the article does really good about pointing out the problems but does very little at suggesting a solution, its like my wife who sometimes complains about something, unless you offer a solution quit complaining I say.
is the
IICRC meant to take a totally unskilled person and make them into a extremely skilled pro, I say no. my point is that only comes with experience, can't we all agree that is worth something?? and further yet is there really any other substitute for it?? I say no. the value of the
IICRC as I see it is, we agree to operate under a set of standards, these standards govern the methods we use and basic procedures to follow. Ideally this is recognized by the consumer. I don't see anything wrong with training someone what they need to do to stay out of trouble, shouldn't this be the first thing anyone is taught.
its like when I first went to work for rainbow international, I went through their training program, which IMO was better than anything the
IICRC has offered, there was hands on etc. however when I started out, I sucked as a cleaner realistically. I don't feel like I really started doing good work until I was doing it for a year or so. the point is the
IICRC should be seen as a companion to the experience we already get in the field.
no amount of hands on will equal experience in the field, what about the stains that come back on a carpet, wick backs on glue downs, and the hundreds of other issues that crop up in the field, this can't be simulated in a class room. so I say accept the
IICRC for what it is, and that is the only body or group that has widely accepted standards in our industry, is it perfect no, could something else be better yeah, but IMO its going to cost more to do it, and it must be more widely accepted. will the industry support that, I say no. standards are good for the industry, especially for say like the water damage industry, they allow us to prove we did the job correctly.
