Minneapolis treecutter cries foul!

I have definitely found the ca has benefited my career immensely. I look foward to hitting the books a bit and getting back into study mode. I realized that I have become complacent in furthering my knowledge over the past several years. In relation to other business expenses, such as wc, education and certification is nothing.
 
funny
being one of the early CA adopters, Smart clients (had money) started calling wanting to know if we were certified, thinking it was the chit. OH yeah we are squirtified I'd say

Helped Top Notch tremendously, at first.
City Foresters were not supposed to recommend any one licensed tree company over another -- that said they could wink wink nod nod clients to us. (well we really were good tree guys)
I remember clients glancing at my sewed on CA patch, Hell I had forest ranger status or something - didn't see other tree guys with one of those official looking sewed on patchs, Top Notch must be the one to hire, TNT kept growing

Then as more and more guys got CA'd (some >400 in MN) My story changed to . . . . "well CA is good but its only a very basic knowledge of Trees, WE are better(did not word it that way)because OUR staff has 8 Arborists with Urban forestry degrees and one with a masters in plant pathology.(well at one time anyways), just about anybody can pass the CA test" (got to be different to succeed)

Now there is definitely more info to learn on the net then passing the CA , but how do you qualify it? (I like the High school analogy)
BCMA from what I have heard, raises the bar to a much more serious attempt at "practicing" Arboriculture.

Good on you Kevin!
 
I really can't understand what grounds this guy is arguing from. Doesn't a city or prospective employer have the right to hire whoever they choose? What if they decided that whoever they hire has to own a chainsaw? What if they said that the district attorney needed to pass the BAR exam. I don't understand how this guy has any case whatsoever.
 
[ QUOTE ]
20 years ago, CA was the cat's meow, and it meant so much for so long that we were--and still are--spoiled rotten, getting so much for so little. Now it's like a HS diploma, and the plaintiff in this case is beyotching long and loud about needing one before the city trusts their trees to his company. What a crock.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not all trees in a city belong to the city. There is a very large fault in the reasoning that believes they do.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I really can't understand what grounds this guy is arguing from. Doesn't a city or prospective employer have the right to hire whoever they choose? What if they decided that whoever they hire has to own a chainsaw? What if they said that the district attorney needed to pass the BAR exam. I don't understand how this guy has any case whatsoever.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes a city does have the right to hire whom they want. Does the city have a right to decide who property owners within that city hire? I don't think they should. I think the case this guy has is that the CA is not high enough of a cert to be the deciding factor in who gets to work in the city. Maybe a minimum of a having a Board Certified Master Arborist on staff and only then if the BCMA has a 4 year or higher degree in Arboriculture or Forestry would really clean up the tree care industry in that local.
 
As I understand the issue it isn't about contracting for city work. This is about obtaining a license to do private work.

The city is attempting to look out for the residents. Good intentions but it might not be legal.
 
You get the value from a Certification that you put into it. Certs mean nothing on their own. And they seem 'dumbed down' enough so that most people can get them. It should be a little tougher maybe. Or at least tougher at some level of responsibility (company owner or manager maybe?)

Some loose thoughts:

I don't think recognition at being a professional tree care individual or company should be as much about Certification or licencing in any particular organization as proficiency and honest adherence to 'Best Practices' as are most recognized in the industry. Good arbs, whether certified or licenced or not probably agree on the important points of safety or tree care.

This proof or demonstration of adherence should also be affordable. I think ISA and TCIA are affordable. They are a small fraction of any of the other usual costs of running a safe operation.

I think weeding out the hacks everywhere without forcing good practitioners to belong to any particular organization would be a worthy goal. I think it might be tough to devise something workable and enforceable. Maybe the Orgs we currently have are the best we can do. Dunno.
 
I am always asked by customers. " you liscensed and insured?" There is no liscenseing where I am but it seems that most costomers assume there is. I tell them I'm certified and insured. If there were a liscenseing process isn't it fair to set some standards? The liscenseing entity in this case is contracting out the liscenseing process to ISA. That seems legit, saves Minneapolis from writing their own exam. You have to pass a test to drive a car or practice medicine or be a veterinarian.
 
What about to build a house? Or even a deck. Or be a plumber. Tree work is one of the few professions that people think anyone can do.
 
[ QUOTE ]
What about to build a house? Or even a deck. Or be a plumber. Tree work is one of the few professions that people think anyone can do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Plumbers need a plumbers license here in Georgia but house builder and deck builder need only a business license.
 
I read (into the article) that the municipality choose to require certified arborists for an unstated reason (improved urban forest?). The municipality can likely support this in court if they show it is reasonable and will provide a public benefit.

Thus the question arises does becomeing an (ISA?) certified arborist make "tree-trimmers" arborists and better at the care and maintenance of trees? Is there any evidence of this?
 
1. What do we want from certification?

a respect
b better tree care
c safer workplace
d higher rates
e all of the above


2. Which other jobs could also require certification?

a agriculture
b lawncare
c aquaculture
d nursery/greenhouse
e all of the above

3.

c
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom