What should be our new membership requirement?

[Blaine Wiley]

I think the answer lies in our SOP. This would certainly indicate that general home inspectors should not be under the control, purview, supervision or any thing else by engineers.

II. The inspector is not required to:

E. Provide any engineering or architectural service.

[Joe Farsetta]

Blaine,

While we are not RFEQUIRED to do this, many of us regularly "exceed the SOP" and do actually perform evaluations in these areas.

We shoot ourselves in the foot all the time.

[Blaine Wiley]

True Joe.

In the grand scheme of it, we all determine the severity of a foundation crack. Simply deciding whether or not to recommend further evaluation entails a decision of whether the crack is nothing, or is significant enough to warrant additional expense by the client for an engineer, contractor, etc.

[Joe Farsetta]

I invite them to seek the counsel of a licensed professional engineer in every report I write.

[jmichalski]

Originally Posted by bwiley

Yes, there are many questions in the pool for the test and the questions are different each time. Many of the questions in the pool though are asking the same thing, only with different wording.

Our entrance exam is a basic entry level exam. Perhaps year 2-5 should have a more difficult, more encompassing exam, then year 5-8, and so on. Perhaps guys who've been in the business for eons like Dan Bowers who inspected Mount Vernon for George Washington, should write their own.

I would not be in favor of proctoring an exam for current members if it cost them money or made them travel.

So, we want to make it more difficult for people to remain members than we make it for newbies to join in the first place?

Unless we are going to start identifying veteran members (or Full Members) publicly this seems like needless ag to more senior members and illogically puts fresh out of the box, passed my online test members on equal footing with more veteran members who will have to pass more stringent criteria without any purpose or benefit.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by jmichalski

So, we want to make it more difficult for people to remain members than we make it for newbies to join in the first place?

(Note to self: You are in agreement with Joe Michalski.

Stop. Re-think everything you hold to be true, including God and your U.S. citizenship. How certain am I that my children are really mine...after all, I only have the word of their mother to that effect. Where was I on November 22, 1963 at approximately 12:30 CST? Could I have been on a grassy knoll?)

Oh, my God. I'm not feeling well. Please excuse me.

[Blaine Wiley]

Originally Posted by jmichalski

So, we want to make it more difficult for people to remain members than we make it for newbies to join in the first place?

It's called throwing out an idea outside of the box.

[jmichalski]

Originally Posted by jbushart

(Note to self: You are in agreement with Joe Michalski.

Stop. Re-think everything you hold to be true, including God and your U.S. citizenship. How certain am I that my children are really mine...after all, I only have the word of their mother to that effect. Where was I on November 22, 1963 at approximately 12:30 CST? Could I have been on a grassy knoll?)

Oh, my God. I'm not feeling well. Please excuse me.

Now that is funny, James!

[jmichalski]

Originally Posted by bwiley

It's called throwing out an idea outside of the box.

OK - no one can blame a guy for trying. Can I ask the obvious question?

Why is there a need to alter the current requirements?

What, specifically, are you attempting to accomplish? Maybe by starting with a clear goal, it would be easier to come to a suitable solution....

[Blaine Wiley]

As nick stated, he wants to strengther our membership requirements.

Nick proposed two thoughts that he and John came up with.

[jmichalski]

Originally Posted by bwiley

As nick stated, he wants to strengther our membership requirements.
.

Yes. I saw that.

But WHY? What is to be accomplished?

[Brian E. Kelly]

I do not want to test for mold or radon.

If I wanted to be an architect or engineer I would be one already.

Having sampled what ITA considers HI CEU's on more than one occasion my guess is a Weeblo meeting would pass for advanced HI education, and I am not paying to go to a Weeblo meeting.

Although I did have a very good pinewood derby car, I should submit my ribbons for some CMI credits.

[Richard L. Bennett]

Just some thoughts

After so many years in a profession one finds if hard to not repeat education content. One moves to the next point -- that of educator

Yes, there are changes to a profession that one must stay up to date on but the laws of physic do not change.

Please remember that many inspectors "have been there done that".

Go Bucks

[Richard L. Bennett]

I though the kids (boys and girls) were to build the cars

Not the parents (just dads)

rlb