What should be our new membership requirement?

1

John Bowman and I and others have been trying to increase the membership requirements at NACHI for 2007.

We’ve boiled it down to two options (but we don’t want to adopt both):

  1. Increase the number of continuing education hours per year from 24 to 30 (this probably isn’t as much of a burden as it seems since there are so many more classroom, hands-on, online, and home study courses available these days).

or

  1. Require that members take at least one advanced course or inspection-related course outside the SOP (such as mold, radon, code, engineering, architechture, advanced electrical, thermal imaging, etc).

Which one shall it be?

2

Are the choices limited to only those two options, Nick?

24 per year is already two to four times more than what most licensed states (and all other associations) require. An increase of this sort might appear more to favor the education provider than the end user.

Have you looked at other areas of refinement?

3

I’m leaning toward #2.

4

Jim: We did but we’re open to suggestions. We didn’t just want to make it harder for the sake of making it harder. We want meaningfulness.

5

I like # 2 myself…lol…:slight_smile:

6

Any other ideas? Feel free to think outside the box.

7

John Bowman and I have been banging this around for a while and came up with some others we didn’t like, but we can rethink them. One was Convention attendance within the first 3 years but it is hard for many of our members to get away, so we dumped that idea.

We want to add something meaningful.

8

One was to either take or go on an inspection with another inspector. A ride-a-long in other words.

9

I agree with that one and they should have to do a report on it

10

I can think of a few that would cost little in time, money and effort…yet still enhance the membership of the association.

For instance, each member could be required to initiate or participate in a minimum of one community volunteer project per year. 9500 random acts of NACHI kindness throughout the land could not hurt anyone’s reputation and business…

11

You could make the CE hours 100 and it won’t make any difference until it is actually enforced. (yes I have mine)

The findaninspector thing should show the public who is really a member and who is not really a member.

12

And I’m leaning toward #1.

13

Heck…bring em BOTH…they both are doable…:slight_smile:

14

#2 is the only meaningful, enforceable, and non-subjective policy enhancement possible.

It will be meaningful, easily obtainable, and not cause any hardship for inspectors. it also allows individuals to choose subjec the matter they want to enhance their own personal knowledge of, or allows them to choose ancillary service knowledge based on their individual markets.

Go for # 2. Defenseable. Non-arbitrary. Meaningful.

15

#2 helps support the more advanced than Inspection 101 offerings as well.

16

Joe,

How is #1 not all of these? Please expand…

17

Ahh…I resent that remark…lol…not all 101 renderings are basic…just a name used to convey the message of the instruction…some class are FAR from basic just because they say 101 behind them…:wink:

18

True…But, advanced is limited at this point. In addition any prudent inspector that has accomplished all of the basics would automatically strive for the advanced in completion of #1. #1 would be inclusive of both basic and advanced training which is beneficial to all the membership.

19

http://www.home-inspect.com/courses/advancedce.asp

http://www.certifiedmasterinspector.org/cmi/schools.htm

20

I personally like the idea of the community volunteer project - 1 per year. It benefits everyone involved, the inspector AND NACHI, and the community. Plus, it’s something meaningful…instead of 1 more class.