08-21-2013, 09:16 AM
As one who saw a major house renovation budget balloon hugely when the GC discovered zip cord (lamp wire) behind the wall board, along with "studs" constructed of three-deep, short 2x4 scraps nailed together, I really appreciate professional attention to electrical and plumbing construction. I would never want anyone to inherit the mess we found in that 20 year old house in a good neighborhood in the south Bay area. So I support the idea that licensed professionals are required to perform and be accountable for their work in these areas.
But this idea that it's OK to have a licensed professional simply "sign off" for anyone on an electrical or plumbing job is irresponsible. Not that clever and experienced handy persons (such as the sterling folk on this forum) can't do a good job, but it's usually not you we should be worried about. To borrow a term from Rob, it's the Elmer Fudds that we're worried about. What will a "coupla hundred" (as suggested) really buy if it is somehow a generally accepted practice to buy a professional's signature? If evading a legal requirement is just fine, would you totally believe the evading professional will do a great job of supervision? Will they check everything? Anything? Will someone down the line get zip cord in their walls because a couple hundred was good enough for a signature? Not that Elmer Fudds can't make a real mess even using the correct materials.
Or look at it from the view of the electrical or plumbing professional being offered a few hundred dollars for their signature. If they are actually trying to make a living in their profession, you are asking them to work for nearly nothing compared to the complete installation. How is that attractive to a working person? Maybe if they are busy and a little short on ethics, maybe they don't care. Just collect the money and sign off, let someone else worry about hidden problems. Maybe if they are ready to go to work, you have just insulted them big time. You are saying a couple of hundred is only what they are worth? How do you feed a family on a couple of hundred?
And the union bashing that seems to be in fashion gets tiresome. At base a union wants what most any working person wants, a full time job with a reasonable wage under decent working conditions. Company management often seems opposed to those goals. Exorbitant wage demands? Real wages for average incomes, inflation adjusted, have been flat to sinking for at least the last twenty years while the upper end of wealth has been growing dramatically for that period. It's not the unions or average working person who has been making out like bandits financially and wealth inequality is a national topic now.
So the unions push for code rules that require licensed (state-licensed, not union) professionals to perform electrical and plumbing construction, as is true in many jurisdictions. What's wrong with that? That's the union's job: to improve the working conditions for their members. But you don't have to be a union member to benefit from this, just as you don't have to be a union member to benefit from wage increases are negotiated on your behalf by an employee's union. Perhaps maybe even some political pressure came from non-union electricians and plumbers who might feel they should have a voice also? And sorry, anecdotes about bad experiences with incompetent or fraudulent union members or other so-called professionals doesn't really count. Unless you've been very lucky you've had experience with incompetence or fraud in the upper level of professionals, the doctors, lawyers, and, I'm sad to say, even in engineers. Big corporations, small governments and energetic entrepreneurs and everything in between have their ethical and organizational problems. How they are regulated makes all the difference.
What we need to do as individuals is to be very careful in who we employ to do our construction and pay close attention to what they do all along the way. Hopefully with these requirements the county has raised the bar on who gets into the pool of people who do this work so as employers we will start with a better sort than we would have otherwise. If not, you have a clear avenue to complain. Try complaining to Exxon.
But this idea that it's OK to have a licensed professional simply "sign off" for anyone on an electrical or plumbing job is irresponsible. Not that clever and experienced handy persons (such as the sterling folk on this forum) can't do a good job, but it's usually not you we should be worried about. To borrow a term from Rob, it's the Elmer Fudds that we're worried about. What will a "coupla hundred" (as suggested) really buy if it is somehow a generally accepted practice to buy a professional's signature? If evading a legal requirement is just fine, would you totally believe the evading professional will do a great job of supervision? Will they check everything? Anything? Will someone down the line get zip cord in their walls because a couple hundred was good enough for a signature? Not that Elmer Fudds can't make a real mess even using the correct materials.
Or look at it from the view of the electrical or plumbing professional being offered a few hundred dollars for their signature. If they are actually trying to make a living in their profession, you are asking them to work for nearly nothing compared to the complete installation. How is that attractive to a working person? Maybe if they are busy and a little short on ethics, maybe they don't care. Just collect the money and sign off, let someone else worry about hidden problems. Maybe if they are ready to go to work, you have just insulted them big time. You are saying a couple of hundred is only what they are worth? How do you feed a family on a couple of hundred?
And the union bashing that seems to be in fashion gets tiresome. At base a union wants what most any working person wants, a full time job with a reasonable wage under decent working conditions. Company management often seems opposed to those goals. Exorbitant wage demands? Real wages for average incomes, inflation adjusted, have been flat to sinking for at least the last twenty years while the upper end of wealth has been growing dramatically for that period. It's not the unions or average working person who has been making out like bandits financially and wealth inequality is a national topic now.
So the unions push for code rules that require licensed (state-licensed, not union) professionals to perform electrical and plumbing construction, as is true in many jurisdictions. What's wrong with that? That's the union's job: to improve the working conditions for their members. But you don't have to be a union member to benefit from this, just as you don't have to be a union member to benefit from wage increases are negotiated on your behalf by an employee's union. Perhaps maybe even some political pressure came from non-union electricians and plumbers who might feel they should have a voice also? And sorry, anecdotes about bad experiences with incompetent or fraudulent union members or other so-called professionals doesn't really count. Unless you've been very lucky you've had experience with incompetence or fraud in the upper level of professionals, the doctors, lawyers, and, I'm sad to say, even in engineers. Big corporations, small governments and energetic entrepreneurs and everything in between have their ethical and organizational problems. How they are regulated makes all the difference.
What we need to do as individuals is to be very careful in who we employ to do our construction and pay close attention to what they do all along the way. Hopefully with these requirements the county has raised the bar on who gets into the pool of people who do this work so as employers we will start with a better sort than we would have otherwise. If not, you have a clear avenue to complain. Try complaining to Exxon.