National Certification Authority NCA Elections Reminder

[rwand1]

This is just a reminder for 'Holders' to get their vote in before the deadline.

Voting Closes December 7th, 2007

Candidates

C. Brett Bernier

Wayne Christopher

Brian Crewe

Peter Elliott

Floyd Gage

Claude Lawrenson

I had one question, how can Claude run for a committee position if he is already the NCA Chair?

Cheers,

[Claude Lawrenson]

Astute observation - first I was "selected" half way into the NCA mandate. It is reasonably easy to say - my position expires at the close of the December NCA meeting and another member can be selected for the position of chair, and I am out the door.

My decision to run was based on a number of good reasons. But primarily it is based on my conviction to assure that the NCP -national certification program still needs a bit more work and some fine tuning in the "governance" area, as well as "representation" of inspectors, representing the national characteristics expected within all of the home inspection sector.

[rwand1]

Thanks Claude,

Now that it has become very apparent OAHI has improperly applied the designation of RHI does this create any concerns with National Certification?

Thanks,

[Claude Lawrenson]

Personally, I will leave that to the lawyers to decide and get rich on!

Any organization providing false or misleading information can present a real dilemma. So with that stated - I am not an expert on the law or procedures of whether the "Bill" passed trumps the association by-laws or matters of which holds precedence. My belief was based on that one earns the designation, the same way that one earns the national certificate holder status, or CMI designation, etc. Perhaps I am wrong - but as I stated - I am not a legal expert on such an argument.

On the other side, National Certification is also about compliance along with common sense and agreement. Those that bend or break the rules can also be dealt with in due course. If policy or bylaws indicate that one can loose such a status, than perhaps that is the difference.

To me the "Bill" was about a named title/designation use in Ontario. It was not about the rules or procedures required to obtain that title.

Again - its simply my personal opinion.

[rwand1]

Claude

I have information that suggests the OAHI BOE/AR are operating outside the bylaws and people are taking actions which are not supported by the bylaws.

I would file a complaint with OAHI DPPC but I know that committee is a reincarnate of the BOD and the BOE/AR and it won't go anywhere. If members are arbitrarily being reviewed to a policy or standard that is not valid, there are very serious ramifications as you can well appreciate.

I also understand that OAHI through its board is peeved that Nachi members have been given the same opportunities as OAHI members to National Certification. It seems some can't swallow that fact.

Cheers,

[bmullen1]

Originally Posted by rwand1

Claude

I also understand that OAHI through its board is peeved that Nachi members have been given the same opportunities as OAHI members to National Certification. It seems some can't swallow that fact.

Cheers,

Some members of OAHI and some members on the Board feel that the National Certification Program should only be available to members of CAHPI associations, since they have invested a lot of time and money into it. This feeling does not exist only in Ontario. I have made many speeches and presentations across Canada over the past two years and that has been a sore point in all provinces

However, the NCP was created to give all Canadian Home Inspectors an equal opportunity to be tested and certified to a cross-Canada level of competence and ability. Claude and I have never waivered about this fact despite much loud opposition. Actually the derision and anger directed at us on the NACHI forum is child's play compared with what we have endured elsewhere while trying to defend everyone's rights.

The bottom line is that the provincial associations do not control the program. The NCA is in charge of it and through the many checks and balances that we insisted on during the Pilot Project, it must remain fair to all.

As far as OAHI and whether or not their RHI is valid or not, that has nothing to do with the NCP. If anything, the questions about the RHI enhance the value of the National Certificate designation in Ontario.

Bill Mullen

[bmullen1]

Originally Posted by rwand1

Thanks Claude,

Now that it has become very apparent OAHI has improperly applied the designation of RHI does this create any concerns with National Certification?

Thanks,

None. The NCP is not connected to the RHI in any way. They are two distinct credentials from two distinct juridictions.

Bill Mullen

[rwand1]

Those members who think that should wake up and smell the coffee. The minute taxpayers money was used, those contentions became moot.

Cheers,

[bmullen1]

Originally Posted by rwand1

Those members who think that should wake up and smell the coffee. The minute taxpayers money was used, those contentions became moot.

Cheers,

BINGO !!!!!

I have no idea why this concept is so difficult for some people to understand.

Bill Mullen

[rwand1]

Camp
Coterie
Ingroup
Inner circle
pack
clique

[George A. H. Luck]

"However, the NCP was created to give all Canadian Home Inspectors an equal opportunity to be tested and certified to a cross-Canada level of competence and ability."

With the unfare fee structure that non-CAHPI members must endure this statement is clearly untrue.

[rwand1]

George I think its being worked on from what I am hearing from someone out west.

[bmullen1]

Originally Posted by gluck

"However, the NCP was created to give all Canadian Home Inspectors an equal opportunity to be tested and certified to a cross-Canada level of competence and ability."

With the unfare fee structure that non-CAHPI members must endure this statement is clearly untrue.

The fee structure is very fair when you consider the extra administrative work involved in processing someone who is not from an association that has signed an equivalency agreement with the NCA.

The opportunity for NACHI members to pay the same as CAHPI members is available and has been offered many times. Why should other applicants subsidize the additional costs incurred to process and test NACHI applicants?

Raymond, whoever told you that is not correct.

Bill Mullen

[Mario A. Kyriacou, CHI]

It would be nice if it was Bill!!! Make it happen!!

[bmullen1]

Originally Posted by mkyriacou

It would be nice if it was Bill!!! Make it happen!!

Mario:

If it costs XXX dollars to review, process, test and certify one person but

it costs XXX plus YYY dollars to do the same for a second person, why should they both pay the same?

Where will the extra money come from?

The secret is to reduce the work involved for the NCA by working together and getting an Equivalency agreement between the two associations.

I would love to see NACHI members pay the lower rates, but the costs are now much higher for their processing so more money is needed.

Here's a scenario:

If I apply as a member of CAHPI Ontario, the NCA can merely contact CAHPI Ontario and verify that I have satisfied their requirements and they can confirm the courses that I have taken. CAHPI Ontario has signed an Equivalency Agreement that says they verify my credentials. The NCA has hired independent consultants who have verified the requirements for CAHPI Ontario because CAHPI Ontario applied for an Equivalency evaluation.

Processing my application is very simple for the NCA.

If you apply, there is no way for the NCA to easily verify any of your educational background or experience because you do not belong to a group which has successfully submitted their application for an Equivalency evaluation. If you send in a list of courses, etc., the NCA has to verify each one. The adminisitrative burden is enormous, therefore much more costly.

This type of equivalency is done all the time by educators. For instance, if the University of Toronto gets an application from a student at the University of Waterloo, they would refer to a previous equivalency agreement between the two universities so that U of T can be sure the courses the individual took at the U of W covered the requirements to get into U of T.

Someone has to bend on this and as long as the true costs are more, I don't see how reductions are possible.

Bill Mullen