Message from Claude Lawrenson

[Bill Mullen]

Originally Posted by gluck

"You are given points for all of those things. If you reach the required threshold, no courses or anything else are needed."

DEAR SAD BITTER OLD MAN;
Can you give us an illustration of how these points are awarded and what the required number of points will be?
</IMG>

Apparently you would rather mock me than get your question answered. So b it.

Bill Mullen

[rwand1]

George,

I don't think you will be invited onto the Canuck list now. Bad, bad boy.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by bmullen1

Apparently you would rather mock me than get your question answered. So b it.

Bill Mullen

Bill it is too bad you do not have a sense of humor.
It was obvious that post of Georges was directed to me as I am sure you have very little idea how most things work at NACHI.
I have been a member for many years and I sure have to get help to make sure of how things run some times .
Still sad but I have never been Bitter even though you have said this more then once .
Your jealousy is showing again Bill.
.... Cookie

[Claude Lawrenson]

As Bill noted there are no "bylaws" for the National Certification Program. As indicated by legal counsel - there will be a policy and procedures manual released. It is largely based as I noted earlier on the "governance policies" such as that which was posted on the OAHI website in the members section. FYI: Governance policy equates to bylaw.

A large part of the governance impacts the associations that have "equivalency" agreements. To date (Inter)NACHI chose not to be associated - although invited by registered letter. Again it is voluntary. The NCP/NCA will not force anyone to belong. Those holding "equivalency" agreements are deemed to have shown an interest in the national certification program. Therefore those associations have access to information such as the "governance policies" and the approved NCA meeting minutes. Even at the current time, I am still involved in authoring the updated version of that original document to reflect the changes and amendments into a more finalized version for the conference.

For that and the position that I serve as Chair I am paid a fee of "nothing" other than being the Chair walking around with the target on my back. I will be attending the National Conference in Collingwood and again, nothing is compensated for my expenses. I rightfully will bear my own cost.

Both Bill and I have chosen to take that role and try to communicate here hoping it would help foster a better working relationship - even with NACHI - but it seems that reality was short-lived. So with that, if the members here feel we are flogging a dead-horse than I will zip-it! I cannot speak for Bill. Again that choice is in your hands. But it seems that some seek information, while others seem more motivated to chase us away.

Regards, Claude

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/site/.../cl00700e.html



PDF Documents: Primer for Directors of Not-for-Profit Corporations

[rwand1]

Hi Claude,

Claude do you mind if I post that document?

Thanks for the reply.

[Claude Lawrenson]

I certainly cannot stop you, however, as I noted - I am almost positive there will be some areas that have been changed - that some viewers may not feel comfortable with. One in particular deals with a recent amendment to assure that unaffiliaited applicants are reviewed by the National Certification Council. This was ammended to assure fairness and impartiality for members not holding membership in an association holding an "equivalency agreement".

So in my opinion it may be premature. As noted in my earlier post - that 11 page document now numbers approximately 37 pages. And the earlier version will be misconstrued as the final word - which it really is not - because of the changes and amendments.

Regards, Claude

[rwand1]

Claude I was under the impression that once the NCA was up and running CAHPI would be completely removed from the NCA and the NCA would be self funding with no further input from CAHPI?

I also read that the Provincial bodies will be responsible for administering the program in their areas. I believe this has been changed? Particularly as it applies to Nachi members?

Thanks,

[Bill Mullen]

Originally Posted by rwand1

Claude I was under the impression that once the NCA was up and running CAHPI would be completely removed from the NCA and the NCA would be self funding with no further input from CAHPI?

I also read that the Provincial bodies will be responsible for administering the program in their areas. I believe this has been changed? Particularly as it applies to Nachi members?

Thanks,

Raymond:

The NCA is self-sustaining. CAHPI money and NCA money will forever be kept separate. However, CAHPI was created to own and administer the NCP, so CAHPI will not be out of the picture. CAHPI has merely turned over control of the NCP to the NCA so that it can run autonomously. (Sort of like a blind trust, and yes, it gets audited every year) After the free elections are held in three weeks, the NCA will be an elected body.

As Claude said above, and as I said a week ago, the provincial associations will be responsible for administering the program ONLY to its own members, and even they can opt out if they feel uncomfortable about it. The NCA will for now administer anyone other than those in provincial associations.

Now here's a slant you might not have thought of. According to the rules, any association (not just CAHPI ones) that has signed an Equivalency Agreement with the NCA could also administer their own members. In other words, if NACHI had such an agreement, NACHI members could be processed through NACHI. That means the original application would be checked by NACHI to ensure it was complete. NACHI could then confirm that 'John Smith' had satisfied the requirements for the level that had equivalency (perhaps CMI) and John Smith would be almost done except for doing the TIPR.

That is what we would like to see, and it would give NACHI some real input.

Bill Mullen

[Joe Farsetta]

I was under the impression that once the NCA was up and running CAHPI would be completely removed from the NCA and the NCA would be self funding with no further input from CAHPI

CAHPI was created to own and administer the NCP, so CAHPI will not be out of the picture.

Ummm....

I have a bridge I'd like to sell someone....

[rwand1]

Hi Bill

Thanks for the reply.

Now here's a slant you might not have thought of. According to the rules, any association (not just CAHPI ones) that has signed an Equivalency Agreement with the NCA could also administer their own members. In other words, if NACHI had such an agreement, NACHI members could be processed through NACHI. That means the original application would be checked to ensure it was complete. NACHI could then confirm that 'John Smith' had satisfied the requirements for the level that had equivalency (perhaps CMI) and John Smith would be almost done except for doing the TIPR.

On the surface and with not too much deep thinking on it, it sounds very fair.

Thanks,

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by bmullen1

That means the original application would be checked by NACHI to ensure it was complete. NACHI could then confirm that 'John Smith' had satisfied the requirements for the level that had equivalency (perhaps CMI) and John Smith would be almost done except for doing the TIPR.

That is what we would like to see, and it would give NACHI some real input.

Bill Mullen

.

Just to bring you up to date NACHI and CMI are not the same association and are further from each other then CAHPI and the NAtional Certification.

.... Cookie

[Bill Mullen]

Originally Posted by rcooke

.

Just to bring you up to date NACHI and CMI are not the same association and are further from each other then CAHPI and the NAtional Certification.

.... Cookie

Except that the same fellow makes all the decisions and is the prime contact for both entities. (NACHI & CMI)

Bill Mullen

[George A. H. Luck]

Bill, it was an honest question termed as a little joke at Roy's expense. If you can't take a joke to hell with you.

[Bill Mullen]

Originally Posted by gluck

Bill, it was an honest question termed as a little joke at Roy's expense. If you can't take a joke to hell with you.

George:

With the barrage of insults and accusations I receive from some on this forum, the space between jokes and insults is pretty blurred and I am sorry if I misread it. (It seems Raymond saw it the same way I did)

I'm certainly not headed to heaven anyway, so your comment above is likely deserved.

I will answer your question. Until the end of this year, you need 750 'points' which are assigned for many things including courses, seminars, experience, etc. I don't have the individual breakdown handy since I don't participate in that part of the program. I have seen it and it is quite comprehensive. The National Certification Council works with the formula which was devised by the indpeendent professional consultants, based on similar models in use in other industries. On Jan 1, 2008 the level goes to 850.

If I remember correctly, (and I could be out a few here and there) it's broken into three categories, with each having a maximum number of points available.
1) Background: 50 points for each recognized degree, diploma, designation etc. up to 250 points. You can also get 25 to 50 points for being a building contractor or other recognized trade (with proof) There are others too but I can't remember them all.
2) Inspections done: One point per full inspection to a maximum of 500
3) Education: 2 to 3 points per course hour and 4 points for each hour of field training. (mentoring) This also has a maximum of 500 points.

So you see, any combination can get you 750 points. On the surface it looks like you could get the maximum for 1 & 3 and get certified without any inspections. Not so. You have to have at least 150 inspections to qualify and you must have been inspecting for at least one year. After all this you have the pesky but necessary TIPR.

I hope that helps.

Bill Mullen