fact, encourages all of our members to join the ranks of the CMI organization as soon as you qualify.

Thanks for the positive reinforcement

[James E. Braun, CMI]

John Bowman'
How often do you shed you skin