*
I was just hoping to have some people chime in on one of the great mysteries for young builders. Which is how to obtain a license for contracting. I know the process is different from one region to another; so as many comments as possible would be great. I remember while working in Manhattan it was nearly impossible to get any answers, I can’t decide whether the city or the contractors were least helpful.
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
The code requires installing an approved material to slow the spread of fire between floors and adjacent vertical and horizontal cavities — here are the allowed materials and required locations.
Featured Video
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Fine Homebuilding Magazine
Fine Home Building
Follow
-
Fine Homebuilding
Dig into cutting-edge approaches and decades of proven solutions with total access to our experts and tradespeople.
Start Free Trial Now -
GBA Prime
Get instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.
Start Free Trial Now
Replies
*
The amount of inapplicable information about licensing that you may get with a request for as many comments as possible will most likely confuse and conflict with any attempt on your part to obtain such a license in your locality.
So, you might be better served if you would state your target area and then receive the specifics you need to know pertaining to licensing in that area.
What you say, eh?
In Florida we have the Department of Business and Professional Regulation which handles the state contractor certification programs as well as the local governing body which requires a separate occupational license or two.
*in RI it's a piece of cake..in Mass. it's a bear..WHERE are U ?
*In Texas (or at least in Dallas) you just go down to where you apply for permits and give them $175 and they give you a licence good for one year. Then every year after that, they send you a bill for $175 and then they send you back a new piece of computer paper up to date. However, without it, you can't pull a permit. And if you pull a permit there are inspections. So I guess it checks and balances itself. At least it keeps the honest people honest.Ed.
*You need nothing in Idaho. You just wake up one morning and say "I'm a builder".Just curious, how about Oregon and Washington?
*In Georgia all you do is pay for a business license (cost varies by locality) and buy a circular saw, and you are a contractor. If you happen to be married to a first cousin (or closer relative)they waive the circular saw requirement. Seriously though, the states that require no licensing of contractors make it much easier to get into the business. It doesn't make it any easier to stay in business, just get into it. Here the mechanical trades are required to have a state license (testing and experience required), but the general contractor is not.
*In Michigan, you take a two-part, 3-hour written test (I think, it's been 12 years). 1/2 of it is on law (liens, insurance, waivers, etc.), and the other half is supposedly on practical questions relating to the different trades that a residential builder is liscensed for. By statute, any one here who does building, remodeling, excavating, siding, even painting or tiling is supposed to be licensed. Once you pass the test (and I've "heard" that approximately 1/2 fail it at least once), you pay for a credit check and bonding, then pay into a lien fund to help offset the shoddy work done by other builders. The lien fund ran out of money a couple years ago, so we all had to pay again, but that's a different story.Word from my lobbyist customer is that Michigan is considering an actual either hands-on test or some type of apprenticeship program, and is investigating adopting the NAHB residential construction guidelines as quality standards. As for the trades, I believe that electricans and plumbers have to take classes, serve X number of hours as an apprentice, then take several tests. Don't know about HVAC.
*In PA....no state liscense. In the city of Pgh...you have to be registered with the city to pull a permit. All that takes is $65 and a copy of your insurance certificate. They take down your contact info and that's it. To me.....it seems worthless. Just another money maker for the city. The state talks about starting a license program.....but along the same lines.....with no testing. If testing were invloved.....I'd be more apt to say it would be worth while...instead of just another tax. Jeff
*AugeyMike's right about Rhode Island. And they have a funny situation. If a contractor is an employee of a registered contractor, then the employee contractors are not required to be registered. The employee contractors can order labor and materials on behalf of the owner and bind the owner for all labor and material contracts they award.If the contractor in Rhode Island is not an employee of a registered contractor, then he must be registered.The Rhode Island lien law consists of four classes of lien claimants: contractors, subcontractors, material suppliers, and labor. Labor includes carpenters, painters, plumbers, etc. All labor is exempt from licensing except plumbers and electricians.
*The state of Tennessee requires you to take a timed written exam for any trade that you want to be licensed for, (residential, commercial, industrial, electrical, etc.) You also have to take the law exam. You do not have to be licensed to do any work under $25k but, some cities require you to be licensed for specific jobs. Of course all of the licensing is issued by the state so there is a fee for every damn thing you do. The state just changed their renewal reqirements from every year to every other year (still pay the same fee). A CPA must prepare a financial statement on you to determine your license limit & this has to be done every year for renewal (more money). The state also requires you to be bonded (more money). You can retire your license if need be & renew it without taking all the exams again. I guess TN. is one of the most strict states when it comes to becoming a contractor. This is a good thing I think because it keeps all the bozos from cutting your throat in the bidding war & it protects the homeowner. So if you want to become a contractor in TN. bring your tools & don't forget your VISA!!
*I think the whole concept of being a contractor sucks. If a painter makes a contract to paint a house, then the painter has to do the work. But if a person who is not a painter makes a contract to paint a house, then such painting contractor is authorized to use the painter's labor to complete his contract. It seems only proper that if the state or city authorizes those who don't work at the trade to use someone else's labor to complete their painting contract, but does not allow a person who does work at the trade to do the same, then the state or city should compensate the person whose labor is being used by the contractor. A person should have the right to say he does not want his labor to be used by anyone else other than himself in a manner he sees fit.
*Robert, a person does have that choice. The painter, as in your example does have a choice of who he works for and where he works. I know some painters who will only work for home owners and that's okay. Any trades person can work for whom ever he or she wishes. Louis
*Mr. FernandezI think you misunderstand. Suppose A is a painter and B is not a painter. A says he will do a job for X amount. B says he will do the same job for Y amount but he will have to use A's labor because he (B) does not personally do painting. B is awarded the contract instead of A, yet A still has to do the painting. What is the relationship between A and B and does A get X amount for doing the painting? Obviously B was chosen because his price Y was less than A's price X.
*The relationship between A and B is that A is a the GC and B is the subcontractor or employee. The relationship between what A sells the job for and what B agrees to do the work for is irrelevent. Depending on the salesmanship, A could sell the job for as much as possible. B has the right to work for A or not work for A. If A can sell the job for 5 times what B is willing to do the work for, more power to him. I don't see how A could underbid B and still get B to do the job. If A under bid B, and B was unwilling to work for A then A could resort to C, D, or E to do the work. If your point is that B is prevented from bidding on the work because he is not licensed, and in effect is forced to work for general contractors who benefit from his labor, I can understand how this might seem unfair. However, everyone has the same opportunities to become licensed. Perhaps it is not easy to do or the costs are prohibitive, but you can't blame that on the guy who has bitten the bullet and gotten his license.
*Oh God.....there's nothing left of that dead horse you're flogging Robert....whatever your nom de jour is...
*I agree Strott. If you want to be able to bid any job you want, get licensed. This is what seperates the men from the boys. I have heard so many guys bitch & complain about why they're limited in their trade because of licensing laws & that they can't afford to become licensed. I think it's mostly laziness or fear that keeps these guys from taking the next step and becoming licensed. If you want to grow, you have to sacrifice (whether it be time or money). I'm not degrading the unlicensed guys out there. There are a lot of tradesmen that don't have licenses and are content with where their at. I'm just echoeing what Strott said, if your upset that you can't bid on a job that reqires licensing, don't blame the guy who has bitten the bullet & got his license.
*In Mass. you take an exam based mostly on the code book, open-book style. Lots of classes are available for learning how to read the code book, and they suggest ways to rearrange the book to make it easier to find things. Without the class I think the test would be very difficult; with the class I was done early and passed. The test cost $180, as I recall. Then you have to pay $100 when you pull your first permit for bonding with the state. A bear as Mike says, but a little bear....Mike
*B is the surety. A surety makes himself responsible for the debts of another. When B was authorized to set A to work, A became the creditor of the property owner for X amount. For Y amount, B agreed to pay amount X to A.
*Mr. StrottCompare the second paragraph of your message (13) to the following statement of Judge Mayes of the Supreme Court of Mississippi: "Legislation of this kind is on the increase. It is stealthily stealing its way into the statutes for the ostensible purpose of raising revenue for the state, when in truth and in fact the only purpose of the promoters of such legislation is to control the business to which it is directed, to shut out competition, create a monopoly, and force those unable to pay the tax and possessing a knowledge of the business to look to the ones in control of the monopoly for employment. This is not only unjust to the laborer, but is equally wrong to the public." Wilby v. State, 47 So. 465
*Haugen/Joiner/Jones....phoney names don't fool anyone, pal. It's still tripe.
*I must be dense today. Legislation of what kind? Not quite sure what the court case has to do with anything...Anyone care to explain?
*Bingo! Jeff
*trust me....don't try to understand.......he never makes sense...and everything involves some ancient law suit from another case that doesn't apply! Jeff
*To allI am not sure how it is possible for one person to profit from the labor of another. I will give you my 2 cents worth.Suppose one man charges for the labor of another man. This does not prevent the other man from also charging for his labor. The owner who is being charged by the first man knows he is being charged for someone else's labor. By acknowledging this fact he agrees that such third person will be working on his property. It is easily understood that such third person will also charge for his labor.As to licensing, I am indifferent. If a workman is required to obtain a license in his trade, does it make him any better at performing his trade? Is his competency level any greater? I gather from this board that some of you would like to see licensing for all tradesmen of all trades. No offense, but I am not sure a written test would cover much in the area of drywall or bricklaying. On the other hand, plumbing and electrical work could probably require an extensive test. Carpentry is such a broad field that to cover such topics as complex roof framing and the construction of circular or elliptical stairs could take a lengthy examination.
*Thanks Jeff. For a moment I thought there was some relevance that I had missed. Dave, you are correct; a written test does not guarantee competency, quality, or professionalism. However, it does provide a basic set, even if very basic, set of standards and a tracking mechanism for builders. The idea is to attempt, at some level, to weed out the outright frauds from the respectable. Does it work? I don't know, but all I have to do is look at the meeting minutes for the Department of Commerce in Michigan, and see the number of "fly-by-night" contractors who are building piece of crap homes, and being caught, to know that the system is weeding out some of the worst.
*JasonI am not so sure the problem lies entirely with the workmen. Many of the nations largest developers insist on fast but lousy work. Any carpenter who has done a fair amount of framing has probably been told not to worry about quality - it gets hidden by drywall. I have seen many excellent framers who worked at a slow deliberate pace, and did quality work, get fired because they were too slow. In reality, by going slowly and carefully, they did the job right the first time. The fast, sloppy guys had to constantly have their mistakes corrected. So they weren't really any faster. They just wasted more material and time. But their frantic pace made them look like they got a lot accomplished. I am sure this is so in other trades and is especially noticeable in painting and finish carpentry. I was working on a house one time and the newly finished house next door was up for sale - asking price $400,000.00. The entry door was flanked by two sidelights. A trim piece was needed to run continuously over the top of the door and sidelights. The total length needed to be approximately 8 feet long. Instead of using one continuous piece, two smaller pieces were butt joined above the center of the door. It looked stupid. Every carpenter who went to look at this house could not believe that this was acceptable. I guess you cannot teach or license aesthetics. I once built a set of stairs in a large expensive home. The carriages were 3x12's. The outside carriages had to be wedge-anchored into concrete walls. From wall to wall was 3 feet, 7 inches. The tread material came in 10 foot lengths. I was told to cut each 10 foot length in 3 equal lengths of 3 feet, 4 inches. This meant the tread rested on only 1 inch of the outside carriages with a 1 and a half inch gap between outside of tread and the concrete wall. I objected to this but was overruled by the ones in charge. When the owner saw this, he was highly upset. I did not have to answer for this but it was amusing to listen to those in charge try to explain. The owner is a wealthy man who could have easily afforded to have this done right. He wanted to know why they didn't order tread material in 12 foot lengths.
*Fellas, you're missing the entire point of licensing, that is besides the added income for the states, but then again that probably goes to running their departments.Licensing is no different than a college degree in biology or psychology. It's strictly to "prepare" one for what is to come. Each of us make "choices". We can expand upon what we are forced to learn prior to taking those licensing tests, or we can blantanly ingore it. We can further avail oursleves of business management, or watch TV. We can do job costing in each and every job we perform or not. To me getting a license is about the same as obtaining a high school diploma. From there it's obvious that it's up to us individually to learn more - or not. From the stats of the failures of our industry, I'd say it's evident that most of us erroneously assumed we know it all - with that lousy high school diploma. Add to that those jusristictions that don't monitor their contractors, don't persue the incompentents and otherwise, allow an all ready festering situation to continue.The basics via licensing, for the majority of us, is no more than a jump start onself-employment in construction. If we make a "choice" to do nothing more, who is to blame. Ther are not that many "naturals" who can make in teh world of self-employment regardless of industry. For the rest, it's "choose" self education, or suffer the consequences. Either way, the responsibility lies not elsewhere, but within ourselves. Business failure is not caused from outside, but from not being prepared for those situations from which failures emminate. That preparation is garnered from "both" experience "and" formal or informal training. Pride dictates no job is finished until it's "builder" says it's done. Should money take precedence over "responsibility", that's only indicative of that contractor's abdication of his responsibility to his peers, his clients and I might add, to himself.As for pure greed and incompentence due to greed? Well, they exists in all industries. Always have and always will.As I stated above, all licensing does is resemble some semblence of just basic competency. From there it's up to each of us. We can learn more - or not. We're still back to "choices." The same choices we each make after being given the basics by our parents prior to going out into the world on our own. For most, license testing preparation just whets the appetite for what is still left to learn, as it was when we left our parents homes for the last time.
*SonnyI agree that one should always be learning and striving to improve himself.I'm not sure I catch your drift about licensing being a jump start to self employment. By the very nature of the industry, those who engage in the trades are self employed. Ours is a transient industry. A week workimg here, a day or two there, maybe three months on another job. It is this independence which draws people to this industry. The term journeyman denotes this independece. Unlike conventional employment where people get their paycheck week after week from the same place, the independence of construction means one day you bill this guy for the work you did, the next day you might bill someone else.I'm not sure what licensing has to do with self employment.
*In my state the license provides clients with specific rights in the case of a dispute. Hire an unlicensed contractor and the client is on their own the law treats the unlicensed contractor pretty harshly as well with hefty fines. Licensed contractor by law have to provide written contracts with specific completion dates, right of rescission, minimum levels of liability, disability, auto, workers compensation insurance. A home owner would be crazy not to hire a licensed contractor. Most states, counties, or cities have a division dedicated to licensing if you call their general telephone numbers they will tell you who to talk to and where to go some are easy some are a pain in the neck but either way they are worth having and absolutely necessary for any professional contractor.
*Dave, you mentioned "independence" which reminds me of my "independence" after I quit my job i 1971. I went to see one of the owners several months later and we had a good laugh about it. When I notified her I would be leaving in 60 days, I said: "And I'm not going to be like you, working 60 - 80 hours per week in the business. It wil be 40 hours and that's it."I told her about my "independence" and my naive assumption that I thought I'd be "my own boss." My "Bosses" ended up being my employees, my subs, my ventors, my clients and the bureaucrats. Every body else "but" me was telling me what to do, or should do. So much for my independence, a 40 hour week, and the "stability" of self-employment.Be he a tradesman working here and there or a businessman with a home office and what goes with it, they are both self-employed. What's I' saying about licensing is that passing the tests to acquire a license at least to some degree, prepares one for that self-employment "status" and the tremendous responsibilities, and further needs, or at least makes obvious those fruther needs, that goes along with self-employment of any type, while also offering again, some basic sense of security by the public that licensees at least meet a minimum set of standards needed to ply their trades - as tradesmen and/or as businessmen.Conventional or unconventional, responsibilities still apply. For example, after dealing with independent auto mechanics, just this year at my age, I've decided to start using dealerships. The reason is that I prefer to "hire" the specialist specifically trained to work on my particular type of vehicle, (as opposed to ALL vehicles) and in exchange for that exceptional service ("value" preference), I' m willing to pay the premium prices dealerships charge. It's nice to know he was "certified" akin to "licensed" in an area I feel valuable.Our problem is that those who represent us in our industry do a really lousy job in getting the word out to the public of just what a professional painter, carpenter, electrician etc., really must know. Try physics, botany, electronics, geology, trig, engineering, chemistry, algebra, etc. For botany for example, a good carpenter must know things such as the difference of wood species, their general physical nuances and how each will perforn under given application and finishing. To a degree, licensing test preparation includes those basic trade specific attibutes.
*That's true, Sonny.....if testing is involved. Which I think would be the only reason for having liscensing.....pass a test...show some knowledge...become liscensed. But.....I don't see any benefit...to the contractor or consumer.....if the liscense can just be bought...for the price of the fee and the price of basic insurance. That's what PA was proposing.....if testing was involved....a little thinning of the herd....I'd be all for it. Jeff
*Sonny or othersHow do you guys feel about exemptions to licensing some states make?For example, in some states if the contractor is an employee of the property owner with wages as his compensation and taxes and F.I.C.A. and all the other bureaucratic stuff being deducted from his check by the owner, then the contractor is exempt from licensing. In such cases the electrical contractor might be an employee of the property owner with a paycheck from the owner while the electricians working on the job remain independent and bill for their labor. I wonder if such a situation creates an interesting dynamic on the job.There seems to be a whole range of exemptions to contractor licensing in states that have licensing schemes. Property managers, government employees, etc. are given exempt status while other contractors doing the same work are required to be licensed. Do you think this is fair?
*I think Q should do all the work and M should collect the money and then D would be the contractor and then what logically follows is that S would be licensed. Then the world would be a better place.Louis
*Mr. Jones, in response to your reply, "the only purpose of the promoters of such legislation is to control the business to which it is directed, to shut out competition, create a monopoly, and force those unable to pay the tax and possessing a knowledge of the business to look to the ones in control of the monopoly for employment"This sounds exactly like what most business people try to do to their competition. What you said, stated another way: "the purpose of the owners of said business is to eliminate the competition, increase market share, and provide a good source of employment."I'm not necessarily a proponent of licensing, but whether your state has it or not, the playing field is level. Go for it. Get your license, build a business, assume the risk, make the payroll, sell the jobs. It's all out there.
*jeff, almost all states that institute registration.. or licensing..have to overcome tremendous resistance to the legislation...it gets introduced, and usually killed in legislative committee..eventually, the ones that make it thru are watered down , easy entry systems with some type of review board established to oversee it...after about three years of working with it they make amendments to the system...RI and Mass both started out with easy systems (that's how i got mine.. i just sent money).. now both states have fine tuned them to where they start to make sense...If you get involved with a builder's or remodeler's association , you will find that they are wrestling with the task of building a consensus as to wether or not they want licensing / registration..the legislature is also trying to get consumer protection into the mix..the end result is a less that perfect system.. when i started on my own in '75 licensing was not wanted by our bldr's assoc.. it wasn't even discussed...things change... the Moss-Magnuson warranty law changed a lot of thinking about "caveat emptor"..people expect the legislature to do something about a system that won't police itself....if registration comes to PA.. make sure you are first on your block to send in the money and forms..you'll get a low number, easy grandfather entry... and have a piece of paper on your wall that will gain in value every year...and your new boss may think YOU have more value ....business is NOT going to get LESS complicated.. it's going to get MORE complicated.. licensing / registration is just part of that process...b but hey, whadda i no ?
*DaveThere are two reasons for contractor licensing. One to define the business relationship between the consumer and the contractor by doing a backround checks, requiring insurance, and bonding.The other reason is to insure some limited amount of knowledge and skills.As you can see from all of these messages some states cover only one part or the other, and to differing degrees.ABout your question if the person is working as an employee they are, but definition, not a contractor. There is no business relationship. It is an employor, employee relationship. So there so no need for licensing to protect the owner.Likewise the owner, as an employer directs the work of the employee so it is responsible for the employee's actions and thus there is no need for a skills test for the employee. However, the employer could give the employee a skills test as part of hiring him
*BillIn response to your claim that an employee is not a contractor, there would be no reason for exempting employee contractors if this were not so.Here is an example. Under a contractor licensing law, there is an exemption section of which one paragraph reads "Any person who engages in the activities regulated by this chapter, as an employee of an exempt property owner or as an employee with wages as his sole compensation."Another section of the contractor licensing statutes makes it illegal to act in the capacity of contractor without having a license unless exempt pursuant to the exemption section.Another section states that no contractor shall act as agent or commence or maintain any action in any court of the state for collection of compensation if a license is required. So the person can act as the property owner's agent if an employee without a license and file suit against his employer if he is not given his paycheck in accordance with the law.The mechanics' and materialmen's lien laws then add force to the law by stating that contractors who are required to have licenses cannot exercise lien rights if they are not licensed. Those who are exempt from licensing do get lien rights.The mechanics' and materialmen's lien law is fairly standard in that it states that any person who furnishes labor or materials shall have a lien whether the labor or materials are furnished at the instance of the property owner or his agent and that all contractors and subcontractors are agents of the owner.These types of provisions are fairly common in states that have contractor licensing.But you have touched on the point which I was addressing. If the contractor is an employee working under the direction of his employer, does that mean he is competent to order labor and materials? Is his employer competent to teach him how to order labor and materials? An agent is an agent. Why the exemption for employee agents working for a paycheck and not an independent agent? They do the same work. If this can be done for the occupation of contractor, it would seem logical that this could be done for doctors, dentists, architects and the like. I think we both can agree on that absurdity.
*Florida has a statute that mandates all trades working on an owner's home must be licensed. Residential owner's can pull a permit, not so if it's commerical, which must condos are zoned as such. the logic, which I agree is that even if I as the owner of a house decide to act as my own GC and hire the trades directly, by mandating that those hired are licensed, requiring a permit for each trade, "protects" subsequent owners of that house the provious work done was done so by licensed tradesmen, and approved by the resulting inspections.We've all done jobs where we've seen work that was shocking, whether obvious or hidden in the walls or attic. As MIke mentioned, no system is perfect, but licensing does afford, in my opinion, some protection to the owner.Licensing without testing - in both the trade and basic business mgt. - is ludicrous, and does nothing other than fatten the purse of the city/county/state.
*dave adams.. or robert.. or whoever you are this week..why don't you take up a better cause.... like emptying the water out of the ocean...anyone who wants to be a contractor can be... anyone who wants to be an employee can be ..you are the absurdity....
*Dave, et. al., I certainly do not place any blame on workmen or anyone else for shoddy work; licensing in my state merely identifies men and women who have passed a test and paid their admittance fee. It doesn't guarantee quality, but it certainly helps to cut down on the charlatans who occassionally pop up and rip people off. Here, homeowners know they should be hiring licensed contractors for work on their homes, and they are as liable as the contractors if they aren't licensed. Does it make for more quality? I think to a certain degree it does; the people who have taken the time to take the test and paid their dues are probably more likely to want to continue in business. As for you illustrations of quality, I quite frankly wouldn't do what you suggest; butting trim in the middle of a door. I'd tell that GC to suck my trim. On the other hand, I have little respect for the customer who would accept it; I'll say it here just as I have in other threads; most customers spend more time thinking about their next video rental than they do their homes, so they get what they deserve. When customers and builders start demanding better quality, we'll get it. Until then, there will always be cheap SOBs who are in it for the fast buck, and in the end, both those cheap contractors and cheap customers will realize their folly's.
*Jason, you said it well: "Until then, there will always be cheap SOBs who are in it for the fast buck, and in the end, both those cheap contractors and cheap customers will realize their folly's." As for customers, over the last few decades, they have been more concerned with "glitz" and the most "glitz" they can get for their buck than anything else, than qualtiy workmanship and quality products. So in their love with glitz, they diminish what's really important in building/buying a home, be it a condo or house. The proof is in the fact that if it wasn't for lenders mandating home inspections prior to issuing a mortgage, how many customers whould spend the $300 or so to pay for one? All one has to do is look at the stats before and after lenders started their policy of mandating those inspection reports.People in every level tend to gravitate toward their respective level, as your last sentence indicates.
*Mike SmithPlease explain the following:Rhode Island law states that all contractors must be registered unless the contractor is an employee of a registered contractor. It's your state law. It says in plain English that contractors who are employees of registered contractors need not be registered. Since you say it is impossible to be an employee and a contractor simultaneously, please explain the legislative intent.You state that contractors employ others to perform labor. That must mean that the contractor has a contract to employ the workmen.The contractor is the employer of the workmen and the workmen are employees of the contractor. However the employer - employee relationship is not one of master and servant. A contractor can employ corporations which are formed by workmen or partnerships formed by workmen. There are only two natural positions in the law: A person can perform labor in which case he makes contracts to perform labor. Or a person can employ others to perform labor in which case he makes contracts to employ the labor. A carpenter who makes contracts to perform labor is a mechanic. The person who makes contracts to employ the carpenters is a carpentry contractor.It is such a simple concept that you will never comprehend it.
*Mike....I'd jump in right away if it comes....as it is....I seem to be one of the few that get's registered with the city....and most of my work in the past has been outside if city limits......but every little thing can be sold as an advantage over the competition. For the $65 or so....I can say all year...."registered contractor"...even when I'm outside the bounds. But....I'd like it to take the form of testing right off the bat....as I'm confident I'd pass right away.....and half the competition......would be out of the game. Jeff
*and some of us can pretend to be both! Jeff
*dave, robert, haugen, joiner.... take your multiple personalities and go back to Arizona... you are such a jerk....
*Mike SmithYes or no.Isn't it true that Rhode Island law states that contractors who are employees of registered contractors need not be registered?A yes or no answer has no reflection on you. Why are you so afraid to answer this? One word, yes or no.
*why should i answer a question that has no meaning anyways, asked by a lier ?you are a lier.. and a jerk....anyone who wants to be an employee can be.. anyone who wants to be a contractor can be...slavery is DEAD... so is your line of reasoning....y r u hiding behind a nom de plume ?
*Mike SmithYou sound like a scared little boy.I am not threatening your manhood am I?Just yes or no please.Why are you so intimidated and reluctant to answer?All I am asking for is one word - yes or no.You are a coward who is afraid to answer this question because you know the answer is yes. I don't understand your fear. Your Legislature wrote the law. You didn't. So why are you so afraid to admit what is written in your statutes. You can tell everyone this is true.
*geesh robert haugen... u r so transparent.. and it's so easy to push yur buttons......
*Mike,Are we fighting this fight again? After almost a hundred posts and several months of silence, I thought we had put the question to bed.It appears that the silence may have only been a time for research. What has our esteemed opponent unearthed about Tennnessee licensing law?
*no, peter, the masked crusader has returned to protect employees from simon legree.....
*Haugen....you're a nut. Go away.
*I think you guys are way to concerned about licensing when you need not be.Example: A property owner wants to build a deck on his property. He goes to the lumberyard and enters into a contract with the lumberyard to furnish the lumber. One of the parties to the contract is the contractor and the other party is the materialman. Hint: The lumberyard is not the contractor.Example: A property owner wants to refinish wood floors in his house. He does not own a drum sander. He goes to an equipment rental outfit and enters into a contract with the equipment supplier to furnish him a drum sander for $100 per day. One of the parties to the contract is the contractor and the other is the equipment supplier. Hint: The equipment rental outfit is not the contractor.Example: A property owner wants new electrical wiring installed in his house. He enters into a contract with an electrician to perform the necessary labor. One of the parties to the contract is the contractor and the other is the person who furnishes electrical labor. Hint: The electrician is not the contractor.
*Dave,And your whole point would be WHATTTTT???!!!!!When you have no clue, it's best not to open your mouth. Or use your keyboard.When you understand the business better and understand the license issue, come back and talk then.Billy
*PeterYou have already posted in the past that under Tennessee law, property owners are exempt from contractor licensing under certain conditions.Miss AllysonThe point is that many of the persons involved in this board are too concerned about licensing when they need not be. Very few states require licenses of those who work at a trade. Most of them only require a license if you don't work at the trade. This was the crux of the argument made in City of Milwaukee v. Rissling, 184 Wis. 517, 199 N.W. 61. Virtually all contractor licensing for electrical contractors, plumbing contractors, etc. is derived from this case.The argument made in the case was as follows: the defense argued that the law must be unconstitutional on the grounds that no person who worked as an electrician was required to be licensed. The law was enacted to make sure electrical work was done properly. The defense point was simple. Since only electricians do electrical work, good or bad work is always done by the person who does the work. The courts position was as follows - electricians do electrical work and electrical contractors do not. They comprise two different classes - and all members of the class must be treated alike. Therefore, only those who did not perform electrical work were required to be licensed. If you worked as an electrician, you were exempt. The people on this board are always talking about working at a trade. Therefore, they are exempt from contractor licensing. Some states require certain trades to be licensed such as plumbers and electricians. Those states feel that it is more important for the men who do the work to be licensed, rather than those who do not do the work.There is nothing that prevents any number of electricians to form partnerships or giant corporations. The fact that a giant corporation makes an electrical contract does not make such corporation an electrical contractor. Any individual, partnership or corporation that makes a contract to perform labor is not a contractor. If there were but one electrician, he would have a monopoly. No person other than himself could make a contract to do electrical work. If there were two electricians, they could be competitors or form a partnership or corporation. If there were three electricians, they could be competitors as individuals, two could form a partnership or corporation, or all three could form a partnership or corporation. But in no instance would they be an electrical contractor. If the state required licenses of electricians, all would be required to obtain a license.
*If Carpenter A, driving a F-150 that gets 18 MPG, leaves Grand Central Station at 2:00 and drives due west for four hours at 55 miles per hour, and Carpentry Contractor B leaves Atlanta in a Dodge 4x4 weighing 2200lbs and drives north for 90 minutes at 60 mph, how many heads do the carpenters have on the planet where Haugen and his many other personalities come from?
*Dave,You've got too much time on your hands. You just typed up a long line of drbble that is meaningless. Get a life. There was nothing useful in that whole post. And BTW, read the sigatures at the bottom of the posts. Also learn to use the reply button.Billy
*Adrian,Stop it, You're killing me. LMAO!!!!!Billy
*To all In contractor licensing statutes, the laws come under the headings of professions and occupations. Under this heading are listed doctors, dentists, architects, engineers, contractors, barbers and other occupations. Your state may list some occupations for regulation not listed by other states.We all can visualize what a barber does or what an accountant does. There seems to be disagreement as to what the occupation of contractor does.How about everyone describing what a contractor does. For example, if you were describing what a barber does, you would probably say that he uses various clippers and scissors and other implements to cut and style hair. Or if you were describing an architect you would probably say that he designs buildings and draws the plans to be utilized. To make it simple, imagine one man, much like a one person law practice or a single accountant, who works alone with no partners, employees, etc. Describe the actual work done by such person so that it can be visualized mentally in the same manner that we can visualize a barber at work from a description.
*I think Mr. Augey's original question has been answered, so let's all go back to the tavern.
*Dave et all. A couple of years after I became married about 38 years ago to a high spirited Italian, I learned one valuable lesson that allowed me, and I suppose my wife as well, to maintain our sanity while having a pointless arguement with each other, and the key word here is "pointless". "Yes Dear."To this today, it still works.Regarding the original post from Augey, I'd worry less about your state's licensing or registering specifics than learning about business. Not to diminish your state's regulations since you should know them well, use contracts designed well, and buy the books "Markup & Profit" by Michael C. Stone from http://www.craftsman-book.com and The E-Myth by Michael Gerber from Amazon. Study them, don't just read them; take their advice, and you should do fine.
*HEY YOUSE GUYS!This is a no brainer, or a little to no brainer at best. Pay or be slaughtered!!! Don't stop at the license...get the regs, da codes, dee insurance,the signage..And da beat goes on!!! BOOM CHICKA BOOM BOOM BOOM!!!Dan-O!
*Dear Dave.....I need your expert help. I am an employeed carpenter, who is still a registered contractor thru the rest of this year....and I also cut my own hair. And I'm now cutting my own hair more often than I'm acting as a registered contractor....granted, for 40 hrs a week....I am employeed as a carpenter....but first impressions mean alot....so maybe my being a barber is the primary occupation? Please, as you can see.....you are the only man for the job. What type of contract have I gotten myself into......and seeing as how barbers were the first doctors.....which states can I practice medicine? Thanks for the usefull info......Jeff
*Malcom X was once quoted as saying " there's no such thing as a stupid question. " Perhaps I've proven him wrong?can't we all just get along?
*Augey, you and Malcome X are correct. The problem is that sometimes the answers initiate new questions, and as is typical of many people, we get off into different tangents. The ability to "focus" is not necessarially natural. Besides, even the "Brady" bunch had an occasional squabble.
*augey.. why should anyone try to get along with a guy who posts under 4 different pseudonyms... and keeps dragging out his same old chestnut...broken needle doesn't care about licensing.. he doesn't think contractors should have employees.. that's what this is about.....
*I'm with Mike cause anyone who can spell "pseudonym" has my vote. You didn't hit the "Check Spelling" button did you?
*sonny... you know what it would look like if i did....hah, hah, hah...spell checker... more like spelling scrambler... auto encoder.....
*pseudonym, with the spell checker.
*I just hope they don't print any of this in the "best of breaktime" section next month.But while we're on the subject of spelling, did anyone hear President Bush say "'nucular' weapons" twice today?
*Robert, are you a disgruntled painter?What is your point? There is no law requiring the painter to paint for the contractor. Those are choices that the tradesman makes. I've been a carpenter for many years and only work for contractors. I do this willingly. I don't work directly for homeowners, although I'm allowed to.Yes, the contractor charges more for my services. He needs to stay in business too. It's called free enterprise. You sound very angry that some painters choose to paint for contractors. Why don't you relax on the couch and spill your guts.blue
*Dave, it is very easy to profit from anothers labor. All you need to do is sell the labor to a third party for more than you are charged. It's called markup and is done in every industry in every store, factory or service. blue
*Mike, thank you for explaing Robert, err Dave, err whoever. I wondered what his point was. I agree wholeheartily with him. If he's a contractor, he shouldn't have employees. I wonder what he'd do if he landed a contract to build an Interstate Highway....?I might be able to use his services for some sleep deprived people I know....blue
*
I was just hoping to have some people chime in on one of the great mysteries for young builders. Which is how to obtain a license for contracting. I know the process is different from one region to another; so as many comments as possible would be great. I remember while working in Manhattan it was nearly impossible to get any answers, I can't decide whether the city or the contractors were least helpful.