Contractors and education, take 2

[jar546]

This brings up a good point (and very timely for me!). I am in the midst of a conversation with my local HBA regarding just this issue (lack of code knowledge), and they seem somewhat receptive - even indicating that they would be open to undergoing training. The problem is - in our area, we have no training providers. They are asking if I would be willing to conduct the trainings. On one hand, I would be more than happy to assist them, but on the other hand, I have some serious reservations about - as Builder Bob says -- being the "educator and regulator". A third-party fresh perspective on codes would benefit them much more than having me do it.What are your thoughts on wearing a teacher's hat on Tuesday night, and showing up on their jobsites on Wednesday morning in your inspector hat? Somehow seems to veer into the gray periphery of "conflict of interest" territory, doesn't it???

Great question!!

I have provided presentations to electricians and other inspectors on the energy code and lighting. No problems and it was great PR.

I have provided a code seminar for a restoration company and insurance adjusters. No problems and it shed a lot of light on the issues along with clarifying others.

I do see the potential conflict but the end result of how it affects the opinions of the contractors will be up the the perception of the individual contractor.

With that being said, I prefer to have them hear it from someone else as it helps to validate my decisions.

 

[Yankee]

This brings up a good point (and very timely for me!). I am in the midst of a conversation with my local HBA regarding just this issue (lack of code knowledge), and they seem somewhat receptive - even indicating that they would be open to undergoing training. The problem is - in our area, we have no training providers. They are asking if I would be willing to conduct the trainings. On one hand, I would be more than happy to assist them, but on the other hand, I have some serious reservations about - as Builder Bob says -- being the "educator and regulator". A third-party fresh perspective on codes would benefit them much more than having me do it.What are your thoughts on wearing a teacher's hat on Tuesday night, and showing up on their jobsites on Wednesday morning in your inspector hat? Somehow seems to veer into the gray periphery of "conflict of interest" territory, doesn't it???

I don't see a conflict because in the field one takes the position of educator anyway. Educate, then enforce. My personal preference would be to have the education more in the form of a round table discussion on a given topic than a flat out lecture. One of the most beneficial sentences I have ever been taught to say is "Well, lets see what the code book has to say about your question". That way, I am not "winging" the language even if I know the subject well, and focuses both parties on an inanimate object instead of each other.

 

[DRP]

I've read a good bit online, for instance jars wall bracing post was very good. The website could have a repository of reference papers that you all could peer review and post for contractor education. If these were free to post to other forums that would not be a bad thing either.

Codes, I agree with old Hammurabi, chisel them in stone and post them in the village square for all to see. Happily mine are.

 

[tbz]

This has been a thread that has been getting better every time I read it.

I have always seen a reason for general full service contractors to be fully knowledgeable of many things and have training in many disciplines and codes are just one of those items.

However, how do you classify a specialty company that never really works outside their small box as a contractor and then justify having them know and maintain knowledge of items they never get in to.

Daddy-o how does VA handle specialty contractors like my company that only work on stairs, balconies, guards and handrails?

Do you see a reason a company like mine or let’s say a company that just does gutters or may be just does flooring or tile, should be required to have a full contractor’s license?

Having to know, for an example, how to build a hotel complex to sell and install gutters, just seems a little over kill.

The conflict I see is that under some states licensing requirements, the gutter guy has to know how to do foundations in order to sell and install his gutter line of products, why add that to the mix, what do you gain? Just hire priced gutters.

Without a sub licensing program in place, overly restrictive requirements for licensing just drives up the costs for clients to a point were there ends up being a large difference in cost for sub-contractors being legit and going rogue, and I see many just saying where small and screw it.

The idea is not to make it so hard as to keep out many, but rather make it so that those that do the work want to be a part of the system and see the reason for knowing the information. Just mandating a requirement will just breed further separation between doing it legally and doing it off the books.

As for requiring code books on site, I know the building officials won't want to hear this but that is an easy one to fix today. Just figure out what the cost is to have copies of the IBC & IRC that you adopted in house, add the cost to the permit and hand them a copy with the approved drawings, put a stamp on it with the permit number this copy of the code must remain on site with the prints at all times.

Heck why not buy the commentary version to explain the code reasons.

If they need additional copies like for A117, NEC or plumbing you could add them in.

I sure the ICC would love it. :devil

Tom

 

[globe trekker]

The problem is - in our area, we have no training providers.

Code Neophyte,

No disprespect to you, but there are training providers everywhere. All it takes is an earnest desire

to learn. To have that earnest desire means it will take effort, ...money & time. I have to pay for

all of my own testing, ...my transportation costs and any additional study aides that I feel will

benefit me and help me to understand and administer the various codes.

Just sayin'!

.

 

[jar546]

My opinion with many of the building trades:

It is easier to complain to municipal politicians and spend trade association money on lobbyist to get laws changed than it is to actually learn your job and minimum requirements.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Do contractors really need to "know" the code and have a code book on every job? I don't think so. The contractor is required to build to the plans and specs. Most problems arise when there is a lack of details on how an item should be built such as fastening table not on the drawings or the DP's most common phrase "install per code"

 

[Coug Dad]

On larger commercial projects, I add to the specifications that the contractor provide set of codes at the project site and then turn them over to the owner at the end. This allows questions at the site to be answered relative to the actual code being used (as opposed to guessing) and the owner then has a set of codes (kept in the building engineer's office) under which the building has been designed and built. This really comes in handy a few years down the road when the code has changed and questions arise regarding "what were they thinking" during the original design.

 

[tbz]

Jar,

I would have to disagree with your last post, it is not cheaper, it is more costly because you always have to pay the politician and lobbyist year after year on each project they screw up.

Learning to do it right your out lay is far cheaper.

Educating them to understand that is were the politicians have you beat, they prefer them coming back again and again.

 

[FredK]

Code Neophyte

I remember when we went from the old IBC to the new 94 version with shear walls really starting to be defined as to location. My boss was a structural engineer and we as the AHJ provided a two class on the subject. We asked around and got Simpson and the Wood products guys (I-joist from Boise Cascade, APW, etc) to also speak on their products. About 80 people showed up (code, engineers, builders and designers) to learn about the changes and what we were going to be looking for in the field and on plans.

Did we get everyone--no. Did they get it right--no. Was it a start yes.

So if there's an construction area that shows a general weakness call around and there are instructors that will show up just to sell their product or how to use their product. Worst case is ICC has instructors that can tailor a class for you ($$). Banging your head doesn't do it.

Me--I'm comfortable doing the one on one for the guy in the field since I know he'll never get a code book, open it or read it. Explained stairs one time to this guy that framed in something wrong a few years back. Explained what was wrong and to this day if he's on the job he'll take the time to show the stairs to me since he's proud of his work.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Yankee]

Do contractors really need to "know" the code and have a code book on every job? I don't think so. The contractor is required to build to the plans and specs. Most problems arise when there is a lack of details on how an item should be built such as fastening table not on the drawings or the DP's most common phrase "install per code"

We don't require construction specs for residential permitting. So yes, the builder needs to know what to do.

 

[bgingras]

We don't require construction specs for residential permitting. So yes, the builder needs to know what to do.

In MA, most plans only show basic info when it comes to residential construction. Plans rarely, if ever, show details concerning fire and draft stopping and other items that arise as bigger issues on inspections. A plan may state 2x6 16" o.c with 2x8 joists, 2x10 rafters, etc. They will not show attachment details, etc. Most of the time, the contractor (myself included) is the one drawing the plans for these structures. It's up to the person on the ground at the site to know the codes to be able to build what is drawn properly AND to code. Maybe the answer is RDPs only draw house plans, or we require a lot more detail during plan review. The bottom line is most contractors couldn't care less and will only do it right if it's found on an inspection.

 

[FredK]

.... or we require a lot more detail during plan review. The bottom line is most contractors couldn't care less and will only do it right if it's found on an inspection.

It's expected here to have that detail on the plans before they submit/or get a permit. How they do it in the field may be another mater.

 

[bgingras]

Around here you are called "unreasonable" by asking for any detail at all. I start my new job on Monday as inspector and plan review, my first question will be what they define as unreasonable. I really think the inspectors job in the field is enhanced by good plan review. Having been the inspector in the field, I hope I can avert many of the plan review issues I ran into onsite, but again, that all depends on the definition of unreasonable.

 

[mtlogcabin]

For house plans we have many details that we will print and attach to the drawings (Miltons Rule) that way we are not "unreasonable". The inspectors carry copies in the trucks and hand them out when needed. It is all about education to get compliance and a picture with the code lanquage makes it so much clearer to the guy in the field then just citing a code section. The contractor can be the biggest code geek in the world but if the guy swinging the hammer or installing the window isn't instructed in a manner that they can comprehend you will have problems all the time with your regular workers. The homeowner and newbies are just part of the job.

 

[bgingras]

I agree that education is a big part of the job. I agree that "how do I approve this" should be the guide, and we should be aiding in that where possible. I built a home 3 years ago in a no to be mentioned town in MA. I submitted nearly 80 pages wrong with the permit application. I got a 3 page list of corrections/questions back, when I asked him about them, he said he doesn't approve any application the first time because he can always find something missing. my correction items included "How will you be storing the trusses after delivery?"...during the project I had a neighbor come over and ask he we got a permit, he had gone through 3 contractors and an engineer just to build an attached 2 car garage and the inspector didn't like anybody's plans. That department was my definition of unreasonable....anyway, I still think more education of contractors is needed, but it takes inspectors not feeling superior and actually helping and willing to teach to make that happen.

 

[JBI]

R106.3 Examination of documents. The building official shall examine or cause to be examined construction documents for code compliance.

Even the IRC requires code compliant submittals. Whether prepared by a DP or a Contractor or a homeowner, the reviewers job is to verify code compliance prior to approval.

That said, Contractors need to understand the code provisions that are germaine to the work they undertake, and need to follow the approved plans in the field - professionally prepared or not.

Inspectors shouldn't have to carry code books around with them, that's ludicrous.

The approved plans, demonstrating code compliance or better, need to be on the jobsite.

If you want a code based answer, the inspector can

a) call the office and have someone look it up or better yet

b) tell you he will look it up and get back to you.

Fortunately I live in an area where training is easy to get.

Unfortunately not enough people take the opportunity...

 

[TimNY]

I don't see any conflict with teaching the code and enforcing the code. In the end the code will prevail.

What possible conflict could there be?

I agree in that training is out there. The problem is, what kind of training is it? I know Simpson will do great training seminars.. on Simpson products. I believe there is a lot of specialized training.. But very little on the basics. Not every contractor is at the level where they need to know the difference between a round hole and a triangular hole in the joist hanger; some contractors need to know where a joist hanger is required.

 

[bgingras]

R106.3 Examination of documents. The building official shall examine or cause to be examined construction documents for code compliance. Inspectors shouldn't have to carry code books around with them, that's ludicrous.

The approved plans, demonstrating code compliance or better, need to be on the jobsite.

I pretty much ALWAYS have a code book with me, along with plenty of paper. I also try to take the file with me so I have a set of plans. There is never a code book on the site, when a contractor wants to debate something they expect us to look it up and show them, and they almost never have a set of plans on the site, never mind the approved set. I've been told I'm to hard to deal with when I ask to see the approved plans to review during inspection because I'm questioning their work. Maybe it's a New England thing where the "We've been doing it this way for 50 years." comes out all the time, or now it's "The economy is rough, why are you making us spend more money?, We're lucky to even be working."...I could go on and on...I'm easy to get along with, I swear!

Education, we need more education!!!!

 

[Code Neophyte]

I don't see any conflict with teaching the code and enforcing the code. In the end the code will prevail.What possible conflict could there be?

I completely understand what you and others have said in this regard, and I somewhat agree. But let me better put this in context. Our local HBA may only have +/- 20 builder members, our city's population is around 40k, with no other cities of any significant size within the region. We're hundreds of miles from the nearest "metro" area. They don't have the treasury necessary to hire ICC or another third party (at a cost of several thousand $$, including travel, lodging, etc.). I agree that in years past, Simpson or someone like them would have come here to do a presentation anyway, as they had a liberal training budget. Even then, they wouldn't have been too excited about it. In the current economy, I know they wouldn't think it worth their while.

I used the word "conflict" in the OP - I think that's perhaps a poor choice of word. It's not really so much a conflict, as an in-breeding of sorts (although I lobbed that one up there, please no comments about rural midwest gene pools!!) I just think it would benefit all involved to have someone other than the referee coach the game. Maybe I'm way overthinking it.....

 

[tbz]

code neophyte,

It is better to have a referee coach the game than no coach at all.

If it was not for all the inspectors in my early days giving me direction and telling me about classes and handing me papers I would say it would have been hard to see the reason to get involved.

When inspectors stand on one side of the fence and contractors on the other telling each other they are wrong, the younger generation sees the inspector as a problem not a help, outgoing informative inspectors are the best promotion of code compliance than any other form out there hands down IMO.

I see many inspectors that stay closed, dictate the code rather than educating the code as just adding to the problem and passing the buck. I always hear I don't get paid to educate only inspect, well the inspectors that take a little time to explain in my area all seem to get great reviews when I talk to other contractors.

There are a few towns around here that the basic comment is, great guy/gal will show you why and direct you in the correct direction to find your information, but he/she never bends on compliance. Do it right or don't work in that town. If you don't ask them were to find the information if they know they will tell you if they don't you move forward on your search.

To me that is the best compliment an inspector can get. Rather than, don't ask the inspector they are just a big A?? &*l# and a $*ck.

I was always told breading conflict is much harder than just working it out, except ego's always step in and screw things up.

Tom

 

[tbz]

As for drawings not being on site on most of the projects I lead, the top piece of paper on the approved paperwork I get from many towns simply says no inspection will be done without these approved documents being on site at the time of inspection. Failure to have the documents on site will result in the inspection not being done, a failure or stop order issued and a fine of xyz dollars.

You sign the paper when you pick up the documents and a copy is given to you for your records.

The contractors always seem to have these lock boxes on site with the documents in them, they are there only for the inspector, copies are given out and used daily.

Is it over kill maybe, but were they require it like this, there is never a shortage of plans on site.

I know I always have a set on site.

Tom

 

[FredK]

I agree in that training is out there. The problem is, what kind of training is it? I know Simpson will do great training seminars.. on Simpson products. ......

Tim---I start my search here. Note ths is for wood products/connections;http://www.awc.org/technical/ewpinfo.html

Click on any of the links and call a number. Some are more than willing to show up to explain their products and more importantly the code at the same time. And if they can't they I'm sure could recommend people in your area that could.

Good luck and let us know how it goes.

 

[Daddy-0-]

tbz said

Daddy-o how does VA handle specialty contractors like my company that only work on stairs, balconies, guards and handrails?

You can do up to $7500 per project with a class "C" license. This license is basically for home improvement/maintenance work that does not involve additions or new construction except decks. If your rails are high end like I think they are you would need a class "B" which takes you up to $250,000 per project. You can practically get the "C" license from a cereal box. The "B" is more substantial and the "A" is basically unlimited.