We need a universal "UL" mark ???

Status
Not open for further replies.

CBE

Member
We are going thru UL testing with someone other than UL labs. Now after the fact (we have a signed contract) we come to find out IF we obtain our UL that certain wholesalers have the right to refuse our product strictly on the fact they want to see UL and not someone else's mark. They own the business and its their choice....Reason being John Q Public "knows" the UL mark and most likely none of the other 15 NRTL that are available to each and every one of us. In addition approaching UL for possible help would be a waste. I'm sure they would just want to start over for the dollars alone.
Has there ever been any talk about some type of universal marking to replace the UL that John Q public knows? Is it that UL has so much pull with OSHA this will never happen?
 

Jraef

Moderator, OTD
Staff member
Location
San Francisco Bay Area, CA, USA
Occupation
Electrical Engineer
There already is a "universal" term, it's called having an "NRTL Label"; NRTL stands for Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory. That is how OSHA words it and technically is the ONLY type of label that is required by any codes, most of which point to OSHA as the defining list of acceptable NRTLs. So nowhere does anything say "UL" other than that list, and UL is just one of the NRTLs listed. Some larger jurisdictions such as Los Angeles and New York have their own lists of which of the OSHA NRTLs are acceptable, and may even include some that are not on that list. But nobody says UL has an exclusive. UL is just the most well known of the NRTLs, and in fact most of the others don;'t even bother to have their own testing standards, they just buy a copy from UL and use them.

UL is a company with a product to sell, namely their testing services and the development of testing standards. They are not a government agency, nor in any way affiliated with a government agency. Their name comes from "Underwriter's Laboratories", although more recently they changed it to just "UL". That was Underwriters, as in INSURANCE underwriters. UL originally was a testing lab serving the nations largest fire insurance carriers as a way of them having some way of knowing if equipment that their customers were installing was going to cause (or prevent) a fire or not. It was put together after the Chicago Columbian Exposition, where tesla and Westinghouse first displayed their AC electric lights for the world. Chicago, still remembering the Great Chicago Fire, had hired the guy that later founded UL to inspect and test the way those lights were connected and make sure they were not going to start the Chicago Fire #2. Afterward, he started a lab to do testing like that for others and insurance underwriters jumped on the idea.

So in your original post, you mentioned "We are going thru UL testing with someone other than UL labs." That would be impossible. You are going through NRTL listing, but you will not have UL listing, nor will it be UL doing the testing, nor will UL be in any way interested in discussing this with you, because you are using a competitor of theirs. That's like saying "I am using a GE breaker, except it is not made by GE, but I want GE to stand behind it". Ain't gonna happen...

That's not to say the other NRTLs are not good, but when your customer says they don't want to accept it, they have that right. You will on occasion find that an insurance company, in underwriting a fire insurance policy, will have a rider saying something to the effect of, damages in a fire determined to be caused by a device that could have been UL listed but was not, may not be covered. The insurance companies, being private enterprises, have every right to chose who's standards and testing they will or will not accept.

An ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR however cannot say that. If their jurisdiction has a requirement for an NRTL, and they defer to the OSHA list or their own list, then anyone on that list will suffice.
 

CBE

Member
I completely understand the process but maybe I didn't make it plain enough.
Maybe this might work... John Q Public almost always ask's for "does it have a UL label" ?
Im saying replace John Q Public's way of thinking....OSHA would have to step in and create a "mark" that all NRTL would use. For this conversation lets call it SE (safe electric) and therefore John Q Public would ask does it have a SE mark. All NRTL would now stamp SE not their own mark. Of course you could trace who did your testing but all products would receive a SE mark.
The point being anyone can go to any testing lab spend ten of thousands of dollars (achieve their UL number that they want) thinking OK I'm all set to place my product on the market...wrong! only to have a private company say we want the UL mark and no one else's. And of course that is their right...BUt if OSHA changed to ONE UNIVERSAL MARK the whole UL bullcrap would go away.
You would think the 15 other NRTL companies would lobby OSHA for a change to something like this. We are almost "forced" to use UL if you want to market a product.
 

CBE

Member
Just one more point MET labs is the oldest testing lab..so I would guess that they were founded before UL was started.
 

zog

Senior Member
Location
Charlotte, NC
It is what it is, when your nose runs you ask for a "Kleenex", we test with "Meggers", etc...you might have researched this a little earlier. Not trying to be mean, just telling the truth.

What does the contract you have say? "UL" or NRTL?
 

CBE

Member
ZOG...We did plenty of research but maybe you're smarter then all of us. Your telling me you would have gone door to door to different suppliers and asked would you accept any other NRTL besides UL? The world assumes a NRTL is Nationally RECOGNIZED. You would have figured all the other NTRL's are useless. Interesting. Another minor question...do you think all the other NRTL's besides UL should be required to divulge that if you spend thousands with us it may do you no good? I know the world is not perfect but I would assume being in this business for 37 years we would have heard of this issue. OK..I?m out from under the rock now.
 

Sierrasparky

Senior Member
Location
USA
Occupation
Electrician ,contractor
ZOG...We did plenty of research but maybe you're smarter then all of us. Your telling me you would have gone door to door to different suppliers and asked would you accept any other NRTL besides UL? The world assumes a NRTL is Nationally RECOGNIZED. You would have figured all the other NTRL's are useless. Interesting. Another minor question...do you think all the other NRTL's besides UL should be required to divulge that if you spend thousands with us it may do you no good? I know the world is not perfect but I would assume being in this business for 37 years we would have heard of this issue. OK..I?m out from under the rock now.

Rediculous as it may sound , Most people who manufacture products know that you a UL label is most desirable. If one does not ask why is is so then I say Tough luck. Most buyers require a UL label not a NRTL. I have heard these issues before they are not new.

I agree that in the future there should only be one label. It is what is is today though. I would support a change.
 

zog

Senior Member
Location
Charlotte, NC
ZOG...We did plenty of research but maybe you're smarter then all of us. Your telling me you would have gone door to door to different suppliers and asked would you accept any other NRTL besides UL? The world assumes a NRTL is Nationally RECOGNIZED. You would have figured all the other NTRL's are useless. Interesting. Another minor question...do you think all the other NRTL's besides UL should be required to divulge that if you spend thousands with us it may do you no good? I know the world is not perfect but I would assume being in this business for 37 years we would have heard of this issue. OK..I?m out from under the rock now.

We manufacture plenty of equipment and always go with UL, as Sierrasparks said most manufactures know that is what people look for, even if it a sham to not accept other NRTL's. It is called market reasearch.

You didn't answer my question, what does it say in your contract? UL or NRTL?, that is all that really matters in this case.
 

roger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Fl
Occupation
Retired Electrician
Most people will ask for a pair of "channel Locks" and I hand them a pair of adjustable pliars then explain that there are more than one entity making these.

I have never had a problem with a recognized NRTL's mark after I explain this same thing to the customer.

Roger
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
...
I agree that in the future there should only be one label. It is what is is today though. I would support a change.
I don't see that ever happening. The "marks" are registered trademarks of privately owned companies. I don't see a reason to try to take their marks away. The listing of products is big business. Like Roger said after you explain it to the customer they will most of the time accept the other NRTL marks. If they don't that is their choice.
I don't see any need for a change.
 

CBE

Member
Don I understand your point. But the UL label is almost like the IBM issue when they first got rolling. I'm not saying lose their mark just educate the public on a safety standard that doesn't point to one company. I'm sure UL would loose some work but the whole NRTL's become equal competitors. Isn't that what the USA is all about?
 

Smart $

Esteemed Member
Location
Ohio
Don I understand your point. But the UL label is almost like the IBM issue when they first got rolling. I'm not saying lose their mark just educate the public on a safety standard that doesn't point to one company. I'm sure UL would loose some work but the whole NRTL's become equal competitors. Isn't that what the USA is all about?
That's just it. UL has established itself through fair business practices (AFAIK). It's on the lesser recognized NRTL's to increase their exposure, consumer awareness, and ultimately their recognition.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
UL 1008 is what is on the contract..
That, in itself, does not require that you use UL. It just requires that the product be listed to that standard. It is still your customers choice as to the acceptance or lack thereof of the listing mark.
 

renosteinke

Senior Member
Location
NE Arkansas
"Plenty of research" left plenty to be desired.

It's pretty simple ... some folks want a Cadillac, and don't care a bit how nice your Lincoln may be.

That's the issue.

UL is a private firm. It's only product is its' opinion, its' reputation. They have had more than a century to develop their brand name. They own it, and they protect it. It's that simple.

There are competitors- especially now, since UL went the "ISO 9000" certification route. There's also that fine detail that it's simply illegal for any government to steer commerce to any individual business. Code can insist something be 'listed,' but they cannot insist itbe UL listed.

Private customers, however, have the right to buy only what they want. If they want UL, then that's who you need.

If your researcher didn't figure this one out, maybe you should ask for a refund.
 
"Plenty of research" left plenty to be desired.

It's pretty simple ... some folks want a Cadillac, and don't care a bit how nice your Lincoln may be.

That's the issue.

UL is a private firm. It's only product is its' opinion, its' reputation. They have had more than a century to develop their brand name. They own it, and they protect it. It's that simple.

There are competitors- especially now, since UL went the "ISO 9000" certification route. There's also that fine detail that it's simply illegal for any government to steer commerce to any individual business. Code can insist something be 'listed,' but they cannot insist itbe UL listed.

Private customers, however, have the right to buy only what they want. If they want UL, then that's who you need.

If your researcher didn't figure this one out, maybe you should ask for a refund.

Also, a manufacturer assembling components into a UL listed product must be using components with a UL mark and no others. If the UL field reps see ETL, MET, etc components in a facility it's an immediate red flag. It might not be right, but it's the way it is.

As for the OP's specific situation, does the contract state you have to have UL marks on your parts or does it state you are to be UL1008 certified? Legally speaking there's a big difference.
 

Jraef

Moderator, OTD
Staff member
Location
San Francisco Bay Area, CA, USA
Occupation
Electrical Engineer
Im saying replace John Q Public's way of thinking.

LOL, OK good luck with that... Madison Avenue has been doing that for a century now, they have barely made a difference. I once read that for every million dollars spent on marketing, it's considered a rousing success if they influence 1/10th of 1% of the target audience. Most people buy on reputation or recommendation from someone they know or trust. That's because the concept of "caveat emptor" has been around for a long long time in our society.

But still, I think maybe you were missing my point. "NRTL" is exactly what you are referring to as being needed, and I'm saying it already exists. But who is going to "market" it, the Government? LOL! Nobody has a vested interest in making a generic term better known and in fact others have a vested interest in NOT having a generic term, namely those who are making money on their reputation.

20+ years ago when I first got my UL508A label, a competitor called ETL, Electrical Testing Labs, took on UL's dominance. ETL had been around since Thomas Edison, but outside of GE, nobody had heard of them. To make inroads against UL, ETL salespeople went out and promised that if you signed up with them instead of UL, and anyone rejected it in favor of UL, they would bear the court costs involved in any challenges. Sounded great, but who needs that kind of headache? I certainly had no time for that kind of unproductive nonsense just to save a few bucks on labeling costs. Then I found out that ETL didn't even have their own test standards, they relied on UL to develop them! That sounded like dirty pool to me, I never liked it.

If there was a big publicly funded project however that an ETL listed shop went after and won, then to have the Engineer reject them, ETL went after it tooth and nail because they could jump all over the "restrictive trade practices" issue in public bids. They did, and won some key challenges. But that also had the unintended consequence of spawning a host of other agencies that wanted a piece of that pie, which in essence just depleted ETLs own market share because people who trusted UL continued to trust them and the only ones who went for something else were the bargain hunters. That then eventually ended up resulting in the NRTL issue being created within OSHA as a way of at least vetting some of the myriad testing labs that were springing up all over, some good, some bad. ETL eventually bought up a lot of the smaller players to get them out of the way and they themselves were bought up by another, called Intertek. But out in the wild, ETL has the next most recognized brand name among NRTLs after UL, but nobody outside of a small group had heard of Intertek, so Intertek still uses the ETL label even though technically, ETL no longer exists as a separate company. The power of brand recognition is too great to pass up on.
 

geerhed

Member
Location
Your six.
M A R K E T I N G

ETL may be older, but UL started writing Standards first. First into the market has significant controls on it. Brand recognition is huge.
I'm in high voltage, and I've seen engineering specs where the whole kitchen sink of Standards was thrown in. One contant? UL Listing. Not CSA certification, not MET or ETL Marks. Sometimes the engineer requires it, sometimes the source company does, but regardless, UL has gotten their name out in the public eye thanks to their work writing Standards and certifying to them.

UL wrote their first standard in 1903; CSA wasn't even established until 1919. IEEE doesn't "mark" anything, they write Standards others use.

Marking is done by private companies, and moving away from brand recognition and loyalty would take immense power. Who would drive such and effort? The branded companies? They would be cutting their own throats. The federal government? Yikes.



Does Intertek mark bottled water? Does TUV? Guess what...UL does. First in the market controls it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top