State Licensing Shot Down Again!

Here's a George Will collumn on state licenses.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/in-arizona-nibbling-away-at-free-enterprise/2011/09/22/gIQA9B2erK_story.html

Roofguy;

Those are local bldg. official sqaubles...Heck, I had an inspector make a false police report one time, that I had threatened him....I was livid...sitting there in that courtroom berrated by the judge...the whole time my attorney glaring at me - to keep my blank'n mouth shut! That was extremely trying....I feel for you.

poop happens....From 1983 - 1992 I had one P.O.S. customer complain to the CSLB....Yes, it was unjust & a bunch of BS & it took up some otherwise productive time & energy....it happens....very minuscule risk for the benefits involved.

Twill;....AMEN!

The IRS could shut down most operations on a whim and do it legally too. And collect some taxes in place of what the dumbie legals (us) are paying too.

Has not happened, and never will. What licensing aspect can we expect to ever be enforced, when the government is too lazy to collect the E-Z money that could be easily handed over to them now if they'd only enforced one or two basic rules (LAWS)?

Enforcing those 2 laws alone would solve most every single licensing issue (No more E-Z money.....would chase out the criminal & un qualified elements)

Making the path of least resistance even easier for the lazy bureaucrats is only going to want to make it even easier for the lazy bureaucrats...and easier.....and easier.

Eventually they'd need to get out of bed and collect a paycheck, and that is where the resistance comes, I guess :S

TomB Said: lanny----Theres an example of some in-efficiency, huh?....In Calif.;, when a consumer makes a complaint, it MUST be resolved, otherwise, the licesnse is suspended until such time the issue is resolved....No license = no worky....Quite the incentive.

Yeah that's all well and good until it is YOUR turn to have your license suspended and your very livelihood and million dollar investment in your roofing operation, and the livelihood off all of your employees, put at the emotional whim of a bureaucrat who you've pissed off at some point in time for not showing him the level of respect he thinks he deserves. You think that only happens to contractors who deserve it?

That very thing happened to us in Brownfield, Texas in 1985. We were working the hailstorm because it's a town we have always worked, just 35 miles from our office. 50 other roofers were also working the storm. The local building inspector, a guy my dad tangled with previously on a totally unrelated situation where my dad made the mistake of proving him wrong and making him look stupid, red flagged the job we were on. Shut us down! He said that the poly fabric we were using had to have labels and had to meet Class-A fire ratings. We insisted the City Manager call an emergency city council meeting, and explained that, yeah the Ply IV felt that every other roofer was using in town had the labels, but that the recover method of application they were using did not qualify for a Class-A rating either. We told them that if they're gonna shut us down, they darn well better shut down every other BUR roofer in town who isn't installing Class-A rated roofs. They made a few calls to some roofing manufacturers and found out we were right. One councilman scolded the inspector, and scarcastically asked him: "Why is it we're here right now? Why aren't these roofers (us) on their roof working right now? Leave these people alone."

Yes, I know, licensing and codes are 2 different entities. However, they're the same principle. The principle is that inviting a new level of bureaucracy and regulation/expense for the masses, to protect a few consumers, and so that some local roofers don't have to work so hard to compete, is using a sledge hammer to drive a tack.

lanny----There's an example of some in-efficiency, huh?....In Calif.;, when a consumer makes a complaint, it MUST be resolved, otherwise, the licesnse is suspended until such time the issue is resolved....No license = no worky....Quite the incentive.

Tom wrote: With the notion of licensing, comes effective licensing....As far as I can glean, Utah, Nevada, California, Washington, Arizona & possibly New Mexico & Oregon(?), are the only states that have in-place anything that would resemble any sort of effective licensing.

And then Tom wrote: I do understand Florida had some mighty crazy/over-kill bldg. code ammendments....????

So, what I see here is in the top comment you are making the case that, not only does Colorado need licensing, but then that won't be enough because they will also need "effective" licensing so that it's easier to punish/control roofers.

And then in the next comment you said that Florida has some "crazy/over-kill" building codes. Don't you see a connection between the two? Tell me what state/local/federal entity you know of that is in the habit of being reasonable and just going as far as needed in their codes and enforcement. It doesn't happen. These entities have to continually grow and expand to justify their existance. Ever see a code book get smaller from one version to the next?

You see this at the DMV every time you go to get tags for a vehicle or registration. You have very low functioning people, given a little authority, and they abuse it. More often than not they abuse it. I bought a towable manlift last week and went to the DMV to get new tags and register it. As I live in another town, and having experience with the flunkies at the DMV, I called ahead to see exactly what they needed me to bring. After a morning of jumping through hoops getting their applications faxed and filled out, I headed to the DMV. When I got there and handed them my stack of documents, the lady went to another lady, then another, and before you know it there were 3 ladies standing in front of me trying their hardest to find some reason, any reason, to not give me the tag. They huddled and mumbled that they didn't know if they can accept a faxed copy of a notarized document. I heard and interupted that their boss at another location told me I could bring a faxed copy. Then they said I'd need an invoice from United Rental, the company who sold the lift to someone else...in 2001! I quickly explained again that their boss approved that. After 30 minutes of those clowns engaging in mindless obstructionism, they finally decided there was nothing else they could do and it looked like they're gonna have to give me the tag. Grudgingly, as though they failed in their job to deny me a tag without wasting the entire day.

If you want people like that making you jump though hoops like a circus poodle, be my guest. Me, I don't want some doofus government employee, whose most critical job of the day is deciding whether to buy White Out by the pint or the quart, telling me when and how I can install a roof.

It's not about whether or not some new organization might make things better for some people in a few instances. It is about surrendering more and more liberty to government and their addiction to over-regulation. The fact that more people are willing to encourage more encroachments on our liberty, is exactly how we got in this mess to begin with.

---CIAK...In the state of Washington if a complaint is filed against a contractor exactly NOTHING will happen. As long as the contractor is licensed and NOT breaking any laws the state will do nothing. ---It is not against the law to give bad service, do shoddy work or insult the customer. The customer must take you to civil court to collect any damages. Contractors do get sued every now and then for legitimate and illegitimate reasons. The customer has to be really upset to file a lawsuit against you. But this has nothing to do with the state or being licensed. ---The state licensing requirement of carrying insurance protects the yyou and the customer. If something goes wrong and you end up in court your insurance carrier will defend you and settle. Your insurance rates will skyrocket and possibly put you out of business but again the state is not involved. Lanny

....I forgot about Florida....However, isn't what you speak of; More of code enforcement?....Not so much the licensing aspect?....Two copmpletely different things....I do understand Florida had some mighty crazy/over-kill bldg. code ammendments....????

Oh, I'm right there with ya CIAK.....I mostly agree...In the bigger sense of it all....if that makes any sense.... :S

I Should be manufacturing string..... every federal dollar has a string attached to it.

This is what happens in the highly regulated State of Florida Let me try to make it clear. What happens in a licensed state when a complaint is filed against a licensed contractor. It does and will happen. Frivolous and wrongful complaints. You the contractor will have your rights stomped on fined and who knows what, Perhaps Jail. Here is why........... Unchecked, the nature of the proceedings, combined with the prohibitive time and expense associated with enforcement of a licensee's rights ( you the contractor), allows boards and the DBPR to proceed virtually unfettered by the constraints of the law. The results can be disastrous for the regulated individual or business entity. It does and will happen. Think about it before you leap on this band wagon.... rooting for a more aggressive police state? Do the cops jackbooted thugs really need to push a man to the ground to cuff him? It could and might be you .Be careful of what you wish for: you could be next. Then your kids and grandkids. Fight oppression while you still can. Watch what you wish for it may come back on you 10 times.IMO B) :) :) B) Deep Down In Florida Where The Sun Shines Damn Near Every Day

With the notion of licensing, comes effective licensing....As far as I can glean, Utah, Nevada, California, Washington, Arizona & possibly New Mexico & Oregon(?), are the only states that have in-place anything that would resemble any sort of effective licensing.

Colorado has made attempts, but goes about it in unecessary, complicated ways....It's talked/analyzed to death, further complicated to unbelievable messures, then is quite easily defeated...probably due to a combination of unecessary complexity & coruptive behavior.

I sat on a board in the early 90's, in Colorado....I eventually resigned, due to the fact it just got ridiculous with all the talk/BS....I realized the people on this "board" were primarilly made up of old, very well established, roofing co.s, along with the "hail-chaser" types....the "good ol' boys" & the "shysters", add to that, the then influence, of the big home bldrs,....it was an absolute joke & doomed from the git-go.

That being said...At least some knid of licencing is better than none & a start in the right direction....

Personaly, I doubt there'll ever be any signifigant contractor licensing in other states, as the good ol' boys are comfortable where their at and the shyster/quick/big $ talks....the majority of the rest, are simply sheeples....#7 or 8(?)

Licensing is of course meant to monitor contractors, which to some point is a good thing. The idea is if a contractor has a valid state license they then carry proper insurances and with inspections performed will do a good job. The truth to that last statement is this... Anybody with a good background can pay $300 to take a class in MN on how to be a general contractor. $100 for two tests, $1,000 or less for a $300K insurance policy, and $690 and you just got a 2 year license!!! That being said most anybody with a couple grand can get a license in MN.

The truth is any fast talking "contractor" can talk a homeowner into pulling a permit or a licensed contractor for that matter. What's worse? they could just say they are another licensed contractor and pull the premit, seen and heard it done several times. Know 3 people that had that done to their license.

Personaly have no problem pulling permits in MN. Minneapolis and St. Paul allow me to pull permits without having to go downtown. Some rural areas don't require permits also.

What I don't like? One city charges $30 to put a roof on a $1,000,000 house while another city charges $300 to put a roof on a $100,000 house.

;)

---In Washington state you must get contractor's license. To get one you must have proof of liability insurance, 12k bond, and pay the license fee of around $100. I think we are now on a 2 year renewal cycle. No test or competancy requirement. ---Insurance for roofer's is expensive. ---There is always the problem of unlicensed roofers who have less overhead to pay for. However, It is a crime to advertise as a contractor and not be licensed. Regulators can just see your ad and check your licensing status online (as can any customer) and nail you for being unlicensed. So if you are unlicensed you have to work underground with no advertising and that limits how much you can really compete with the licensed roofing community. And by the way all advertising by law must include your state contractor's license number in the ad. ---I am by principle against big gov't. However, minimum laws and requirements are acceptable to me. These include, driver's licenses, auto licenses, marriage licenses, corporation rules & regs, business licenses and so forth. I don't mind miniumum requirements that maintain a level of responsibility and accountability. Lanny