Interview with Werner Braun PART TWO 3-14 -07

[Jim1]

Regarding equipment, I am specifically asking about small manufacturers and others who refuse to be tested. Also, older truckmounts no longer in production? How will these be handled? Prochem, Hydramaster, etc. all have units no longer in production!

If I understand correctly the initial INTENT was NOT to be used as a standard for requirement in warantees. A yes or no will suffice.

Also - AGAIN - Is it CRI's opinion that ANY/ALL equipment not approved will damage any of a carpet's characteristics?

Jim McDannel

 

[Lonnie]

Thanks for your reply,
I am also taking my personal time to address issues that effect thousands of cleaners.

However you did not answer the questions.

Please answer all questions in a complete manner. What you gave people was a political spin which is not appreciated.

Let me add this to the list:
CRI has no protocol for testing Low Moisture Systems..how do you expect people to submit systems for a test that doesn't exist?

Why would CRI not listen the multitude of skilled professionals that weighed in at Georgia Tech?

 

[Mikey P]

Brummitt


I get 40% of my new customers from 7 Flooring Retailers. If and when they get the letter from Shaw demanding them to refer a SOA firm I could then be in a world of hurt.


Up to this minute I have not lost one cent over this.

 

[Guest]

In the ICS Mag you said that this program is a "win win for all". Explain how it's a win win for the owner operator or the small carpet cleaning business.

 

[Mikey P]

Well then, without naming names, can you tell us what TYPE of machines have failed?

 

[Werner Braun]

If a truckmount is tested with a single wand, but is used in the common dual wand configuration, how does that effect the approval status?

Take care,
Lisa

Lisa, this is similar to the question I tried to address earlier and gets at the credibility of the SOA program. On one hand, you would expect that individuals and companies that went to the time and expense to have their truck mounts tested would be reputable and would use the equipment as submitted and tested. On the other hand, there may be a need for occasional and random audits to insure that the program is not being abused and the customer short changed.

We certainly understand that wands are critical to the optimal performance of extractors. The C&M IMT is currently developing test protocols to better understand the impact of various wands on extractor cleaning performance. W

 

[Werner Braun]

How much money has CRI taken in and how much does it project to obtain over the years from this project and what margine of profit does the program have?

Lonnie, I assure you CRI is not making money off the SOA program and certainly there is no margin of profit to be enjoyed for us as a non-profit organization. The testing fees are used to pay for the testing done by the independent laboratory. The small difference between the test and the actual cost to the manufacture covers CRI's administrative costs for the program. W

 

[Mike Brummett]

If a homeowner has a non-approved "home" cleaning extractor and THEY use that equipment to clean their own carpets, does this void their SOA-linked carpet warranty?

MIKE

 

[Werner Braun]

"There is an annual renewal fee of $1000 per tested product."

Curious why that is?
Do the machines need to retest?

If not, then why the yearly extortion money from manufactures and private owners who have their machines certified "Oakie Doakie" with your org?

Is the goal to set standards of performance, or to create a money flow to your org?

..L.T.A.

The $1000 renewal fee is for the Space Foundation seal and has nothing to do with SOA. The SOA renewal fee is $50 and covers CRI's admin. W

 

[Guest]

In the ICS Mag you state

Finally, and I hate to be the bearer of bad news to the Internet conspiracy theorists, but CRI does not have a relationship with IICRC and/or the member mills when it comes to SOA or recommended service providers.

Isn't the CRI a supporter of the IICRC?


http://www.iicrc.org/supporters.shtml

 

[Werner Braun]

In your article in Installation & Cleaning Specialist you made a comment regarding "orphan machines" where you mentioned the possibility of testing with SOA Certified Cleaning Agents and a SOA Certified Wand.

Have you tested wands independently? Or do you consider a wand that has already been tested with a SOA machine to be the SOA Certified Wand?

Jim, in talking to Gary Asbury, it is my understanding during the course of routine testing they have acquired a considerable amount of comparative data on wands. It is my understanding that the wand is a critical component for optimum cleaning results. The C&M IMT has authorized PTL to do additional testing of wands so that we may better understand the impact of wands on cleaning performance. W

 

[The Preacher]

why not just drop all the other stuff and have a fee schedule for chems, machines, space foundations patch???

you seem to be saying CRI doesn't have anything to do with this, but you sure are investing a lot of time and admin resources to this program???

 

[Guest]

How are you guys going to randomly audit machines and systems when you dont even have a practicle way to get to all the machines that would need to be tested ?

As has been said numerous times from real professionals in the field , its not the machine its the operator. Wouldn't it be more prudent to concentrate on proper training and advertisements focused toward promoting trained professional cleaners instead of this program that first and foremost will benefit the franchises and put undue hardship on the mom and pop operators ?

James

 

[Lonnie]

Sir,
With respect...

You posted to this and never placed an answer to anything...this is now being asked a third time....Can you please answer the questions below...

Mike Brummett wrote:
O.K., Terry, you've had your fun, now back to the legitimate questions:

Werner:

The current SOA testing has been on deep cleaning, or extraction systems.

Will CRI be testing some of the other viable cleaning methods, such as bonnet/pad cleaning and encapsulation cleaning? And if so, approximately when?

Also, will these methods, equipment chemicals, etc. be eligible for SOA ratings?

Mike, the C&M IMT has on their priorty list consideration of a program for interim cleaning systems such as bonnet, etc. The encapsulation systems can already be tested under the existing SOA systems program. W

Thanks, MIKE

 

[truckmount girl]

Why would the CRI allow a marketing designator like the Space Foundation Seal, which gives nothing but preferential positioning for large companies (franchises) but is cost prohibitive for small firms? The offering of this designator for sale would seem to me to greatly compromise the integrity of the program's basic mission. When added to the costs of testing it becomes prohibitive for most. Is this ethical?

How do you feel about this issue?

Thanks and take care,
Lisa

 

[harryhides]

Mr Werner.

I have some questions and concerns, not about the science but about the criteria and how they were established. So instead of asking "where's the beef" I ask "where's the coffee, tea, coke, pet hair, cooking oils and wine in your test soil?"

The white paper entitled "X-Ray fluorescence and the quantification of test matter extracted from carpet by Gary Asbury of PTL and Robert F Shannon of KeyMaster Technologies, it states on page 8, 2nd paragraph, that they apply 6 grams of each compound or 30 gram in total to 1,000 grams of nylon pellets, then they use 250 grams out of the 1,000 grams of coated pellets to soil the test carpet. see first 2 paragraphs on page 4. This would amount to approx 1/4 of 30 grams or 7.5 grams of soil to a piece of carpet 400 sq inches in size ( like 16x25 inches). Since 28 grams = one ounce, that means that they are using approx one quarter of an ounce of "soil" per carpet strip.

This is then being cleaned with anywhere from from 4 "passes" for residential to 44 "passes" on commercial. Is it any wonder that a Rug Doctor passes? I can doctor your criteria to ensure that several more CRI member's home cleaning units will also pass - Hoover, Bissel, Electrolux etc.

Who determined what amount of soil was to be used?
Who decided on how many passes would be used? and what bearing does this have on the reality of how many passes are actually made by the cleaner?
Who decided on the 55% bar for a bronze seal?
How do you really expect to raise standards with 55% bar?
Most of us are WAY above that already and that is why we are incensed.

Do you really suppose that the end user will take the time to inform herself of the difference between using or hiring bronze or silver or gold equipment ?
Why do you state the SOA was launched in 2005 when we both know that it all began in 2002 and had to be dropped?

You have often stated that you do not understand why we as cleaners do not support this program in it's present form. Given the lack of transparency and any lack of consulting with professional cleaners you do really wonder why?

 

[dmsclean]

Lisa,
where is you proof that it provides preferential treatment? -ps. i am on yuour side-

 

[The Cleaning Artist]

The Auto industry tried this approach and they got sued. I suspect if a mill "requires" instead of "recommends" this progam they too will be sued. I am already talking with a large firm that does huge class action lawsuits. They are gathering more information to see if they want to initate further.

 

[Werner Braun]

MR Werner

What do you know about racketeering and collusion ?

I have talked with our local state Representative

Let me see if I have this right

SOA approved machines and chemicals?

YOU have to be a IICRC certified firm to do the cleaning.

Sounds like if you don't join the union you can work?

Now I am being nice so answer the questions!!!!!!

T, CRI has developed the SOA programs in response to customer dissatisfaction relative to their carpet cleaning experience. I'm sure that we both share the desired outcome that the customer be satisfied with their cleaning.

CRI does not nor will we prescribe a recommended service provider and that includes IICRC. (I must say at a personal level that I have an enormous amount of respect for the IICRC and the cleaning professionals and firms that are certified by them.)

CRI has no input or control of what a mill decides to do with respect to their warranties. Decisions to tie warranties to the CRI SOA programs or specific service providers are solely the responsibility of the mill. W


T

 

[harryhides]

Mr Werner, please be open and honest with us. Is it true that most of the cleaning agents that failed were made by SC Johnson or other suppliers to the janitorial market?
Is it not true that the real problem with carpet maintenance is in the commercial part of the industry ? If that is so why are you first targeting the residential cleaner who is far more likely to be certified and using a truck-mounted unit?

And why oh why has there been NO MENTION of the commercial component of the testing?
Is it really credible to allow Rug Doctor to pass a commercial test and to get "Approved" for a rental machine that we all know is used primarily on residential carpet?

 

[Guest]

CRI has no input or control of what a mill decides to do with respect to their warranties. Decisions to tie warranties to the CRI SOA programs or specific service providers are solely the responsibility of the mill.

Did the CRI approach the mills about the SOA program or did the mills approach the CRI? I'm sure the CRI didn't just create the SOA program for the heck of it.

I'm guessing that the CRI had the idea and approached the mills, telling them how they can save millions of dollars a year in claims. Is this true?

 

[dmsclean]

connection = $$$$$$

 

[Werner Braun]

CRI created the Seal of Approval programs to test and recognize cleaning chemicals, extractors, and systems that work. The independent decisions by certain mills to tie their warranties to the CRI SOA programs came a year or two after the decision was made to initiate the SOA programs. As I've stated before, I'm gratified that the some mills have come to the independent conclusion that CRI's SOA programs are credible enough to be tied to their warranties. W

Some of the same people of CRI have other interests. Do you think they may have a "conflict of interest"?

Seems so to me as those persons and their other affiliations make a connection to getting your SOA program backed.

Harley, the C&M IMT is composed of CRI carpet manufacturing members, suppliers and associates. In one way or another everyone on the IMT and, for that matter, in CRI has a vested interest in this issue. Everyone wants to see the customer satisfied with their cleaning experience and their carpet purchase. Because of the diversity and number of IMT members, no one with a narrow personal interest can dominate the decisions made by the IMT. In addition, if any member believes the IMT has made a bad decision, that member may appeal that decision to the entire Board of Directors. I do not believe that conflicts of interest have had ANY impact on the development of the CRI SOA programs. W

 

[Werner Braun]

Mr Braun.
A friend who cannot be here tonight has asked me to ask the following question:

In your prior interview on this forum you emphatically indicated that the testing protocol was identical for both truckmounts and portables. Yet we see on the CRI website itself (“deep cleaning systemsâ€ÂÂ

 

[-JB-]

Well this is more like it, this is the Hot Seat I know and love.

WELCOME TO THE HOT SEAT W.


"The customers told the CRI that they were dissatisfied with their cleaning/maintenance", give us a break, I'd wager that more of our clients know who we are (all us smaller companies) than have ever even heard of the CRI, the same goes for the independent retailers too.

The last statement may not be the most constructive use of the Internet, but it doesn't make it any the less true does it?

Mikey, it is not our policy to publish such data. We only publish the ones that pass.

W he didn't ask for policy he asked a legitimate question, your organization makes it very clear that some of the best extractor manufactures are not approved because they choose not to participate, the policy states that you cannot disclose what units failed, and you wonder why they won't participate? Hmmm? :roll:

 

[Werner Braun]

I'm guessing that if you fork over the money to get a machine or chem tested ... you'll pass and get a rating. If you keep up the annual fee you'll keep your rating.

Is that correct? If not how many have failed? What manufacturers have failed?

Shawn, you would be guessing wrong. There have been numerous machines that have paid for testing and failed to get a rating. If you do pass the test and continue to pay the small renewal fee annually you will indeed keep your rating. We do not make it a policy to name those who have failed the test, but among the chemicals, the rate of failure was as high as 75 percent in the early going and continues to hover around the 25 percent range. W

 

[Mikey P]

If the Rug Doctor machine that we used at my Fest this past week can pass your test I just cant imagine what other kind of professional extractor wouldn't.




Can I assume that the Hoover and Bissell type machines are the ones that failed your testing then?

 

[MarkCermak]

Change the policy and publish the failed equipment/chems/systems.

 

[Werner Braun]

Mr Braun, could you please clarify if there are different tests for different equipment?

Steve Poulos tells there are indeed different tests.
He tells us the tests for a Hydromaster Boxer 427 and Rotary Dri-Master tool were as follows;

Three carpet samples

sample 1.) 4 wet or dry passes
sample 2.) 4 wet or dry passes
sample 3.) 4 wet or dry passes

The results were used to determine ranking.



However, their Express Multi Surface Machine with Extraction Head was tested in this way:

1 carpet sample:

4 passes
Turned 90 degrees
4 passes
Turned 90 degrees

This went on 11 times for a total of 44 passes on one carpet, versus 4 with the 427 and Dri-Master

That sounds like two different tests to me.

Are you aware of this?
Has this different type of testing been changed since Hydromaster's tests in August '05?

Thank you

..l.T.A.

Larry, it is my belief that what you are referring to above was done before the extractor systems program was in place. Further, it is my understanding that several manufacturers have worked with Professional Testing Labs independently to enhance the performance of their equipment before submitting equipment under the SOA program. Outside the program manufacturers can specify anything they want in an attempt to undertstand the performance of their equipment better.

Within the SOA cleaning systems program which was introduced mid-2006, the system submitter can specify the cleaning methodology for his system. Now, before you go crazy, let me add that we have established an independent review board that reviews these methodologies to determine whether they are reasonable and representative of actual application in the field. In fact, we have already referred two cases for review to the board. W

 

[Werner Braun]

Re: CRI-SOA

Wow, you all have a super wide and varied concern over the program. I have been involved with the SOA program from the onset and have been to PTL for equipment testing. Did I mention I work for a manufacturer?
Our firm has two interests with this program. First, sales is interested because we would like to have more sales. Second and to me was the engineering dept that finally had a quantifiable way to measure that was superior to anything available in the past.

For us, it's a start for a serious bit of improvement to the industry.
My Question would be this,
As a consumer, how does one identify thedifferencee between a commercial SOA test and a residential test. I've had both tested and can't tell which is which on the website.

Steve,Clearly you raise a great point and the IMT has discussed how we might better our website. We are in the process of re-designing our entire site and I would suspect our "new" and improved version will rectify some of the problems you have mentioned. W