• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

CBO And MCP

Thomas Nabors

Thomas Nabors

REGISTERED
Joined
Sep 20, 2016
Messages
14
Location
Newberry S.C.
Why has ICC changed the whole format to obtaining your CBO and MCP. Just to get the MCP there are extra hoops to jump through. Just would like to get some opinions on this and who all its affecting. My idea behind this is that this is the ICC's way of getting more money from you in a market where inspectors and officials are hard to come by
 
I knew they changed the CBO and Fire Marshall, have not checked the MCP. Anything specifically?
 
yes, since they done away with the 01 and 02 to the MM, MG, BS you have to take a new test, the CS (code specialist) if you want to try to do it the old way with having all your combo inspector certs.
 
Good morning to all! Yes it may appear that this was just a money grab with the changes to the CBO and MCP at face value. However revenue was not the motivation for the changes. The thought was to raise the bar / standard to increase the value and especially the creditability of the respective certifications. Looking at this for the future 1, 5, 10, 20 years out the vision I see is that the certifications would be part of a degreed program for a 2, 4, or 6 year college degree. Btw, I believe that accreditation is also on the horizon. I hope this helps at least a little bit understanding the method to the madness.
 
Thanks Jim........glad to see you posting!

Are you ready for the eclipse? Have half your ranch rented out?
 
Yes we are ready for the eclipse. Patty & I took the day off so we were not in town for the madness. I could have rented out to RV's and such but money is not everything. I value my space and quiet a lot more than a buck. Greg and Rene Wheeler are coming up from Thorton Colorado to spend the weekend with us. Fly fishing East Tensleep Creek Saturday the 20th and kick back some adult beverages on the deck and watch the eclipse on Monday the 21st.
 
Could these additional testing requirements be benefiting the third party inspectors with City's not wanting to foot the bill for additional fees? Just wondering.
 
Not sure as I have never worked for a 3rd party or have ever seen what their budgets look like. I would expect the for profit companies would surely be looking at their bottom line just like jurisdictions should be doing. I also wonder what would be the real difference? Government vs. 3rd party as it relates to the value of certification on a philosophical level?
 
jpranch said:
Good morning to all! Yes it may appear that this was just a money grab with the changes to the CBO and MCP at face value. However revenue was not the motivation for the changes. The thought was to raise the bar / standard to increase the value and especially the creditability of the respective certifications. Looking at this for the future 1, 5, 10, 20 years out the vision I see is that the certifications would be part of a degreed program for a 2, 4, or 6 year college degree. Btw, I believe that accreditation is also on the horizon. I hope this helps at least a little bit understanding the method to the madness.
Click to expand...

Really, Jim????
Thanks for the spin. But I don't buy it. How nice for the International Cash Cow if ICC certifications become part of degree programs. That only means more profit for ICC. It would add the the number of certs they sell and strengthen their profit margins. Typical capitalist logic.

Any college that relies on ICC certification will only be frustrated by the inconsistency of the ICC Certification Program. In the last 14 years, I have seen it changed too many times. And the examples of the MCP, CBO and FM requirements are just a few recent corporate greed.
 
Understood. Perhaps I was not as clear as I should have been, Part of a degree program. Not a whole program. For architects, engineers, construction management, building maintenance, ect... Oh, almost forgot the High School Technical Training program that ICC has that does not make a penny. Btw, I don't spin. Never have and never will. Now if ICC does receive revenue(s) above operating expenses the real question is where dose that money go? The best answer I can give you will be in the financial report that will be in the agenda for the Annual Business Meeting in Columbus next month. "Corporate greed" wow... I've been accused of a lot of things in my 59 years but that is a new one. It truly, truly saddens me to be viewed in that ugly light.
 
jpranch said:
Good morning to all! Yes it may appear that this was just a money grab with the changes to the CBO and MCP at face value. However revenue was not the motivation for the changes. The thought was to raise the bar / standard to increase the value and especially the creditability of the respective certifications. Looking at this for the future 1, 5, 10, 20 years out the vision I see is that the certifications would be part of a degreed program for a 2, 4, or 6 year college degree. Btw, I believe that accreditation is also on the horizon. I hope this helps at least a little bit understanding the method to the madness.
Click to expand...


Good to hear from you!!!
 
Thanks. Inspector Gift. To respond I'm a part of the corporation these days. So let's wind the clock back 4 or 5 years ago when I was the one calling the ICC a cash cow. At least as my personal experience and thought process years ago I would have the same perception. With that I ran for the board when the ABM was in Phoenix and went down in flames. Ran again in Portland and was successful. Since being elected I have served on many committees for the board. To the point of the conservation I have served on the budget committee, audit committee, investment committee, and many others. Yes the ICC has to have dependable revenue streams . But to suggest it is at the expense of our members that is something I have not seen. Yes I have been challenged in many ways but please rest assured that your current board as well as past ones that I'm familiar with have never ever considered the money the sole primary reason to take action on anything. It's much bigger and broader than that. I can tell you that the ICC is currently in the best financial position since it's inception. Also rest assured that with that current position a heck of a lot of thought has been given for the direction of the association. Member focused to be sure and financially solid. I don't know how to better express my experience on the board.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top