Re: Insurance question
Originally posted by dillon3c:
You know tex,
In reading your post,don't know if I should be offended or not.It is just about paramount to a -slur- to the Master Licensed Electricians,working the field.The Licensed Master Electrician, running these jobs.
Seems like I just witnessed,the differance in the " suit and tie attitudes" to Masters Electricans,that work these large jobs in field. I'm just guessing now,but could be the lack of "hands on in working the field experience" in lew of why this statement was made?
Shame on you,in offering up of such a statement as this, against the field electrician..
Dillon -- no slur or insult was intended at all. Sorry if you took it that way -- I certainly didn't intend to offend you.
I've worked in the field as well as in the office, from apprentice to owner, and all positions in-between, over the span of 40+ years. From small residential work up through industrial, commercial, and governmental electrical projects as large as $19,000,000.
I have nothing but high regard for qualified, skilled people in any of the various positions, including Masters (I have a number of Master licenses myself), superintendents, foremen, journeymen, estimators, project managers, etc.
I've worked with a number of people that were far more skilled at a particular position than I was. That was who I wanted to work with. I always look for people that are the best at what they do -- they are invariably more skilled and talented in those particular positions than I am. I try to utilize their skill and talent.
I was speaking strictly from a business point of view as the owner of an electrical contracting company.
If you take on a project in another state and your only Masters license that qualifies you (i.e. gives you legal "
permission ") to perform that work is someones' other than your own, then you put yourself at risk of having that job shut down if you have a disagreement with that particular employee. It doesn't matter if the Master is your on-site electrical superintendent, an in-office project manager, or your own brother.
Any time that your ability (legal permission) to perform work that you are contractually obligated to perform (electrical or otherwise) is dependent on someone elses' license, you give that other person quite a bit of leverage over you. I'm just not comfortable in doing that myself, though other contractors obviously are willing to take that risk.
I was speaking of a direct experience in this regard that went bad. The company landed a new large Multi-million $ electrical subcontract. It was the first company project in that state. It then obtained its state contracting license using the Masters license of the new guy that was hired to be the electrical superintendent for this specific project. He was the only company employee with a master license in that state. This new guy knew that the work couldn't be performed without him, and he became convinced that he didn't have to answer to anyone.
Work quality and work ethic problems developed during the course of this 18 month project. About mid-way through the job, things came to a head. The company owner tried to work things out with the guy and to get him back on-track, but he told the owner to buzz off, and that the owner couldn't fire him because he would shut down the job. Yes, he really did say that, and obviously believed it, too.
Well, the owner did fire him. And the electrical work did get shut down for a while. The Owner did a very quick search for another Master, and finally found an old guy that was retired and unable to work, but had maintained his license. He was hired by the company for the rest of the project, but pretty much just stayed at home. All he had to do was provide the license until that project was completed, and be there for inspections. He was paid a couple of thousand $ a month for doing just that -- he had no other role. It was a great deal for him and it allowed the company to complete the project without being defaulted or sued by the GC.
The company sent in one of their best superintendents to supervise completion of the project. He was highly skilled, but didn't have a masters license. He did a great job of pulling the project back on-track and correcting the installation problems. He saved the day.
In the end, though, there was a LOT of extra costs on that project. Productivity problems and fixing installation errors that were created by the original electrical superintendent, plus the added cost of employing a non-productive Master just to maintain the company state license, etc. It was an expensive lesson.
The owner did this to himself, though, by taking on a project where he didn't already have a license, then mis-judging the character of a new employee, and then making himself dependent on the license of that new employee.
The owner of the company didn't want to spend the time (and probably couldn't pass the tests) and trusted me, so he sent me around to the various states. I obtained Masters licenses in all of the places he had any interest in doing projects. I licensed the company in all of those states for a number of years.
Could I have done the same thing to the Owner? Yes, and it would have been a much larger problem for him, since I licensed all of the states. But I didn't take advantage of him or the situation.
I don't think that most Master electricians would take advantage of their employer in this manner, but I saw how much it could cost if you accidently picked the wrong guy. It's just a risk that I'm not willing to take, mainly because I don't have to -- I carry the licenses myself. If a company owner can't or doesn't want to carry the Masters license himself, then he takes a certain amount of risk. That's his choice.
So I wasn't saying anything bad about anyone that has a Masters license. For me, they're being paid for their knowledge, skill and experience. I've worked with some of the very best, and I have nothing but respect and high regard for their ability.
I just don't personally think that it is a good business decision for the owner of a company to have to depend on anyone elses license for their legal "permission" to do the work that the company (and the owner) has obligated itself to perform. If he does, he should develop some license "depth" (i.e. more than one person with the necessary licenses) just for insurance.
It may not happen often, but I've seen firsthand what can happen if the wrong owner/employee relationship goes sour.
To me, a Masters License is a designation of technical competence. It doesn't automatically make you a good employee.
Just because a doctor has an "MD" doesn't necessarily make him a good doctor.
There are many very good electricians that do not have a Masters License. There are also quite a few electricians who hold a Masters License that aren't necessarily good employees.
The license says that they may know how to do the work, but it is no quarantee that they will actually do it right. That all depends on the specific individual, not on his license.
Am I the only one who sees the electrical world this way?
