Day one of California Certification

[e57]

Well - its Day one of the mandatory certification requirement - anyone get busted yet?

[bkludecke]

When this legislation first came down out of Sacramento I laughed. This state can't do anything right it seems. That was 1999 I think and they just kept moving the deadline date year after year. I did the right thing and took the test (even though as an EC I'm not required to) and 2 of my j-men have the cert. 2 more will test this month and I work for a training company teaching others to take the test. So far only about half of the people estimated to need certification have even applied and that does not include the HUGE underground economy of handymen, illegals, etc. If it weren'y so serious it would be fun to watch how it all plays out.

[gndrod]

Hi Bob otlc,
If the enforcement is anything like Title 24 that started back in 1972 it'll take a few years. :)

[bkludecke]

Title 24, now there's a good one. I'll admit it is doing some good in reducing energy consumtion but the lighting portion is a joke. People hate the flourescent lighting (esp in the bathrooms) and the vacancy sensing switches. I do alot of business replacing the light fixtures after the building is finaled. I wonder if that is a crime????????

[cowboyjwc]

Bob is an outlaw, Bob is an outlaw. I'm telling.

[charlie b]

I do alot of business replacing the light fixtures after the building is finaled. I wonder if that is a crime????????
I don't know. Did you get a permit, and do you have the mandatory certification? :grin:

[bkludecke]

OK, I'm turning myself in. I'll report to Folsom Prison, CA @ dawn (why mess w/ a trial). I can use the rest anyway. Hey John, can you do a side job for me???

[cowboyjwc]

NO!!! But thanks for asking.

[sandsnow]

Day two and still not enforcing it on the local level.

btw, I'll try to get to those questions in the other thread to night.

[satcom]

Better get a good chair. If Cal is anything like Jersey, it only took them 40 years to start enforcement, and as of this March, they are still training the law enforcement branches, how to enforce the laws.

Jersey is finally going after illegal contractors, and a good number of very unhappy contractors paying all the required expenses and doing everything legal, are finally turning in the illegal guys.

[celtic]

Better get a good chair. If Cal is anything like Jersey, it only took them 40 years to start enforcement....
Cal. law has NO TEETH WHATSOEVER.
Here is the "law" and the "enforcement" status:
Enforcement Questions (http://www.dir.ca.gov/DAS/ECU_FAQ.htm#Enforcement%20Questions)

Some of my favorites...

What agency checks the electricians and enforces the law on job sites?
The Statute does not currently provide for state enforcement.

Who is penalized when an electrician is found working without a valid certification?
The individual who is not certified will be considered illegally working.

What is the penalty when an electrician is found working without a valid certification?
According to our Regulations 294.0 - any person who displays a certificate, or otherwise claims to be certified, who is not certified shall be prohibited from taking the test for certification for a period of five(5) years.

Did ya see that?
The Statute does not currently provide for state enforcement.

LOL

So let's say, someone does actually come around and find you w/o your certification...so what?
Now you "can't" take the test for another 5 years...so what?
You'll still work....NO ONE is enforcing anything!

[bkludecke]

Wecome to my world!! I don't think we're in Kansas anymore.

[cowboyjwc]

Everyone is calling me and asking if we are enforcing it and I keep asking enforcing what?

It's a state law put into effect by the Contractors State License Board and they have not deputized me or even told me what I would do if the person didn't have their cert.

Gotta love those "no teeth laws".

[kingpb]

Read a little closer:

What is the penalty when an electrician is found working without a valid certification?
According to our Regulations 294.0 - any person who displays a certificate, or otherwise claims to be certified, who is not certified shall be prohibited from taking the test for certification for a period of five(5) years.

The question was glossed over and never answered. As long as you don't try to claim to be certified (i.e. don't lie if asked), or don't display a fake certificate, then you can still take the test.

Frankly, I think the law is an underhanded way to crack down on illegals.

[bkludecke]

Everyone is calling me and asking if we are enforcing it and I keep asking enforcing what?

It's a state law put into effect by the Contractors State License Board and they have not deputized me or even told me what I would do if the person didn't have their cert.

Gotta love those "no teeth laws".
Actually it's worse than that. The law was put in to effect by the Dept. of Industrial Relations- Beurau of Apprenticship Standards and they never even talked to the CSLB about it. It has only been in the last year that many ECs were even aware of it because the CSLB never made mention of it in their newsletter. I'd rather watch sausage being made than watch the CA legislative process. They held the whole thing up for over a year because the test in Spanish was too hard. The required apprentiship training which is now required before you can take the test is under fire because it is completely unworkable with the few programs available. One could be in a in blimp and fly under the radar of this system. The sad thing is that the idea was a good one, it works in many other states and CA can't even begin to get it right.

[JohnJ0906]

There might be a few of us over on the other coast besides me wondering exactly what "mandatory certification" y'all are refering to!:-?

[cowboyjwc]

John,

There is a new law in CA that "anyone" working as an electrician, other than the License holder, must be certified by taking a test that is given by the state and you must carry this card with you just as you would a license and produce it if asked.

Bob,

Because remember Tim Owens kept saying that we should just do whatever some of the other states are doing, but as usual CA had to try and reinvent the wheel.

[bkludecke]

There might be a few of us over on the other coast besides me wondering exactly what "mandatory certification" y'all are refering to!:-?
As Cowboy said anyone who works for an EC must be certified. If a person is not certified but is in a state approved apprenticship program (union or non-union) they can work so long as there is a one-on-one supervision ratio; that means for every apprentice there must be at least one supervising j-man on the job. It gets worse. By law a general contractor may do electrical work and his electricians do not need to be certified, neither do electricians working for commercial facilities, industrial plants, municipalities etc. I stay in this state because it's so much fun to watch it happen!

[peter d]

By law a general contractor may do electrical work and his electricians do not need to be certified, neither do electricians working for commercial facilities, industrial plants, municipalities etc. I stay in this state because it's so much fun to watch it happen!

It sounds to me like they want to have it both ways. They (are still trying to) implement a "certification program" while basically leaving the old system still completely intact.

I wonder if my CT license will count towards getting certified so I can move out there and watch the fun with you??? :D

[bkludecke]

Just fill out the app and mail it in with your check (nobody is verifying the qualifications), then you take a very easy open book test on the '99NEC and you are certified. Or you can not do any of that and work here anyway 'cause nobody is looking anyway. GOD I LOVE THIS

[e57]

Just fill out the app and mail it in with your check (nobody is verifying the qualifications), then you take a very easy open book test on the '99NEC and you are certified. Or you can not do any of that and work here anyway 'cause nobody is looking anyway. GOD I LOVE THIS
That was true, but not anymore... Unless you had your paperwork in before and took the test, or in the very least failed it and are re-testing - You are now going back to school - if you intend to pay any heed to the law at all..... That is if you can find anyplace to take you....

http://www.dir.ca.gov/DAS/CAC_ECU-Min5.htm

And the only penalty of getting caught is that you ironically cant take the test for 5 years, which is the duration of your apprenticeship.;) Wonder if employers could get busted for not supervising all these new newbies who have 20 years under thier belts?

[e57]

FYI the only thing anywhere close to enforcement is on public works contracts - go figure!

Requiring apprentices for 1 hour of every 5 by a journeyman - as that journeyman will have to listed for training purposes.... :roll:

Smells bad - real bad...:mad:

[JohnJ0906]

It gets worse. By law a general contractor may do electrical work and his electricians do not need to be certified,
What the...? So, no certification for the people who shouldn't be doing electrical work at all. :confused:

[ramsy]

CA IBEW currently is not dispatching their JW members without that card, perhaps its a skills selling point to their contractors, primarily NECA, although the NJATC apprenticeship was already supposed to accomplish that skills point.

[bkludecke]

What the...? So, no certification for the people who shouldn't be doing electrical work at all. :confused:
Yup!! It's completely assinine. The cutoff was supposed to be 12/31/06 for being registered and tested but that's not the case. I have 3 new guys that sent in their apps & forms 2 weeks ago and they are all getting test dates for this month. The State was getting alot of flak for continually moving the cutoff dates so they apparantly just stopped announcing it but are still accepting apps from electricians who missed the earlier deadlines. I don't know of anyone who really knows what the rules actually are because they keep changing. The system can't work the way they say it should because if that were so there would not be nearly enough "qualified" people to do the work. There are even alot of ECs that are getting a GC license just in case the State starts enforcing the law; then they just operate as a GC doing EC work and life is good. AAAAUUUUGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[e57]

~ I have 3 new guys that sent in their apps & forms 2 weeks ago and they are all getting test dates for this month. The State was getting alot of flak for continually moving the cutoff dates so they apparantly just stopped announcing it but are still accepting apps from electricians who missed the earlier deadlines. I don't know of anyone who really knows what the rules actually are because they keep changing. The system can't work the way they say it should because if that were so there would not be nearly enough "qualified" people to do the work. There are even alot of ECs that are getting a GC license just in case the State starts enforcing the law; then they just operate as a GC doing EC work and life is good. AAAAUUUUGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The three new guys - if they had not tested and failed - are in violation of this law.... There has been no "official" moving back of the dead-line - that I know of. If so- we could expect an announcement in a month or two - after they think the heat is off. These things seem to have a back-room feel to me... The most recent incarnation of the law is here:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/asm/ab_2901-2950/ab_2907_bill_20060930_chaptered.pdf


(2) The deadline for certification as a general electrician or fire/life
safety technician is January 1, 2006, except that persons who applied for
certification prior to January 1, 2006, have until January 1, 2007, to pass
the certification examination. The deadline for certification as a residential
electrician is January 1, 2007, and the deadline for certification as a voice
data video technician or a nonresidential lighting technician is January 1,
2008. The California Apprenticeship Council may extend the certification
date for any of these three categories of electricians up to January 1, 2009,
if the council concludes that the existing deadline will not provide persons
sufficient time to obtain certification, enroll in an apprenticeship or
training program, or register pursuant to Section 3099.4.

The sentances in bold reffering to the items in red allow them to dick around until 2009! At thier liesure........... Also note the double speak on the residential classification deadline 2007 - BUT COULD EXTEND UNTIL 2009? :rolleyes:

And you should warn anyone that you know of getting a B license and contracting as a C-10 that they too are violating the law... Unless they maintain thier C-10 - which requires any carpenter they would employ not to make any connection of 100VA or more... Or they too would have to go get "Certified" under the "Electrician Certification Program" as they would be "employed" by someone holding a C-10, and therefore subject to that law... And if they did not maintain thier C-10, under 7057(b) they would not be allowed to take a contract solely for electrical, (or any other single trade)

§ 7057. General building contractor (http://198.187.128.12/california/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=150d05a1.59e0049.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%27BUS%2F7057%27%5D)(a) Except as provided in this section, a general building contractor is a contractor whose principal contracting business is in connection with any structure built, being built, or to be built, for the support, shelter, and enclosure of persons, animals, chattels, or movable property of any kind, requiring in its construction the use of at least two unrelated building trades or crafts, or to do or superintend the whole or any part thereof.This does not include anyone who merely furnishes materials or supplies under Section 7045 (http://198.187.128.12/california/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=150d05a1.59e0049.0.0&nid=d9f#JD_sec7045) without fabricating them into, or consuming them in the performance of the work of the general building contractor.(b) A general building contractor may take a prime contract or a subcontract for a framing or carpentry project. However, a general building contractor shall not take a prime contract for any project involving trades other than framing or carpentry unless the prime contract requires at least two unrelated building trades or crafts other than framing or carpentry, or unless the general building contractor holds the appropriate license classification or subcontracts with an appropriately licensed contractor to perform the work. A general building contractor shall not take a subcontract involving trades other than framing or carpentry, unless the subcontract requires at least two unrelated trades or crafts other than framing or carpentry, or unless the general building contractor holds the appropriate license classification. The general building contractor may not count framing or carpentry in calculating the two unrelated trades necessary in order for the general building contractor to be able to take a prime contract or subcontract for a project involving other trades.Emphisis mine...

[e57]

Actually it's worse than that. The law was put in to effect by the Dept. of Industrial Relations- Beurau of Apprenticship Standards and they never even talked to the CSLB about it. It has only been in the last year that many ECs were even aware of it because the CSLB never made mention of it in their newsletter. I'd rather watch sausage being made than watch the CA legislative process. They held the whole thing up for over a year because the test in Spanish was too hard. The required apprentiship training which is now required before you can take the test is under fire because it is completely unworkable with the few programs available. One could be in a in blimp and fly under the radar of this system. The sad thing is that the idea was a good one, it works in many other states and CA can't even begin to get it right.

I'm not trying to pick on ya - just the facts..... :wink: The initial law AB-931 in 1999 (When Gov. Davis was being recalled to install the "Govenator" - Davis signed the law leading up to the recall.... :rolleyes: ) the law originally named a single source as being able to provide training to the industry as a whole - which was non-compliant with Federal Standards.... They risked loosing ALL Federal funding for ALL apprenticeship programs state-wide. They rewrote it... And AB-1087 introduced language to the effect that only "Approved Programs" would be acceptable - only one was approved, and it went into law suits from all of the "Un-Approved" program providers. Then they post-poned it because there was curriculum issues, and then again with an attachment to a law thats main focus had Labor laws for "Horse Jockeys" (NO JOKE) had a little last minute postponement in it as the "Govenator" was about to be re-elected, I believe that AB-1087 was the one offering languages other than English, and it was not post-poned due to it being too hard - it was post-poned because those tests after three years from the date they wrote the law themselves - did NOT write a test! (Thumb in butt!) At the same time they could also not prove to the legislature that they had enough poeple taking the english one to say that there was not going to be a "Shortage" of qualified workers as the law still had that provision in it. During the next postponement they removed that language stating that they had to prove to the lesilature that they had to prove ther would not be a shortage of qualified workers.... The postponement before last on the eve of the deadline they found out they had not been administering tests because they had lost the 3rd party private contract with the company (Had been sold to another company.) who had been giving them - they didn't even know that no one had been tested for nearly 3 weeks!


Added Stats 1999 ch 781 § 1 (AB 931). Amended Stats 2000 ch 875 § 3 (AB 2481); Stats 2002 ch 48 § 1 (AB 1087); Stats 2004 ch 183 § 262 (AB 3082); Stats 2006 ch 828 § 4 (AB 2907), effective January 1, 2007.

The one about horse jockies is not listed there it was an add-on bill outlining a delay - but no change in text....

I've been following it for about 6 years now - and it is very entertaining to watch a bunch of jokers mess with your livelyhood!

[e57]

And for the record.... The CSLB did put it out in one newsletter in 2003.
http://www.cslb.ca.gov/forms/clcwtr2003.pdf

But this law is not thier responcabilty or jurisdiction - they put it in there as a "Courtesy". :wink:

The DAS did not sent me jack, until this last year, and late at that. A letter stating that it is too late to apply for General Journeyman.... (I got mine over 3 years ago - but the first contact they made to me as an EC....)


OK I'll stop.......:mad:

[bkludecke]

The three new guys - if they had not tested and failed - are in violation of this law.... There has been no "official" moving back of the dead-line - that I know of. If so- we could expect an announcement in a month or two - after they think the heat is off. These things seem to have a back-room feel to me... The most recent incarnation of the law is here:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/asm/ab_2901-2950/ab_2907_bill_20060930_chaptered.pdf


The sentances in bold reffering to the items in red allow them to dick around until 2009! At thier liesure........... Also note the double speak on the residential classification deadline 2007 - BUT COULD EXTEND UNTIL 2009? :rolleyes:

And you should warn anyone that you know of getting a B license and contracting as a C-10 that they too are violating the law... Unless they maintain thier C-10 - which requires any carpenter they would employ not to make any connection of 100VA or more... Or they too would have to go get "Certified" under the "Electrician Certification Program" as they would be "employed" by someone holding a C-10, and therefore subject to that law... And if they did not maintain thier C-10, under 7057(b) they would not be allowed to take a contract solely for electrical, (or any other single trade)

Emphisis mine...
Violation of the law?? What Law?? The most incompetent of lawyers could easily embarrass the State in a case that goes to court. This law is about as usefull as our imigration laws (which by the way, if they were enforced , would negate the need for lots of other laws including this one). The State said they would not allow testing (w/out apprenticship after 1/1/07) but they are!

As for the GC thing. "Add outlet, patch drywall, paint patch" viola!! 3 trades!!, or "Dig trench, install conduit, repair broken sprinkler line if needed" viola!! 3 trades!! That's how it's done. Hey, friend, I'm not suggesting it or defending it, but that's how it works. Remember the Home Depot Case was about this very thing and the State lost it big time.

[cowboyjwc]

e57,

What do you mean there was no official moving back of the law. The law passed in 1999 and is just now going into enforcement.

3 or 4 of the members of Bobs and mines IAEI chapter were very involved in the writting of this law and in putting together the testing requirements. All we kept hearing was how the State was putting together something that was totally unenforceable.

I'm going out soon to do my inspections and I will do a straw poll of how many guys actually have their cards. My guess is not many.

[e57]

Violation of the law?? What Law?? The most incompetent of lawyers could easily embarrass the State in a case that goes to court. This law is about as usefull as our imigration laws (which by the way, if they were enforced , would negate the need for lots of other laws including this one). The State said they would not allow testing (w/out apprenticship after 1/1/07) but they are!

As for the GC thing. "Add outlet, patch drywall, paint patch" viola!! 3 trades!!, or "Dig trench, install conduit, repair broken sprinkler line if needed" viola!! 3 trades!! That's how it's done. Hey, friend, I'm not suggesting it or defending it, but that's how it works. Remember the Home Depot Case was about this very thing and the State lost it big time.

Lets not politisize the issue outside of its intended scope with immigration - seperate issues..... Meant to say the State is violating thier own law by allowing it.

The Home Depot case was negated by the wording they added 7057 (b) - I'll lexis up the wording changes intent later.

[e57]

e57,

What do you mean there was no official moving back of the law. The law passed in 1999 and is just now going into enforcement.

3 or 4 of the members of Bobs and mines IAEI chapter were very involved in the writting of this law and in putting together the testing requirements. All we kept hearing was how the State was putting together something that was totally unenforceable.

I'm going out soon to do my inspections and I will do a straw poll of how many guys actually have their cards. My guess is not many.

Postponing THIS time around - I think I was pretty clear about how and why it was postponed before... Talking about this time....

You know people involved in writing this crap - I'd love to pick thier brains...

And you're gonna scare people to death - You will be the very first person I know of to ask if people if they have thier cards....

[bkludecke]

The rumor is that the worker comp carriers may start requiring the cert #s for an employer to list "electrician" and get that rate. But that's a rumor and there have been a ton of them over the years.

[bkludecke]

Postponing THIS time around - I think I was pretty clear about how and why it was postponed before... Talking about this time....

You know people involved in writing this crap - I'd love to pick thier brains...

And you're gonna scare people to death - You will be the very first person I know of to ask if people if they have thier cards....
Not much to pick IMO

[e57]

The rumor is that the worker comp carriers may start requiring the cert #s for an employer to list "electrician" and get that rate. But that's a rumor and there have been a ton of them over the years.
I too have heard that rumor directly from a DAS consultant for this program, but that person never was reliable as a source of information....:rolleyes:

[cowboyjwc]

Here is what I just recieved from the State:

1) The legislature did not create an enforcement mechanism when they crafted the law which created electrician certification.

2) Rumors have suggested that enforcement will be developed in the future but it would require further legislative action.

3) Many awarding bodies have begun to include, in the contract, the requirement that all electricans working under C-10 contractors on their site be certified. This provides substantial civil enforcement opportunities for the awarding body.

4) The civil liability aspect for the C-10 contractor arising out of a problem with work performed by an un-certified electrician is unknown at this time.

[bkludecke]

Thanks John. I'm not really shaking in my boots yet, but I'm watching things. If the lawyers don't get rich off of this one I'll eat my hat.

[JohnJ0906]

Thanks John. I'm not really shaking in my boots yet, but I'm watching things. If the lawyers don't get rich off of this one I'll eat my hat.
What DON'T the lawyers get rich off of?:roll:

[e57]

There have been several outside consultants with full time jobs for the last several years due to this - they might not be getting rich, but dont seem to have much to show for it.

And a wide range of meetings in hotels around the state get to make a few bucks too.

This was posted by 'electure' over at another forum:
There's 3 days of Dept. of Apprencticeship Standards meetings planned for January 24-26 at Sacramento's Radisson Hotel. Of this 3 days, 3 hours will be devoted to electrician certification issues.
DAS partying on your money?? Oh, how can you even suggest such a thing!!
Check it out! (http://www.dir.ca.gov/DAS/DAS_MeetingAgenda/200701CACmtgNotice.pdf)
3 hours of rigorous discussion at a place with it's own private lake is not partying!
Nor is the Apprenticeship Council's tough July quarterly meeting HERE (http://islandia.hyatt.com/hyatt/hotels/index.jsp)
And to top it all off, they'll be beating their poor overworked brows in May too!
HERE (http://sanfranciscoairport.hyatt.com/hyatt/hotels/index.jsp). All of this suffering and sacrifice, and then we actually expect them to have to fill out one of THESE (http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/osp/pdf/std236.pdf) too?
Of course, matters of this importance couldn't be held in the State Building, a few miles away in San Francisco, where the DAS offices are located.
http://electrical-contractor.net/ubb/Forum1/HTML/007871.html

[sandsnow]

I had some questions answered regarding Fire Life Safety Certification. Pay special note to question 4. It would seem to me the that the state would set the hierarchy of Certification, but what do I know. These responses are official state responses. I don't know how to bold or italisize this stuff, so I hope you can differentiate between the questions and answers without too much trouble. I quote:

1) I have a City Inspector office asking if the deadline for FLS is going to be extended?

There are no further extensions for FLS.



2) A General Contractor is trying to put a system in place to watch dog their subs that install the FLS but needs to know if the January 1, 2007 is going to hold true?

Yes, January 1, 2007 all electricians working for a C10 contractor must be certified.



3) The other question the GC had is if they find uncertified FLS and turn them in to DAS/ECU will anythng happen to the person and the company as of today?

We do not have Enforcement at the State level. However, we would like to know information as to who these people are if they are working without being certified. And on our website this is the information we request: The individual who is not certified will be considered illegally working. By January 2007 all electricians working for a C10 contractor must be certified. If certification is not valid and there is fraud, please submit in writing the following information for review.

- Complainant’s name

- Date of Complaint

- The name of the person they are complaining about

- Type of Complaint

- The complaint stated in detail

- If the Complainant knows who the person’s employer is

- What classification is that person working as(General Electrician, Residential, Fire/Life Safety, VDV, NRLT)

- Address (if any)

- Phone # (if any)

- If the person is still employed



4) The last question is if an Electrician took the "General Electrician" (GE) test and passed can that individual work FLS installations and be covered by the GE certification.

This depends on the employer to determine what type of certification is required to do the job. Some employers may require a specialized certificate from the individual verses a general one.

[khixxx]

You guys think CA is crazy. I am trying to relocate to TX and they tell me I'm not qualified to take my journeyman exam. I only have a AST degree in electrical maintenance and construction. 7 years field experience in residential, commercial, and industrial fields. 5 years as a Licensed Journeyman and 2 years with my master electrician license and my electrical contractors license for the state of WV. The past 2 years I have been working evenings and nights on my own company. They told me I need to prove I have 4 years working under a master electrician. The funny part is I was told the 2 years with my masters license will count towards the 4 years I didn't know what to say when he told me that. My old boss is MIA not employed at the old company so I have to either tract him down like a dog, or contact the electrical board to get the information. I guess this stuff looks good on paper. excuse me I'm just venting.

[e57]

Larry, I think they mean "NICET" or equal that may be required by employer or job spec's.... ????????????

[sandsnow]

Larry, I think they mean "NICET" or equal that may be required by employer or job spec's.... ????????????

If you work for Pyromania Alarm Co. you can be either General Journeyman or Fire life safety at the company discretion.

NICET is not mentioned anywhere in the Fire Life Safety Certification info that I know of. Is it???

[e57]

If you work for Pyromania Alarm Co. you can be either General Journeyman or Fire life safety at the company discretion.

NICET is not mentioned anywhere in the Fire Life Safety Certification info that I know of. Is it???

Not suprisingly - it is not! Details.....:rolleyes:

[sandsnow]

Not suprisingly - it is not! Details.....:rolleyes:

Details??? Please specify

[e57]

As in "Details - Details - heh...." Why would they promote a trademarked certification they have no control over?