# misconceptions



## OldSchool (Jan 30, 2010)

There seems to be misunderstanding as what a license is for ...or the purpose of licensing.

Licensing is to control or regulate a person in certain activities.

It is a form of permission allowing you to do a certain activity....

Plumbing license is to allow you to perform plumbing activities or duties.
There is many forms of licensing such as franchises, drivers license.. trade activities, fishing, hunting.

After taking certain courses or meeting certain criteria then a license may be granted by the license agency.

It more or less forms a contract between you and the licensing agency or entity.

This is were the problem is.. what do you do against someone with out a license.... You can not revoke what they do not have. The alternate is fining, charging with offence or suing for infringement.

As professionals in our field ... there needs to be an organization that has the ability to oversee such offences.

The law society and health agencies have organizations that report or catch offending unlicensed offenders.

Things will never change until we have an agency of our own.


----------



## OldSchool (Jan 30, 2010)

Common misconceptions like this is an example



bjones said:


> That's exactly what I'm insinuating. What do you mean, right is right, wrong is wrong?
> 
> Licensing is about protecting the health and safety of the public, period.
> 
> ...


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

Perhaps it works differently in Canada than in the USA....

A license in the USA is proof (in theory any way) that you have had the experience and training necessary to do the job as well as the necessary insurances.

Don't know how it works in Canada, but that's how it's (suppose too) work here.


----------



## OldSchool (Jan 30, 2010)

Protech said:


> Perhaps it works differently in Canada than in the USA....
> 
> A license in the USA is proof (in theory any way) that you have had the experience and training necessary to do the job as well as the necessary insurances.
> 
> Don't know how it works in Canada, but that's how it's (suppose too) work here.


It is the same in both USA and Canada

Maybe you missed were I wrote this part... I will high lite it in red



OldSchool said:


> There seems to be misunderstanding as what a license is for ...or the purpose of licensing.
> 
> Licensing is to control or regulate a person in certain activities.
> 
> ...


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

My bad. I haven't had my tea yet this morning :sleeping:


----------



## OldSchool (Jan 30, 2010)

Protech said:


> Perhaps it works differently in Canada than in the USA....
> 
> A license in the USA is proof (in theory any way) that you have had the experience and training necessary to do the job as well as the necessary insurances.
> 
> Don't know how it works in Canada, but that's how it's (suppose too) work here.


Proof of insurance is not need for a license... other than a buisness license.... or maybe a franchise... this would be a condition of a contract.

Like I said a License is a contract that you agree to follow the terms and conditions set out in a contract. This is why you can lose your license if you breach the contract.


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

It is here. By law we must keep minimum levels of GL insurance while our licenses are active.

Enforcement is another thing though......



OldSchool said:


> *Proof of insurance* is not need for a license... other than a buisness license.... or maybe a franchise... this would be a condition of a contract.
> 
> Like I said a License is a contract that you agree to follow the terms and conditions set out in a contract. This why you can lose your license if you breach the contract.


----------



## LEAD INGOT (Jul 15, 2009)

And if they started collecting fines and penalties from unlicensed people, maybe our license fees could go down. Yeah, and monkeys might fly out of my butt.


----------



## OldSchool (Jan 30, 2010)

Protech said:


> It is here. By law we must keep minimum levels of GL insurance while our licenses are active.
> 
> Enforcement is another thing though......


So you are saying you need insurance for your plumbing license or for your buisness license


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

Both.

In order to keep a master plumbing license aka plumbing contractor license on "active status" (can pull permits, advertise etc) you must keep your insurance and WC active. Trouble is, enforcement is pretty slack.

If you don't want to keep your insurance, you must put your license on "inactive". You still have to go to continuing education and pay to keep it renewed though.

That’s how it works in Florida. Each state is different and the rules vary allot.


----------



## OldSchool (Jan 30, 2010)

A master License is so you can own a buisness and get a buisness license. yes the condtion of contract with city to do buisness within that city requires an insurance policy.

But a journeyman does not have to have insurance unless he was in buisness.

More or less you are making it sound like your workers (journeyman) would have to have each there own insurance policy..


----------



## user2090 (Sep 26, 2009)

Oldschool you have done a great job yet again of adding clarity to what seems to be a fuzzy subject. I agree with you on the Licensing and why it exists. 

To add my own 2 cents. The problem is not that we have unlicensed hacks out there performing sub par work. Its that those who can do something refuse to do anything. And is it any wonder why the United States is in the condition it is in? 

Well anyway, I gotta go out and try and find that ever elusive money tree. :detective:

Interesting side note: You can see some weird things while out delivering fliers.


----------



## OldSchool (Jan 30, 2010)

The day you can truly call this a profession is when only licensed people do plumbing...

Other than that it is a free for all.


----------



## user2090 (Sep 26, 2009)

OldSchool said:


> The day you can truly call this a profession is when only licensed people do plumbing...
> 
> Other than that it is a free for all.



I believe that most people have had such a poor experience with "Plumber" that it makes no difference who they call out. In my area, as I mentioned we have this problem. When you ask someone who does their plumbing, they tell you one of the hacks. The problem is, people don't even know there is a difference. 

I hear this. "I didn't know you had to have a license." or "I didn't know he didn't have a license, his sign says he does plumbing."

Let's not forget the companies that have a Contractor/Master license, but send out a unlicensed employee to do work, they know dang well requires a licensed professional. I think those companies are even worse, because they know better. "Well, geez, if I sent out only licensed plumbers, I wouldn't be able to handle all the work."

Remember Waterboy? Same thing happened to me. Rarely did I work with a Journeyman. It was justified, as being service work, and being in a gray area. I'd bet you dollars to pesos that there are business owners on here that do it.


----------



## Richard Hilliard (Apr 10, 2010)

I am not sure if this is true in all states however in Florida I do not have to be the license holder in order to have a plumbing business. All I need is a qualifier, a person that holds a plumbing license. I could pay a person who has a license and run a business.


----------



## OldSchool (Jan 30, 2010)

Richard Hilliard said:


> I am not sure if this is true in all states however in Florida I do not have to be the license holder in order to have a plumbing business. All I need is a qualifier, a person that holds a plumbing license. I could pay a person who has a license and run a business.


You are correct


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

Of course, that would mean they would have work for you. They would have to over see all of the construction activities of your company. That's were it all goes south. Who is to say that your qualifier is ever on the job site? Who is to say he lives on the other side of the state and just checks his mail box for that pay check every week/month?



Richard Hilliard said:


> I am not sure if this is true in all states however in Florida I do not have to be the license holder in order to have a plumbing business. All I need is a qualifier, a person that holds a plumbing license. I could pay a person who has a license and run a business.


----------



## greenscoutII (Aug 27, 2008)

Colorado has had a serious problem with unlicensed guys performing work unsupervised. During the construction boom, the state plumbing board largely looked the other way. County inspectors were supposed to do the actual enforcement in areas where they handled inspections, though they seldom if ever asked for any body's card.

This has changed a bit as the state decided to crack down and start enforcing the law, but with budget cuts, well, you know......

There used to be a lot of guys who bragged about being "career apprentices". That always bothered me. The way I see it, if a guy is serious about his chosen trade/profession, he should obtain his license. If for no other reason than to give him some professional credibility.

I was plumbing a commercial renovation in Pueblo and I had hundreds of yards of DWV on air test, called for inspection. When the head inspector showed up, he asked to see my license before he would even inspect the job. It made me feel good to present him with my journeyman's card. My inspection passed:thumbup:.....


----------



## plumbpro (Mar 10, 2010)

Here you need not insurance to have a business, it's a good idea though.
Most towns here require a privledge license and they require ins.


----------



## Richard Hilliard (Apr 10, 2010)

Protech said:


> Of course, that would mean they would have work for you. They would have to over see all of the construction activities of your company. That's were it all goes south. Who is to say that your qualifier is ever on the job site? Who is to say he lives on the other side of the state and just checks his mail box for that pay check every week/month?


Nay nay, they can receive payment for that license but they are not required to be on the job or at the office. It may be required however it is not enforced. They are held responsible for the actions of said company.

The very first company that hired me in Florida had a license and was insured. After one week I discovered the holder of the license was not involved in the daily business. He only came into the office to receive his payment for use of that license. The business was run very sloppy,no consequences to the real owners of the company and I left after 2 weeks.

A legal paper signed and notarized alllows for the unlicensed person to pull permits for the holder of the license. This person does not have to be the owner.


----------



## Tommy plumber (Feb 19, 2010)

Really then the only difference between a master licensed plumber who has unlicensed guys working under him and a hack working without a license is that the licensed master plumber has insurance; so he can be sued if something hits the fan.

Hopefully the master licensed plumber provides training for his employees, actively manages company operations, blah blah blah, etc., etc.

So in case someone is injured or property is damaged, the guy with the license can be held accountable. The state says it wants to regulate professions, provide standards, etc., etc. That is a noble idea. Then why doesn't the state require journeyman plumbers to be licensed? I can only speak for Florida. I never had a journeyman's card (if some one bothers to get it, it isn't even a license or a certification) . I applied for and passed the state exam (Master's License). I would like to see legislation mandating the need to obtain a journeyman's license BEFORE being allowed to sit for Master's exam (like Louisiana does). When the Governor's mansion in Tallahassee burns to the ground due to unlicensed "plumbers", then maybe the law will change.

By the way, ever notice how some companies tell customers on the phone that they going to send "the technician" out to diagnose the problem? I'm sure that is done intentionally to deflect liability. So if cust. ever sues the company for something "the plumber" did, the company can say, "Oh we never told you he's a plumber. He isn't licensed. We told you he's a tech." And if cust. comes back with, "Well you are using un-licensed men to work on people's plumbing." The company of course answers that the law doesn't require all the "technicians" to be licensed, thus no law was violated there.

Do you think only the chief surgeon in a hospital has a medical license, and all the other doctors, nurses, etc. work under his license? :no: If the state of Florida's lawmakers were smarter, they would require all journeymen in the state to be licensed if for no other reason than to raise revenue for this state. :thumbsup:


----------



## Epox (Sep 19, 2010)

Totally agrees with all on being responsible and carrying all the proper licenses and insurance as we do. But how many of you recommend side liners for example to repair sheetrock and paint or trim that costumers tree? ( thinking things may get a bit quiet here). NOt meaning to P*ss anyone off but isnt that the same thing? I have to admitt I have. :whistling2:
Am rethinking that now though.
Seems to me all the same should apply in respect to those contractors who deal with the same issues. Andddddd if something should happen, we could get sued for recommending that person or persons. Something to think about. Again hoping not to offend anyone.


----------



## Phat Cat (Apr 1, 2009)

Tommy plumber said:


> Really then the only difference between a master licensed plumber who has unlicensed guys working under him and a hack working without a license is that the licensed master plumber has insurance; so he can be sued if something hits the fan.
> 
> Hopefully the master licensed plumber provides training for his employees, actively manages company operations, blah blah blah, etc., etc.
> 
> So in case someone is injured or property is damaged, the guy with the license can be held accountable.


Not quite TommyPlumber. Master Plumbers do not necessarily have insurance either. The handyhack can be sued just as easily at the Master Plumber.

The Hack who has not been trained is very different from someone who has been trained to be a plumber. In reality, most hacks are handyman with absolutely NO professional training.

As for unlicensed service plumbers working under a Master, the Master Plumber is putting his license on the line and in jeopardy. Service plumbers who run into something beyond their level of expertise have a Master Plumber to direct questions to, whereas the hack does not. I have seen so called Master Plumbers idea of good plumbing . . . it isn't so good.

I have seen service plumbers who are not licensed and I would put them up against a lot of Master Plumbers. My money is on the plumber who has been trained and has years of experience over someone who just has a piece of paper. Integrity and common sense have a lot to do with plumbing. Just because someone has the license does not mean they are utilizing that knowledge and performing per code.

I recall a Master Plumber on PZ readily admitting he does not follow code. Not slamming him, because truth be told, I bet everyone on PZ has taken shortcuts and not followed the letter of the law.

How about plumbers getting tips? Yeah, I bet they are all reported to the IRS too.


----------



## Tommy plumber (Feb 19, 2010)

PlumbCrazy said:


> Not quite TommyPlumber. Master Plumbers do not necessarily have insurance either. The handyhack can be sued just as easily at the Master Plumber.
> 
> The Hack who has not been trained is very different from someone who has been trained to be a plumber. In reality, most hacks are handyman with absolutely NO professional training.
> 
> ...


Unlikely that one will be granted that license w/o proper insurance. Also, how do you sue a hack who doesn't speak much english and who has no assets?


----------



## Tommy plumber (Feb 19, 2010)

PlumbCrazy said:


> Not quite TommyPlumber. Master Plumbers do not necessarily have insurance either. The handyhack can be sued just as easily at the Master Plumber.
> 
> The Hack who has not been trained is very different from someone who has been trained to be a plumber. In reality, most hacks are handyman with absolutely NO professional training.
> 
> ...


This mandatory training you speak of is a farce in the state of Florida. You don't even need a high school diploma to be a plumber. Training is all on the job if that's all some one wants. School is not required. Apprenticeship school is optional, it is not required by law.


----------



## plbgbiz (Aug 27, 2010)

Richard Hilliard said:


> I am not sure if this is true in all states however in Florida I do not have to be the license holder in order to have a plumbing business. All I need is a qualifier, a person that holds a plumbing license. I could pay a person who has a license and run a business.



 
Herein lies a shift in our industry that has gone unchecked and has further watered down what we want to call our "profession".

I am looking for a movement for the added requirement that to operate a plumbing business: The holder of the Plumbing Contractor license must by shares or other measurable financial interest own 51%or more of the said company. And in addition to that, must be involved in the day to day running of that company.

One of the purposes of the testing potential contractors is to verify THEIR worthiness to operate a plumbing business, NOT THEIR ABILITY TO PROSTITUTE THEIR CREDENTIALS TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER! :furious:

Persons who offer payoffs to a contractor so they can operate a business they have no business being in, are nothing more than ticks sucking the life blood out of our industry!

And for you injured or retired souls out there, don't give me that "it's the only way I can still make money" crap. How about we get retired dentists, doctors, and pilots to whore out their licenses so we let them still earn a buck too.

Can you hear me now Mr. Foundation Guy that wants to run a plumbing company?


----------



## plbgbiz (Aug 27, 2010)

mpsllc said:


> Totally agrees with all on being responsible and carrying all the proper licenses and insurance as we do. But how many of you recommend side liners for example to repair sheetrock and paint or trim that costumers tree? ( thinking things may get a bit quiet here). ..



I'm not quiet about it mp...

IF OKC required a license for repairing drywall, you can bet your sweet bippy that IF i recommended some for a repair, that someone would have had to have already proven to me that not only are they qualified but they have the proper credentials. The best drywall repair guy I know carries no insurance, no WC, and works for cash. He does not get my recommendations.

It is rare that I refer someone to one of my customers but when I do, they are vetted diligently first.


----------



## plbgbiz (Aug 27, 2010)

plbgbiz said:


> I am looking for a movement for the added requirement that to operate a plumbing business: The holder of the Plumbing Contractor license must by shares or other measurable financial interest own 51%or more of the said company. And in addition to that, must be involved in the day to day running of that company.


So...for all you folks in central Oklahoma, feel free to PM me or call to discuss how such a movement might get going. Or, of course the other option would be to call me and tell me to shut and quit typing. Either way, it'll be good to hear from you.

And yes, I know this is going to step on the precious toes of some nationwide franchise minded owners and their employees. For their licensed employees I say get a job with a real plumbing contractor, and their are a lot to choose from. For the unlicensed owners I say, get over it. WalMart is hiring.


----------



## plbgbiz (Aug 27, 2010)

Protech said:


> Both.
> 
> In order to keep a master plumbing license aka plumbing contractor license on "active status" (can pull permits, advertise etc) you must keep your insurance and WC active. Trouble is, enforcement is pretty slack.
> 
> ...


In Oklahoma we are required to have a bond filed with the Construction Industries Board. In addition to that, some municipalities require proof of liability insurance as well as your state Plumbing Contractor's license. For instance, the City of Lawton requires us to provide a certificate of insurance listing them as additional insured. The City of Bethany requires an updated copy of your certificate of insurance showing them as additional insured EVERY time you buy a permit.


----------



## user2090 (Sep 26, 2009)

plbgbiz said:


> Herein lies a shift in our industry that has gone unchecked and has further watered down what we want to call our "profession".
> 
> I am looking for a movement for the added requirement that to operate a plumbing business: The holder of the Plumbing Contractor license must by shares or other measurable financial interest own 51%or more of the said company. And in addition to that, must be involved in the day to day running of that company.
> 
> ...



That tells me there is at least one other Owner/Plumber that thinks like I do. I am told that I will get over it, and that I should focus on other things, and I agree, partly.

For one, its not like I am sitting here obsessing all day and night about it. There is next to nothing that can be done in Indiana, but turn them in the way I did. Once that is done, what else can I do, but keep focusing on my business. It takes 5 minutes to fill out the online form, that is not obsessing to me.

Two, no matter if I fail or succeed with my business, I will no longer sit back and allow what has been going on for years, to continue without at least giving 5 minutes to help.

I, like Mr. Biz here would welcome conversation with other Indiana Plumbers that are interested in making a change. But, I will deviate slightly, and say, don't bother contacting me, if you are going to try and dissuade me.

The squeaky wheel gets the grease.


----------



## Redwood (Sep 8, 2008)

Tommy plumber said:


> Unlikely that one will be granted that license w/o proper insurance. Also, how do you sue a hack who doesn't speak much english and who has no assets?


It is more like what is the point of filing a lawsuit against him...
The filing fees, lawyer fees, court fees, fees for having the papers served, and spending your time when you will collect $0:whistling2:


----------



## Redwood (Sep 8, 2008)

plbgbiz said:


> I am looking for a movement for the added requirement that to operate a plumbing business: The holder of the Plumbing Contractor license must by shares or other measurable financial interest own 51%or more of the said company. And in addition to that, must be involved in the day to day running of that company.


Good luck with that one!
Your biggest single opponent on that one is probably going to be a multinational corporation that had annual revenues of 1,190,236,000 listed in their 2009 annual report...

Good Luck at getting a Politician to see past them...
Incidently you do realize they have the same rights as you according to the Supreme Court...
Except you can't outspend them when buying a politician...:whistling2:


----------



## plbgbiz (Aug 27, 2010)

Redwood said:


> ...Except you can't outspend them when buying a politician...:whistling2:


You're right about that Red. Didn't say it was likely or even possible. Just that it would be great if it could. Be that as it may, ya never know what the future holds. I still find it interesting to discuss. And I like the idea of discussing those ideas with my compadres locally and on PZ. Hey, that's what "forums" are for, right?


----------



## Tommy plumber (Feb 19, 2010)

plbgbiz said:


> You're right about that Red. Didn't say it was likely or even possible. Just that it would be great if it could. Be that as it may, ya never know what the future holds. I still find it interesting to discuss. And I like the idea of discussing those ideas with my compadres locally and on PZ. Hey, that's what "forums" are for, right?


 
Yes it is interesting to have an inter-change of ideas with others. Sometimes we school others, sometimes we get schooled.


----------

