Contractor Licensing

[forsmant]

http://www.contractortalk.com/f11/new-penalties-unlicensed-contractors-start-jan-1-a-70592/

Here is an interesting tid bit about California. Jail time for those that practice contracting with out a license. That is a little extreme and where is the punishment for homeowners hiring unlicensed contractors? I know this is not the libertarian position but lets try and have a discussion about current policy and why a policy like this is seen as necessary.

If prostitution is illegal both the prostitute and the john are committing a crime.

I think that a licensing law is brought about to prevent someone who doesn't know how to do the work cripple the integrity of the structure or systems and cause potential disaster to life and property. A private system can do this I know, but that is not what happens. A private system nor a government system will prevent hacks from working just as it doesn't prevent the john and the prostitute. It just gives a legitimacy to punish. What should the punishment be and how should the permit system really work?

I look forward to a real discussion and not a talking point rehash of the libertarian position. I guess lets try and figure out a way a private organization should handle those who do not do proper work and leave the homeowners with an unsafe house.

Just because someone is a private business does not make them efficient or good and often times it will be years before the hack is truly "out of work".

[Anti Federalist]

I look forward to a real discussion and not a talking point rehash of the libertarian position. I guess lets try and figure out a way a private organization should handle those who do not do proper work and leave the homeowners with an unsafe house.

It's already being done.

Sites like Angie's List ("http://www.angieslist.com/angieslist/'[url), and hundreds more like it, do a fairly good job of hounding out unscrupulous contractors.

I would think that would be the best way to go.

[kpitcher]

That's a tricky question, what sort of ISO style system do you go for that is consistent and cost effective?

I'm in Michigan, my family has owned a plumbing and HVAC business for 25+ years. In Michigan there is a formal process to become a licensed master plumber. So many years to be a journeyman, then a few more before you can test to be a master. You need to be a master plumber to work for yourself or advertise plumbing services. I know a state out west used to give a licenses out at the local level, not the state level. Hiring someone with a 'licensed plumber' cert from that state turned out to be a bad choice, the guy didn't know anything as his country was just a filing fee with no tests or mandatory history of working in the field. Although Michigan's test is now open book. Talk about lowering standards.

I personally believe that if any township/city enforces any licensing codes they should enforce all codes equally. As we've seen from our bases in Iraq, you can be electrocuted by improperly installed showers. Locally I have seen furnaces burning down houses, or CO killing them in their sleep. An improperly licensed person doing the work that requires a license should be no different than the punishment for a non-licensed doctor performing surgery or a non-licensed lawyer giving legal advise.

I don't forsee that ever happening. The best that can be hoped for is that the homeowner demands building, plumbing, heating, etc permits for all work done in their home. The local inspectors should catch any problems. Further if it is later found that an inspector failed to catch something very bad, the previous inspector has to pay to have it done correctly. I'm alright with this sort of inspection process - but it should be optional. Oh also at least in our township all permit fees are reimbursed directly to the inspector, nothing goes to the township.

Heck from the viewpoint of various township board members, and even the township hall itself, pulling permits is entirely optional when it comes down to them paying a permit fee. At least they out right refused to get permits when we told them they would need to for various jobs performed over the years. So at this point I take the 'permits are optional' viewpoint too, perform the work to the highest possible quality regardless of if a permit is pulled by the homeowner or not.

[Bossobass]

Q: How does an illegal alien get a contractor's license?

A: He doesn't.

Building standards are simply a method for taxing. The permit fees are exorbitant and the permit requires a total cost, which goes straight to the tax assessor so he no longer has to visit your property.

The insurance industry lobbies states for ever stricter codes, some of which a purely ridiculous, so that they can collect payments and not pay out. The cost is passed on to the property owner as initial cost, plus eternal property tax costs on the inflated price.

Years ago, there was an Apprentice/Journeyman/Master system that assured quality.

Today, an illegal can jump out of a truck from Brownsville, Texas and start banging on your house 10 minutes later.

Today, public education has rendered far too many Americans math-illiterate.

As far as prevention of poor quality goes, my dad used to say: "If you do a good job, they'll tell 3 people. If you do a poor job, they'll tell 3,000 people." That's the free market at work.

The horror stories I've heard in 35 years were from people who thought they could get something for nothing and hired the lowest bidder without checking references, etc.

Government slows the process and drives the price through the roof while not assuring anything in the process.

Consider the weasel inspector who looks the other way for an envelope full of FRNs from the mega-builder.

Consider also that inspectors cannot be held to blame for anything they miss or incorrectly inspect.

An inspector can just say, for example: "I want an Engineer's stamp." It's then on you to find one, pay him high bucks and wait for the report while your project sits idle, after which the engineer usually tells you that it was a waste of time because there was no problem by 4 to 1.

The list goes on and on. It gives me a headache.

Bosso

[forsmant]

As an employee of a builder/remodeler I can assure you that the permit process does generally lead to better quality work. I have worked on both kinds of projects and the quality generally slips when its not open to outside scrutiny. The cost of a job well done will always cost more than a job poorly done regardless of licensing.

As for the illegals lets, skip that point for now. Lets say its just Joe Schmo from the trailer park with no education and little experience. He can go out cripple the integrity of an unaware and frugal homeowners electrical system with a backwoods method of wiring that may cause the house to burn down. Now I know no law can prevent this from happening, but having laws in place making it illegal for this scenario to develop may make people think twice about hiring an unlicensed contractor. Many unlicensed guys ultimately end up cutting and running. And after the homeowners tell 3000 people the business name will change and the contractor goes on without remorse.

If you go to the original thread I linked you will find what the professionals in the field think. Most agree that if you hire an unlicensed contractor, you and the contractor are breaking the law. Enforcement is lacking in this area. That is why so many people get burned and illegals get away with sabotaging homes. The ultimate goal of licensing laws is to prevent that from happening.

A private company is still subject to corruption.

Engineers stamps are usually only required when a code is violated. In my experience the inspectors are not taking kickbacks but can be emotionally aggravated to nitpick a particular builder. Relationships can become hostile. It is best just to appease the inspector. The insurance companies have influence on codes but manufactures of building products have more I would suggest.

In Florida they will jail unlicensed contractors. I suggest this is not a good method or deterrent. Both the homeowner and the unlicensed contractor are skirting the law and should both be at most fined.

[Dianne]

Well what happens, particularly in a state like California is that some dude applies for his or her license... pays the fee (which is really all the state cares about, for revenue purposes); then that newly licensed contractor brings in a ton of illegals he can pay off the books.

Being licensed is just for revenue to the state... it has nothing to do with your knowledge of the job you are being hired to do. Just another rape and pillage...

[CCTelander]

Leagally, a license is permission to do something that would otherwise be illegal/unlawful.

Does one have the right to persue one's chosen calling?

Looking at it in those terms makes it very easy to determine the liberty friendly position.

[forsmant]

Even if I love to build things or run electrical wires, doing in wrong may cause injury to life or property of others. Now doesn't that affect the liberty of others?

A license may be a source of revenue for the state but it also assumes that you will get your work inspected and held up to minimum standards of practice. Not doing it to those minimum standards could lead to injury or death.

As for the California example the licensed contractor is breaking an immigration law that also lacks enforcement. I would prefer them to work under the licensed contractor who subjects his work to outside scrutiny then to just allow an unlicensed hack cobble it together and run.

A private licensing company is desirable but is subject to the same abuses as the government.

[Icymudpuppy]

I have to carry several different licenses to do the work I do. None of them are exorbitant, and all require a level of responsibility that legitimize my business and my work.

I am not against a publicly accepted form of licensing based on education, or coverage, and I think this is a legitimate application of State government.

[CCTelander]

Even if I love to build things or run electrical wires, doing in wrong may cause injury to life or property of others. Now doesn't that affect the liberty of others?

It doesn't affect their liberty at all until they suffer an actual damage.

The maeket would also provide innumerable ways to inform consumers of any shoddy or unsafe workmanship a disreputable contractor was trying to peddle. Underwriters' Laboratories is one excellent example of how it would work.

Liberty entails a certain amount of risk. Period. Consumers simply have to accept some responsibility for their buying decisions. Either that, or you wind up where we currently are all over again.

You can't have it both ways. Licensing is anti-liberty.

[Matt Collins]

As David Boaz (http://www.cato.org/people/david-boaz) discusses in one of his books (http://www.libertarianism.org/):

Occupational licensing laws work like medieval guilds to keep people out of good jobs, specifically the poor and uneducated. Often times an otherwise easy entrepreneurial endeavor is closed to people without already existing capital. This is clearly a violation of economic liberty not to mention an artificial barrier to entry thus hurting those that need it the most.

[Bossobass]

As an employee of a builder/remodeler I can assure you that the permit process does generally lead to better quality work. I have worked on both kinds of projects and the quality generally slips when its not open to outside scrutiny. The cost of a job well done will always cost more than a job poorly done regardless of licensing.

As for the illegals lets, skip that point for now. Lets say its just Joe Schmo from the trailer park with no education and little experience. He can go out cripple the integrity of an unaware and frugal homeowners electrical system with a backwoods method of wiring that may cause the house to burn down. Now I know no law can prevent this from happening, but having laws in place making it illegal for this scenario to develop may make people think twice about hiring an unlicensed contractor. Many unlicensed guys ultimately end up cutting and running. And after the homeowners tell 3000 people the business name will change and the contractor goes on without remorse.

If you go to the original thread I linked you will find what the professionals in the field think. Most agree that if you hire an unlicensed contractor, you and the contractor are breaking the law. Enforcement is lacking in this area. That is why so many people get burned and illegals get away with sabotaging homes. The ultimate goal of licensing laws is to prevent that from happening.

A private company is still subject to corruption.

Engineers stamps are usually only required when a code is violated. In my experience the inspectors are not taking kickbacks but can be emotionally aggravated to nitpick a particular builder. Relationships can become hostile. It is best just to appease the inspector. The insurance companies have influence on codes but manufactures of building products have more I would suggest.

In Florida they will jail unlicensed contractors. I suggest this is not a good method or deterrent. Both the homeowner and the unlicensed contractor are skirting the law and should both be at most fined.

So, which are we talking about, contracting or upfit electrical sub contractors?

Engineer's stamps are required at the whim of the building inspector.

It's NEVER best to "just appease" ANY GS-Puke, especially when it needlessly inconveniences and/or costs your client. Relationships? I am not hired nor paid by the government. I work for my clients. The government works for both me and my client. I couldn't care less what my "relationship" is with the inspector.

If the inspector is errant and unyieldingly so, go over his head and have him removed from the permit.

This example of some hayseed who is burning down houses by ignorant wiring is as tired as it gets. We're talking about a $500 billion industry that's overwhelmingly conducted by very skilled and dedicated people. Trotting out examples like yours is irrelevant and non-preventable in any scenario.

Electrical, mechanical and plumbing are separate trades. People don't call a general contractor to repair or replace their HVAC or a faulty toilet or to add a few outlets, and virtually none of those trades pull permits to do such work.

Many states do not require contractors to be licensed. They have no use for a general contractor. The government takes complete control through the permit process. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Has US housing improved vs the old system it replaces? THOSE are the questions.

Bosso

[pacelli]

Leagally, a license is permission to do something that would otherwise be illegal/unlawful.

Does one have the right to persue one's chosen calling?

Looking at it in those terms makes it very easy to determine the liberty friendly position.

That is true, accurate, and correct. I don't know why anyone would WANT to call themselves a building contractor and give up their own rights in the process. But you know, if people want to break the law, that is their choice in life.

[Icymudpuppy]

Lets talk about my State's requirements for licensing in my field, and why they are there.

I am in Wildlife Pest control. I remove (usually by trapping) small animals which have invaded and are damaging property, and I repair the damage they did, and fortify the property against further invasion.

Because I deal with wildlife which are managed for population health, I am expected to have a hunting licence and trapping license which in my state both require a class and a test to insure you understand the safe operation of the tools used, and the necessity of reporting what happens with the animals you capture for management of the natural resource of wildlife. Both licenses cost less than $100/year together. Pretty minor.

Because I often use the tools of hunting and trapping inside populated areas, I must also attend a course on the special regulations regarding the use of those tools in urban settings. This class is free and attendees with the licenses above will get a Nuisance Wildlife Control Endorsement.

The licenses and their endorsement prove that I understand the importance of dealing with natural resources sustainably, and will be safe in the methods I use or I can be subject to game violations. The endorsement allows me to do things that most hunters and trappers are not allowed to do such as trap inside city limits, but also means I am more heavily scrutinized than regular hunters and trappers to ensure I am not abusing my priveleges.

Because I do work on people's homes, I must have a contractor's license. This has no educational requirement, only a verification that I carry the minimum general liability insurance and bonding. The cost is $50/year. This gives potential customers and easy reference to know that I have that insurance and bonding.

The only license I don't care for is my Business license which is how the state collects its Sales tax and B&O taxes.