Posted this below but figured a new thread would be better.
Well I think I backed myself in a corner now. I'm going to post my and the boards disagreement. I kinda took T.P. Stephens as talking down to me. Maybe I was mistaken but his final comment kind of cememted my thought about his post. The quality or correctness of my work is not in question nor has my work ever been questioned.
Here is the reason my license was not active. Note the word was. I just checked the mail. Active license enclosed. Keep in mind I wrote this yesterday.
I got a letter telling me I had to stop surveying because I didn't take a 2 hour ethics and minimum standards course within the time frame in the state code.
The time frame is every 4 years you must attend a board approved course. You can't take the course online; you must be physically present to take the course. I don't disagree with this. The board will approve a random number of courses per year so people can satisfy the requirement.
In August of 2008 I received a letter stating that my four years was up. I had been home for about a month from my third deployment to Iraq. I was still on active duty, and because I had deployed so many times, I would remain on active duty until October 8, 2008.
This time given me by the military is earned leave and gives the soldier time to start readjusting back to being a civilian. (which that is an entirely different story as it seems it must take years and years because I'm still working on figuring out how to be a civilian)
I contacted the board as soon as I got the letter. Explained between 2004-2008 I was on active duty for most of that time period and was not even in the USA for a good bit of it.
They called me back a few days later, after discussing it, and told me I did not need to take the course until 2011.
Last year I applied and received my license without any problems.
This year I got a letter stating my license wasn't approved for the above explained reason. No ethics class on record.
I called them and was further told that my license renewal last year was a 'mistake' that I should not have gotten my license last year because I didn't have the required ethics and minimum standards continuing education. Of course I got pretty angry. Which isn't something you should do when you are the 'pee-on' talking to 'The Man'.
I explained the issue had been resolved back in 2008 and I was given until 2011. They informed me there was nothing in my file about what happened in 2008 so it 'didn't happen'. I guess there is no paper trail, for some reason, of their decision back in 2008.
I fired off a letter to the board and explained this issue had been resolved back in 2008. In my letter I cited the Legislative rules and exemption that is given to active duty soldiers. I qualified for the expemption and was given one every year since 2004-2008. I explained I feel I should receive a full 4 consecutive years to complete the ethics course just as every other Professional Surveyor is afforded.
I emailed the letter and shortly got a call from the board. "Harsh" was this guys opinion of my letter. I don't know if he was calling to try to bully me or what he expected my response to his opinion to be. However I asked him what he expected, I feel I was wronged.
I agreed to remove a single word and replace it with a different word. I used the word 'reprimand' which did not fit exactly what the board did. But other than that the letter is the same as I first wrote it. I don't care how 'harsh' it reads.
His fear, as he put it, was that if this got out to the media it might look bad on them, that it further made it look like the board did not support the troops, and that I was not being reprimanded. I told him I was not trying to make the board look bad, I just felt I was wronged. I had/have no intention of going to the media. I don't know why that was even brought up. The LAST THING I want is people wanting me to do interviews and talk to them.
I went into a controlled fit on the phone and verbally explained the state code to this guy. To which at the end of my speech he asked, "ARE YOU AN ATTORNEY?" What? I should have told him no, I didn't even graduate high school. It's in my file though, so they already know that. GED
The review was tuesday. I was supposed to get a call or email to find out my fate. I didn't so I am guessing it didn't go so good. I'm not calling them to find out. I'll just wait for the snail mail.
If they did not give me more time then I can't sit for the course until February of 2011 as that is the next closest board approved course. They have a CD based approved course but I was told I couldn't take that as a quick fix since I live in state.
I may have my license back as I type this. I am only stating facts here so any recourse by the board would be unfounded in my humble opinion. I verbally agreed not to go to the media, which I never had any intention of doing in the first place. My verbal word is as good as my written word. Just saying.
Just a few days ago I had to make up a new contract for a client. I have been working on his job for some time now and was making some headway on it. It's a very complex mess of a survey. Along with other reasons, it has taken longer than I or he expected. I received a retainer for this job. He wanted the retainer back and he wanted to get somebody else. I have a lot of money spent out on this job already. I had no choice, since my license isn't 'active' anymore, but to agree to return his full retainer regardless of how much I can justify I have spent on his survey. It wasn't like I could go out there and finish it or honestly tell him I was getting my license placed back on active status.
Problem is I didn't have his money. I have spent as much, if not more than the retainer on his job already. So I wrote up a new contract and he agreed to give me 6 months to repay him in full. If I don't have the full retainer paid to him within 6 months, I must sign my survey vehicle over to him within 10 days after the six months is up. It was a good deal for him and I have no other collateral to offer.
So that is where I stand and I MOST LIKELY won't be surveying anymore regardless of their decision. I am having other problems right now which I have to get figured out. The added stress of all of this has put me in a very bad mental state that was already very bad to begin with.
added this today
I got a letter with license enclosed. The board did not admit any wrong doing on their part though they did grant me a 'waiver' for one year. Which puts me back on track to what I was granted back in 2008. Though I was still shorted a year since I was exempt. That was all I asked for and that is what I got. Though it does pain me that they did not admit their mistake.
Having said that. I will no longer be surveying. I just can't do it anymore. I have another post I wrote yesterday but am hesitant to post it in regards to me and some things going on. I may post it. It's just plain shameful to me as I thought I was a stronger soldier/person.
My inactive license I will no longer be surveying. I just
> I will no longer be surveying. I just can't do it anymore.
Why not? It sounds from all the posts I have read that you know your territory, do a good job at it, and have enough jobs available to keep you busy a good fraction of the time.
You won the argument with the board - just chalk up the remaining frustrations to bureaucracy and move on. Get the training at the next opportunity. In most states you have to take some number of hours every year or two, not every four.
Is it too late, or can you finish the job for the guy and not owe him money?
I wonder if part of the difficulty in adjusting back to civilian life is that they trained you so thoroughly to let somebody else do your thinking and give you orders. Now you need to give yourself orders. Get yourself a boss's hat and think about what you need to do, then put on the employee's hat and do it.
My inactive license I will no longer be surveying. I just
No that job is gone. I felt bad because I didn't get it done and didn't know if I would be able to finish it. He wasn't willing to wait on me any longer. The job already took longer than it should. I had gotten him scheduled then had to cancel and tell him there was a problem with my license, so it looked bad on me all the way around.
I gave the client the CAD file on a CD and also the folder with all the research I had already done. Along with point file in case whoever he hired might get some use out of my traverse and locations. I had no use for any of it anyway.
We do have continuing education every year. The ethics part is only due every 4 years.
My inactive license I will no longer be surveying. I just
John, I don't know you, but I know you've been through a lot. No one could be expected to easily deal with the experiences of those tours of duty and the back and forth between war, family, and "normality". You are a good man who has been through a lot. Do what you have to do to take care of yourself. You can't do anything about the past, except to try to learn from it and move forward. The people around you haven't been with you on those duty tours, so they don't understand, even if they think they do. It's just going to take time to get comfortable again. Whatever you do, don't let "it" beat you. I wish you all of God's blessings and love.
My inactive license I will no longer be surveying. I just
I have never met anyone with good established ethics who, 4 years later, lost his ethics. I am not saying it can't happen, just I have never seen it. Is not moral/ethical character attested to by the signators to you original application??
The idea of continuing education is possative. Implementing govt mandated and approved education just adds negatives for any existing ethical practice or wise taxpayer.
Like Everyone Else Here......
.......I feel your frustration.
There are a couple of lessons here, but some are too heavy and political-laden to get into here.
I will venture this, for ANYONE who is dealing with their Board of Registration (or whatever it's called in your state): Don't ever assume that what you spoke about is going to wind up in your permanent file. Verbal communication will be lost, forgotten, denied or otherwise not on record when you need it most.
Whether it be a clerk, board member, chairperson or whomever, make sure it is documented as soon as possible, and sent in written form to them for filing.
Whatever you discuss, disclose or determine, write it down, either as "minutes" or a "record of teleconference", or however you care to describe it. Make several copies, and mail one, certified, return receipt requested, to the Board (executive, chair, administrator, whatever he or she is called). Send one to your State association and keep one or more in your files.
In the meantime, I hope your situation improves, John....you deserve better.
I kinda took T.P. Stephens as talking down to me.
Sorry John, but nothing could be futher from the truth. The BOR is being a bore. They don't count the sacrifice of your private practice to Tours of Duty in behalf of them and all. Govt agencies do not consider common sence, rational, do the right thing actions.
If the BOR can show evidence of any ethical issue with John, they can present their case. Otherwise, they should get OFF HIS CASE. Allow exemption until he gets back for good, then reinstate as soon as he shows complience, and Thank John for his sacrifices as we all should.
Keep fighting John. Don't give up. I appreciate your service and most all of your colleagues do too. You have to do what is right for you and your family, if that means leaving "the biz" for a while then so be it. You were being screwed by the board. Sounds like that is resolved. I hope you find your way, but in the mean time don't let the BS weigh on you too bad. Take some time to reflect and enjoy being vertical.
John, I am a civilian that works for the department of defense as a Land Surveyor. Each year, I have to take a Government Ethics refresher, just before Christmas. They remind us not to accept Christmas Platters and the such, along with the other issues. Every state that I am licensed in has accepted that as my ethics training.
What does it say about our society when our leadership requires ethics training. What it indicates to me is that our leaders are a bunch of crooks lacking in ethics who think everyone is like them. I don't believe ethics can be taught any further than what you can get away with, beyond that, it is personal attitudes and values that guide and no time in class will change the values you had when you walk in.
Steve's ethics class is just a class on what to do or not to do to stay out of trouble, ethics has nothing to do with it.
jud
Thanks everybody.
John
First, thank you for your service.
Second, take care of yourself.
Third, I can't believe they were actually scared that you would go to the media. Weasels.
John
Ditto all three.
From one WV surveyor to another, this really sounds like the WV BOR at its best. They like to flex their muscle every now and again. Several years ago, the State Society had the ethics and minimum standards courses scheduled at the annual convention. The BOR knew this was being offered and I believe may have received the course outline from the society. The BOR rules say that the course must be "pre-approved" by them for the ethics and minimum standards courses to count against the 4 year requirement. Somehow, the required "pre-approval" was never granted prior to the convention. After the convention, the BOR decides that since it did not grant pre-approval of the material, all those members who attended the course in good faith, would not be allowed to take credit for the course. After several weeks, it was obvious to the attendees and the Society that the BOR was not going to budge and would not "post-approve" the course. All those who attended were offered a "free" course at the next convention.
Of course you might question the ethics of a government board that requires an ethics course for its members, and at the same time, offers that required course as a way of making money for themselves.
Huh?
"Of course you might question the ethics of a government board that requires an ethics course for its members, and at the same time, offers that required course as a way of making money for themselves."
First off the situation you describe in no way shows that BOR members are enriching themselves through approving this course.
The State association is giving the course, and they are earning the money, which, if the members are diligent and involved, will go towards more programs and other efforts towards improving surveying in general.....at least that's how it's supposed to work.
In addition, every BOR member that I have ever known, it has COST them money to be on the Board. It's a volunteer position, and maybe you can get meal and/or travel expenses. Most BOR's have in their enabling legislation, something akin to this:
"Each member of the board shall receive as compensation an amount set by the board not to exceed XXX dollars for each day devoted to the affairs of the board, and shall be entitled to reimbursement of such member's expenses necessarily incurred in the discharge of such member's official duties."
Serving on a BOR is not a for profit activity. If you find that it is, then your BOR is doing something wrong.
In New York, the law reads like this:
"Each member of a board shall receive a certificate of appointment, shall before beginning his term of office file a constitutional oath of office with the secretary of state, shall receive up to one hundred dollars as prescribed by the board of regents for each day devoted to board work, and shall be reimbursed for his necessary expenses. Any member may be removed from a board by the board of regents for misconduct, incapacity or neglect of duty."
In NJ, it is $50.00 a day, limited to $1,000 maximum each year......hardly a profit making enterprise.
Huh?
I'm not saying the Board that license surveyors is in any way enriching themselves. It is thankless job and they can keep it. However both the licensing board AND the State Society (or Association) offer courses in minimum standards and ethics in direct competition with each other. Not that there's anything wrong with it, and I have attended courses offered by both groups, but in the eyes of some of my peers, in smells funny.
The part that really irked me about it was it was clearly in their file on me that I had been given expemptions due to deployments. The guy rattled off the dates of each deployment.
They decided the ethics was not exempted, I can only guess. Still not clear on that since I never got an answer and they just gave me a waiver instead of explaining anything to me or admitting they were wrong, if indeed they were.
I explained both subsection 3.1 and 3.2 are covered under exemption. So the only way I was not exempt was Unless this rule is a ‘pick and choose’ rule left to the boards’ discretion.
Does that sound harsh?
That may actually be what it is, pick and choose. As the wording is somewhat open to interpretation.
the rule uses the word 'may' instead of a more steadfast word as 'shall'. Even so they did grant me the exemption so 'may' became 'shall' since I was granted the exemption every year. Unless of course they can 'pick and choose'. Which I didn't see that terminology in said rules. 🙂
This might be something the society could look in to as it may come back and bite somebody else.
They state all of the things they will do for soldiers on active duty or civilians overseas for more than 120 consecutive days out of a year. Then they have the word 'may' in a place where a more definate and defined word such as 'shall' would clear the air. It's like they left themselves a back door to not grant a Professional Surveyor the exemption.
If they exempt part then should exempt the whole. That is the only thing that makes any sense.
And I would think all the classes/tailgates that you had on shoot/no shoot and stuff while deployed would certainly count as ethics classes. You can't face a tougher ethical question than that in my opinion.
> And I would think all the classes/tailgates that you had on shoot/no shoot and stuff while deployed would certainly count as ethics classes. You can't face a tougher ethical question than that in my opinion.
I put that in my letter to them. I told them though I am sure the military courses are not identical to the civilian courses, I believe they are nonetheless somewhat relative as to the proper way to perform your duties as a Professional and to follow the rules as prescribed.
Deral, you're up late/early.
Up early John. Turned in early last night and it's 4:30 in Lawton now. That's not really early for me.
I would think ethics are ethics no matter who the class is aimed at.
