National Occupational Standards Review

[Bill Mullen]

We recently sent out an invitation to National Certificate Holders to volunteer to be on the NOS Review Focus Group. (NOS = National Occupational Standards) The selection committee will soon be deciding on the participants, but I invite anyone, whether you are a 'Holder' or not, to send me your name ASAP to bmullen@ebtech.net. Here's the text of the invitation message:

Several years ago, as part of the National Initiative for Canadian Home Inspectors, the National Occupational Standards were created. The NOS were the culmination of hundreds of hours of hard work by many volunteers from all sectors of the Canadian Home Inspection industry including people within CAHI organizations and outside.
The NOS document defines the ‘basket’ of skills, knowledge and experience that competent home and property inspectors should have, and is the standard on which certification and accreditation are based.
As with many documents, the NOS needs to be reviewed on a regular basis and improved and updated to reflect industry and housing changes, and this review is about to begin. In order to provide the Canadian Home and Property Inspection industry with as much credibility as possible, the NOS review process will follow established standards for this type of work. CAHPI and its consultants intend to use the ‘DACUM’ approach as per Canadian Vocational Association guidelines.
CAHPI will hopefully be scheduling a DACUM session facilitated by its consultants in Ottawa sometime during the last two weeks in February, 2008. We will bring together 7 to 10 subject matter experts (experienced and respected home inspectors) from across Canada for two intense days of discussion. Following the DACUM session, a DRAFT Revised NOS will be widely distributed to Home and Property inspectors across Canada for validation in the form of a survey. The information gathered through the validation survey will be used to create the FINAL Revised NOS.
We need some volunteers who are willing to spend two long, arduous days with seven to ten of their peers. There is no financial compensation although reasonable expenses will be covered if pre-approved. (ie: Air fare, hotel, meals, etc.) Since the NOS is part of the National Initiative, the obvious group to help with the review would be those who are currently National Certificate Holders. However, no willing, experienced and knowledgeable practitioners will be disqualified automatically.
Best regards

Bill Mullen RHI
#NCA00001
NOS Review Chair

[George A. H. Luck]

"However, no willing, experienced and knowledgeable practitioners will be disqualified automatically."

It will be interesting to see how many "experienced and knowledgeable practioners" who are also non-members actuallly make the cut.

[Bill Mullen]

Originally Posted by gluck

"However, no willing, experienced and knowledgeable practitioners will be disqualified automatically."

It will be interesting to see how many "experienced and knowledgeable practioners" who are also non-members actuallly make the cut.

Indeed it will, George. You can't be chosen if you don't offer your name. The selections will not be made by members of CAHPI. The Management Consultants conducting the review will decide who participates and they want a broad cross-section of people from all areas and all philosophies.

I posted this to advise people it was happening, not to start some silly argument.

Bill Mullen

[William R. DeVries, CMHI]

Well I can always visit some one in Ottawa and stop in and help them out if I have to... LOL

[George A. H. Luck]

I'm not starting a "silly argument" Bill. But then it is not surprising that you would react in a negative manner to a legitimate question, is it.

[Bill Mullen]

Originally Posted by gluck

I'm not starting a "silly argument" Bill. But then it is not surprising that you would react in a negative manner to a legitimate question, is it.

I guess I'm just not smart enough for you, George. I'm so dumb I can't even see a question in that message of yours, let alone a legitimate one.

Could someone please show me where I have gone wrong and not seen a question?

There must be a question because George says there's one, right?? I'd hate to be accused of not answering a question, especially a 'legitimate' one, but darn it, I just can't find it.

Sorry, George, you'll have to ask your 'legitimate' question of someone who can read better than I can.

Why not put your name in the hat, George? I would love to see just how much you really know (or don't know) about this business. I'll even put in a good word for you to the selection committee.

Bill Mullen

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by gluck

It will be interesting to see how many "experienced and knowledgeable practioners" who are also non-members actuallly make the cut.

I agree George but unfortunately we seldom find out much about the NCA except how great it is going to be .
...Cookie
For Bill this is not a question just a True statement.

[George A. H. Luck]

Bill, I have never said that you are stupid, no matter how tempted or how much corroborating evidence you supply. The quesiton is implied as in "How many 'experienced and knowledgeable practitioners' . . . . . ?"

"I guess I'm just not smart enough for you, George. I'm so dumb I can't even see a question in that message of yours, let alone a legitimate one." You said it Bill. Not me.

[Bill Mullen]

Originally Posted by gluck

Bill, I have never said that you are stupid, no matter how tempted or how much corroborating evidence you supply. The quesiton is implied as in "How many 'experienced and knowledgeable practitioners' . . . . . ?"

"I guess I'm just not smart enough for you, George. I'm so dumb I can't even see a question in that message of yours, let alone a legitimate one." You said it Bill. Not me.

Keep the insults coming, George. I guess that's all you've got.

Or do the insults 'imply' something else?.(See, that's a question) It seems we can't take literally what you write..........we have to be able to interpret your implication.

Come on George, sign up for the 'review' and prove once and for all just how knowledgeable you really are. We need smart guys like you.

Bill Mullen

[George A. H. Luck]

Pretty weak Bill. But it appears that school yard taunts are all you have.

"We need smart guys like you." You certainly do. It would help to make up for an obvious deficit. However I will never lend my good name to legitimize any organization with which you are connected.

[Bill Mullen]

Originally Posted by gluck

Pretty weak Bill. But it appears that school yard taunts are all you have.

"We need smart guys like you." You certainly do. It would help to make up for an obvious deficit. However I will never lend my good name to legitimize any organization with which you are connected.

Shucks !!

I guess this means you won't buy me a beer when I'm visiting your area next week.

I'm visiting folks for fun and business in Brighton, Kingston and Ottawa but I'll scratch you off my list.

Bill Mullen

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by bmullen

Shucks !!

I guess this means you won't buy me a beer when I'm visiting your area next week.

I'm visiting folks for fun and business in Brighton, Kingston and Ottawa but I'll scratch you off my list.

Bill Mullen

Bill You have made about 600~ posts in your name on the NACHI site most have been pushing CAHPI and the National Certification .
http://www.bluewaterhomeinspection.com/profile.htm
One of the stipulations of being a NACHI member is to have the InterNACHI Logo as big as other associations logo on your Web site .
I do not see this or a NACHI logo on your web site .
Do you feel you should follow the NACHI rules ?.
You most certainly have made use of our facilities to push your agenda.
You have and continue to insult fee paying members and our great association.
We have welcomed you into our home with open arms and allowed you Cart Blanch when you did not even post on your Canuk list that NACHI was giving a free booth to CAHPI and OAHI and allowing all CAHPI members to attend the NACHI Toronto conference at NACHI members rates.
Question's for Bill
Do you think that you have treated NACHI and its members fairly ?
.

...Cookie

[Bill Mullen]

Good morning, Roy:

I will be in Brighton next Sunday visiting my Aunt/Godmother who lives on Hope Street in Brighton.

Will you be home if a fellow wanted to drop by for a friendly visit?

Bill Mullen

[rwand1]

He may not have the Nachi logo, but I think Bill needs to remove the "What is a RHI?" None of the claims stated are verifiable now that OAHI has and is in breach of its own bylaws by the exmplary actions of the BOE/AR, DPPC, BOD, By-law Committee!

[Bill Mullen]

Originally Posted by rwand1

He may not have the Nachi logo, but I think Bill needs to remove the "What is a RHI?" None of the claims stated are verifiable now that OAHI has and is in breach of its own bylaws by the exmplary actions of the BOE/AR, DPPC, BOD, By-law Committee!

If you look closely at my website you'll see the information is more than two years old. I have a web guy redoing a brand new site but I haven't had time to get the content gathered for him. If it was current, I would certainly have my National Certification mentioned but even that is missing.

Hopefully the new website will launch early in the New Year and it will be nothing like the old one. I'm sure it won't please everyone, but it will be an improvement. BTW, Roy, I have discussed this situation with Lisa from NACHI and she has been very gracious.

As far as the RHI, some of the rules around it might not be valid, but nobody can deny it is an earned and verified credential, so I am proud to show it off. I earned it and even if the designation is somewhat tarnished it has value.

Bill Mullen