Licensing Boards...argggggg

And we wonder why there is a national decline in applicant numbers. The Boards are just making it harder and harder to "get in". Good Luck

Indiana did something similar to me. They had my application for weeks, and tabled it at the board meeting because I was missing some form that I was never told I needed to turn in. Then, after I took the test, they didn't notify me that I had failed.

Thirteen pages? they may complain that it is too long, they did about mine. Mine was somewhat longer because my experience was spread out over twenty plus years, in and amongst a lot more engineering experience. I doubt they will put you on the agenda, as after they accept it as complete they assign it to a board member for review, but you have to try.

It is not really the Board Members, who put in quite a bit of time, compared to their compensation, but the staff. A staff that is pretty much assigned by the State and not really interested in this profession, or any other profession they may be assigned to cover.

Enjoy your trip.

Paul in PA

It is not really the Board Members, who put in quite a bit of time, compared to their compensation, but the staff. A staff that is pretty much assigned by the State and not really interested in this profession, or any other profession they may be assigned to cover.

And there's the Rub...

Could be worse. I have a friend who took the California LS test and got a letter of failure. He took off to Australia for a couple of years, returned to Arizona and got licensed and worked there for a couple of years, then returned to California and applied to take the Cal test again. He was informed that he had already passed the test. Their mistake. I think he had to pay his past license fees and was good to roll. He was most upset because Boards correspondence was always addressed "Dear Applicant". True story, Jp

StLSurveyor, post: 380791, member: 7070 wrote: It is not really the Board Members, who put in quite a bit of time, compared to their compensation, but the staff. A staff that is pretty much assigned by the State and not really interested in this profession, or any other profession they may be assigned to cover.

And there's the Rub...

I would suspect the staff is doing what their job assignments are. I usually place the blame on management if a company or agency is inefficient. Or it has to do with not having enough help to do all of the workload. That could be a much larger issue, because they only have so many fte positions they can fill (still falling on management for not knowing what their workload is).

I'm still trying to figure out how it can be the board's fault that the first guy didn't sign all of his pages as required. That's equivalent to submitting a plat for recording without a stamp and signature and blaming the Register of Deeds when she won't accept it. The "P" in PLS stands for Professional. That includes more than just the technical aspect of surveying. It includes responsibility and integrity. We do our best to be thorough and detailed. But occasionally we miss something. When we do, we own up to it and make it right.

"We're building a new road. Right through here." Says the PLS while pointing at the house of the man who has 100 questions.

BushAxe, post: 380899, member: 11897 wrote: I'm still trying to figure out how it can be the board's fault that the first guy didn't sign all of his pages as required

Pretty sure the "first guy" wrote:

James Fleming, post: 380784, member: 136 wrote: I understand it's 100% my fault

I think his point was that they received the application and cashed the application check six weeks before the deadline, but waited until two days before the deadline to notify him of his oversight. Also pretty sure the first guys tone was that of a light hearted vent...but thanks for playing the home game and questioning my "responsibility and integrity", it reminds me why I simultaneously love and despise this place.

Enjoy the ride

James Fleming, post: 380900, member: 136 wrote: Also pretty sure the first guys tone was that of a light hearted vent...but thanks for playing the home game and questioning my "responsibility and integrity", it reminds me why I simultaneously love and despise this place.

James,
In some ways it takes some other type of "P" (not professional) person to register here as a anonymous member and make a judgmental barb without noticing your first first sentence in your post.
But maybe you need to write more clearly or simply down to the masses like when you were the editor of Professional Surveyor magazine.

Mr. Fleming,

How was your trip to Harrisburg?

As a Professional you should understand that it is a requirement that you report to your superiors as many on this Board feel they are, even some that don't know your name.

Paul in PA

Jp7191, post: 380823, member: 1617 wrote: Could be worse. I have a friend who took the California LS test and got a letter of failure. He took off to Australia for a couple of years, returned to Arizona and got licensed and worked there for a couple of years, then returned to California and applied to take the Cal test again. He was informed that he had already passed the test. Their mistake. I think he had to pay his past license fees and was good to roll. He was most upset because Boards correspondence was always addressed "Dear Applicant". True story, Jp

You must be speaking of a gentleman that goes by Ford, can't imagine too many others have a story like that one.

double_proportion, post: 381186, member: 6421 wrote: You must be speaking of a gentleman that goes by Ford, can't imagine too many others have a story like that one.

You got it! Great guy, and great story teller, terrible listener :). Jp

:heart:

James Fleming, post: 380900, member: 136 wrote: ...it reminds me why I simultaneously love and despise this place.

:heart:

I am in a situation with the IL Board.

I am a PLS in MO and a RPLS in TX. I have a bachelor of science, a masters of science and I have been in the profession for over a decade. I live and work in St Louis MO but we are just across the river from IL. I submitted reference letters from IL registered surveyors.

IL is requiring that I take a 4 hour chemistry or 4 hour physics course to be approved to take their exam. That would be 4 more hours on top of the approximately 195 college hours I already have.

Their logic? Well, I only have 4 hours of chemistry, they require 8 of chemistry or physics, and any other classes are just additional sciences.

I am emailing the Board in advance of their meeting next week to ask, once again, they reconsider. Turns out, Board members still haven't seen my application or appeals up to this point.

I agree --- why are they making this so much more difficult than it needs to be?

having just jumped through what (i think/hope) is the last hoop to get approved to sit for the exam in florida...

always suspected the hoops and inefficiency to be a built-in "how bad do you want it?" check. if registration numbers are ebbing, might be a sign not as many people want it that bad. honestly, for the longest time i never had any desire to get registered anywhere outside of this here royal enigmatic kingdom of surveying, but now that the kids aren't all that far off flying away, and after 25 years landlocked in this metastasizing urban miasma, i'm starting to look for destinations further afoot. honestly don't know where that'll be, but figured the old stomping grounds wasn't a bad place to start. at a minimum, i need to take the PS exam (the fact you can't do that independent of a state board's approval is an entirely similar but different issue).

so i just had to order transcripts for the first time in over a decade, which feels odd being on this side of 40. and write a few emails begging forgiveness and permission and consideration and etc.

yes, the entire process feels entirely byzantine and enervating. but better, i reckon, than having half these yahoos with whom i share an office in posession of a stamp by simple virtue of their degrees.

headywest, post: 381248, member: 9223 wrote: I am in a situation with the IL Board.

I am a PLS in MO and a RPLS in TX. I have a bachelor of science, a masters of science and I have been in the profession for over a decade. I live and work in St Louis MO but we are just across the river from IL. I submitted reference letters from IL registered surveyors.

IL is requiring that I take a 4 hour chemistry or 4 hour physics course to be approved to take their exam. That would be 4 more hours on top of the approximately 195 college hours I already have.

Their logic? Well, I only have 4 hours of chemistry, they require 8 of chemistry or physics, and any other classes are just additional sciences.

I am emailing the Board in advance of their meeting next week to ask, once again, they reconsider. Turns out, Board members still haven't seen my application or appeals up to this point.

I agree --- why are they making this so much more difficult than it needs to be?

I am in about the same situation, I applied to a different state and don‰Ûªt believe the board members or reviewers ever got a chance to review my letters of recommendation. I have been licensed for 41 years and on my application I started listing my experience from the time I got out of college. The person that receives the application told me that the application could not be processed until I went into more detail on some things from 43 years ago. I was so shocked that I have not sent it in. I have provided numerous letters for previous employees and they were excepted with the minimum required time. I was wondering if my age had anything to do with the decision.

headywest and flyin solo, I can tell you that on a national sense, things are beginning to change in regards to thinking about mobility of a license. How far and how quick it progresses is impacted by many, MANY different factors, not the least are individual state laws and how those actually read in addition to getting past the concept of change in the first place by many boards and long time board members. Some of the sticking points may very well be due to the fact that these boards are being pressured to look at how they do business and whether that needs to change. I for one shake my head when I hear about hurdles directly related to the EXACT number of hours associated with requirements particularly when the applicant is already licensed and has many years of actual experience without any cause for discipline.

Best wishes to getting it resolved. Best advice I have is to remember that board staff and members have to abide by the laws every bit as much as the applicant and licensees do. However, there are usually discretionary measures put into place where appropriate to allow flexibility when substantially justified and supported by facts. Kind of like what goes into determining the location of a property line.

flyin solo, post: 381258, member: 8089 wrote: having just jumped through what (i think/hope) is the last hoop to get approved to sit for the exam in florida..

Forget Florida. If you don't live there, it isn't worth it. They don't accept any continuing education that isn't on their list. I don't care if Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Ellicott were resurrected and taught a course. If they didn't didn't become a licensed continuing education provider and then have their class pre-approved, you aren't going to get credit for that course. Frankly, I think the entire thing is a racket.

Some of you are giving too much credit to these boards for masterminding these difficulties. I think this is just par for the course for most bureaucracies, even those with the best of intentions.