You have a very selective memory.
I have responded, for a second time, to NCEES. I have been asked for, and provided, only hard facts regarding dates of employment.
What the world is going on here?
1. A zombie thread.
2. Resurrected to publicly complain to about a professional's hesitation to verify your experience.
This seems counter-productive. I would hesitate to recommend the guy based on judgement alone.
The Licensure Agency is not looking for social information, only cold, hard facts related to one’s knowledge of the applicant’s work.
A huge differnec in those two questions. One is based of factual data that can be retrieved by a Board Investigator to see if it matches data provided by the applicant. The second is a matter of legal confirmation if investigated by a Board Investigator. Has the applicant ever been convicted of a felony? You cannot know the full and truthful answer based on forty years of living beyond during the short time of employment. The correct answer is: The scope of this question exceeds my ability to truthfully answer.
A question that opens the door for personal bias to enter the equation for licensing seems like a terrible idea to me. If they want to do a background check to look for felonies or violations of the child support thing that Washington has (which also seems stupid since removing a guy's ability to make money sure as hell won't help him make child support payments) or whatever then that's fine, but I think it should really only be based on facts and experience.
And the required number of licensed references is probably my biggest complaint. I haven't worked with more than 2 licensed guys at any place I've worked, so I'm supposed to quit 2 or 3 jobs to rack up enough references to apply for licensure? I think this requirement is completely out of whack.
Every licensing board must follow the duties outlined in Statute. The direction in several states is to remove boards from the legislative process. That is why you see the child support forms popping up. Nearly every State adminstratively suspends (or refuses to issue) a license to a parent who has unpaid child support beyond the statutory threshold.
The references requirement varies by State, but the majority do not require the reference be a former employer or supervisor. The language usually requires a 'professional familiar with your work'. Of course you'll never find that out here any longer as our agency was eliminated.
But I'm not bitter.. lol
The references requirement varies by State, but the majority do not require the reference be a former employer or supervisor. The language usually requires a ‘professional familiar with your work’.
Yeah, but who's gonna sign off on a guy whose work they've never actually reviewed? Basically nobody, imo. I don't see how a non-coworker is supposed to become familiar with your work when you can't stamp anything.
I've seen County Surveyors, fellow members of committees, locals who follow work, and licensees in planning departments just to name a few. Again, this is stuff a dedicated agency can help you through. We need another solution as those days are gone.
The correct answer is: The scope of this question exceeds my ability to truthfully answer.
When asked about suitability and professional reputation, if that isn't within your scope of understanding and judgement, then say so. But it isn't that difficult of a question: Would you hire this applicant? Would you want to follow their work? If you cannot say "Yes" to both, I think the answer is obvious.
Adding to our profession technically qualified people that can pass the test, but lack character and judgement, is a bad idea, IMHO.
Spot on!