IICRC funding testing now - good or tainted?

[LisaWagnerCRS]

Hey MB'er's,

I found this R-E-A-L-L-Y interesting. (Did I say interesting... I might have meant predictable... I get those two words mixed up all of the time.)

http://realdirtoncri.wordpress.com/2010 ... oor-deals/

Okay... now, I am a little tainted here.

Did I ever tell you all about my VERY first IICRC board meeting back when I was a pup? (Well, maybe not a pup... maybe just a young beeyach...)

I was excited to meet one instructor who I had read some articles from - Jeff Bishop - and his siamese twin Ruth (the taller twin).

I was representing 400+ companies from CFI, I was honored to have the roll (no one had told me about what to expect..)

I introduced myself to them.

No smile.... no handshake... from either of them.

They kind of sized me up... and then Jeff said "you know, as a new board member you need to keep your mouth shut for several meetings, because you don't know anything..."

We only met once every 6 months for a meeting - so to be quiet for "several" meetings would mean being quiet for several YEARS.

Are you kidding me?

Ruth gave a serious nod in agreement (like a bobble head) - and they walked off. No "welcome", "glad to have you here" - nothing.

They were the most disrespectful, rudest people I met there. And instead of looking to them as role models - my alarm bells went up.

And good thing, because I started to see why they wanted me to be a quiet vote. Lots of conflicts there at that time - that even a mere BEGINNER like me could see there were questions that needed to be asked.

Ahhh... the good old days.

I bet it's more fun there today with some of the board members who I know aren't intimidated by loony tunes like my two favorite rug cleaners, who have never ran a successful rug plant, but like to pretend they have.

This industry sure is FUN!

Hope you enjoy my blog post - let me know if I'm wrong on the points I ask about. It's just my view from the outside now...and I'm happy to apologize if I've said anything wrong and have offended anyone.

:-)

Lisa

 

[John Olson]

Thanks for that Lisa. I see the rationale for the RFP and had already heard about it and I am personally behind the IICRC seeking the testing on AFD's. AFD's are a HUGE gray area between restorers and adjusters. This test will go along way in helping PROVE to the adjuster that it is a necessary part of returning a home to pre-loss condition and is very important for the respiratory health of not only the home owner but the technicians that are on the Job.


With that said what your blog had to say concerns me greatly. I am NOT a Jim Holland or ResCon fan. I took my AMRT at ResCon and if they had given me a kiss on the way out I would have known for sure that I had just got screwed. I am in total agreement that Jim starting the CRA was for profit. Until I read your blog I thought it was a for profit company. I would suspect that if he was to get audited that he would fail as a non-profit but he is playing the law of averages. If he gets caught he would get what would be in effect a fix-it ticket for the first offense, so the rewards far out way the risk at this juncture.

If the contract is rewarded to Mr. Holland then something would be very wrong. Any person that serves on the IICRC should be immediately disqualified from ANY contracts PERIOD. If Mr. Holland or anyone else that serves on the Board or in any capacity wishes to receive any contracts or monies from the IICRC now or in the future should immediately and permanently resign.

That's my 2 cents.

 

[cucu]

i think we all know the iicrc has had some "Flaws". And as you continue to point out the seedy side of the institute the back stabing and back room deals (which must be a big surpirse for some)
are you trying to make the point that its time for a new institute to be formed
"mikeys institute of rug suckers" (thats not a good name is it...just think how big his head would get)
or are you just bitter that this biz has a lot of leeches that live of the backs of others

we know the iicrc is what it is and we all have our own thoughts of it , but how would you like it to be. Is it beyond repair in your view and
do you think the bond with cri will be or should be the death nail of the iicrc

 

[Desk Jockey]

Pretty sad, how do these people sleep at night.....wouldn't their beds be lumpy from the the constant looting?

Damn the IICRC seems to be infested with sneaky, conniving, money grubbers, lining their own pockets. Just when you smoke out one scam, two others pop up.

How do you get rid of these cockroaches? :shock:

 

[The Great Oz]

The previous posts about ethics questions are explained. The conflicts in this case are undeniable, and I think the issue of testing air filtration devices would be better and more cheaply handled by someone that already has some expertise in the field. I believe IAQA is already working on this issue, so letting them publish and referencing their testing would probably be the best solution. If the IICRC wants to own the results, there are companies in the business of building and testing air movers that already have testing rooms and a third party could contract with them to keep costs down. If any competing manufacturer wre interested they could partner with the group and help share those costs. But, that's in the logical world of doing what's best for the organization.


I knew the CRA was a front organization for for-profit companies to hide behind, but originally I thought it was only to be a phony "neutral party" that would promote the owner's offerings. This happens so frequently that I didn't pay much attention; that's how the LMCCA got started.

Unfortunately the CRA have behaved miserably, trying to pretend they're a member-driven organization by raiding members from other organizations. They've pushed to become recognized by the IICRC and Connections, going so far as to apply for partnership in Connections and a board seat at the IICRC - even though they are in direct conflict with existing partners.

It really is up to the associations to publicize what the CRA is not - an unbiased association working in the best interests of the membership.

PS: Thanks for bringing these issues to light Lisa, there's too much ugly stuff going on on the shadows. Probably time to shorten the name of your blog to just The Real Dirt.