News Detail
News Archive >> CEDIA Fights Back!
Details
CEDIA Fights Back!
STATEMENT FROM DON GILPIN and KEN SMITH
Re: Criticism of CEDIA's Government Affairs Program by Randal Lemke of InfoComm
CEDIA'S LEGISLATIVE POSITION
Yesterday, CEDIA's government affairs program was criticized by Randal Lemke, executive director of Infocomm. We felt compelled to offer factual information that provides a clearer picture of our legislative initiatives.
During the 2006 state legislative sessions, CEDIA's Government Affairs team tracked, testified, and introduced legislation related to the electronic systems industry. During the 2006 state legislative sessions, the CEDIA team tracked over 600 bills in 45 states. The majority of legislation CEDIA has been engaged in over the years deals with statewide electrical licensing and contracting proposals regulating electronic systems contractors and technicians. If enacted, these electrical licensing and contracting proposals in most states would require the completion of an electrician apprenticeship program to work as an electronic systems contractor.
Some of the states CEDIA has been actively involved with during the 2006 legislative session include: Illinois (SB 1434), Iowa (HB 2741), Massachusetts (SB1813), Missouri (SB 1243), New Jersey (SB 4891), New York (SB 4891) and Pennsylvania (HB 623). These are specific examples where CEDIA has spent its own funds to either defeat or remove harmful legislation. If enacted, these very bills would have negatively impacted the workforce represented by many different electronics organizations, including InfoComm.
CEDIA's proactive introduction of legislation is in response to our years of defensive work in many states. We can only play defense so long before being asked by the legislators, "What do you want to see in the legislation?" CEDIA's position is that it is far better for us to have a part in writing the rules, thus protecting our members' best interests, than fighting restrictive legislation proposed by others who do not understand the electronic systems industry.
Also, as clarification to Mr. Lemke's assertion that "EST has not been accepted by the industry", I would offer the following: The U.S. Department of Labor has recognized Electronic Systems Technicians as a separate and distinct profession as part of the 21st Century Workforce Initiative. The designation has its own separate Occupational Title and Code. The federal designation has value to CEDIA's legislative efforts as we continue to fight restrictive legislative proposals at the state level that do not recognize our profession and its unique training requirements.
Mr. Lemke also states in his article that "CEDIA continues to lobby states to mandate the Electronic Systems Technician certification." Again, this is not an accurate statement as CEDIA representatives at both the New Hampshire House and Senate hearings and at the Nebraska Study Bill session made it quite clear that the language that was being discussed did not mandate one certification over others. On the contrary, it pointed to a voluntary certification requirement.
The New Hampshire House Bill 1595 that was introduced into the legislature was intended to be an inclusive bill, not exclusionary. New Hampshire House Bill 1595 was legislation to introduce a voluntary certification requirement. The only requirement from the New Hampshire legislation would be if you wanted to advertise as a "Certified-EST" you would have had to have actually completed one of the board approved industry certifications. Any association or business that has a certification or training program would have been welcome to submit their program for state approval, including InfoComm. In no way was this bill intended to accept CEDIA or NSCA education as the only accepted certifications or to restrict a person's business. Invitations were made to other associations to join the advisory committee, including InfoComm, who opposed the legislation. Without cooperation the bill died because of the lack of a unified front.
Mr. Lemke's take on CEDIA's involvement in the Nebraska study bill is again off target. His claim that there was no need to introduce this study bill in Nebraska is not only misinformed, it purposely attempts to paint CEDIA's intentions as something sinister or sneaky. During the Nebraska study bill hearing, a representative from the Nebraska State Electrical Board stated that they have been looking at the issue of licensing low-voltage installers for more than two years. CEDIA was responding to this impending harmful legislation from the Electrical Board with a study bill. CEDIA's intent was to offer language that accepted industry certifications including CEDIA certification.
During the 2004 legislative session, CEDIA was active in Nebraska on legislation that would have potentially restricted the work of an electronics systems contractor as the work of an electrician. This is the same legislative proposal we continue to fight in numerous states. In fact, Iowa House Bill 2741, introduced in 2006, came from Nebraska.
Our intent with any legislative effort is to have CEDIA Certification recognized at the state level as one of the industry certifications that could be accepted. It was never intended to be the only certification and we welcome other industry certifications.
Finally, Mr. Lemke continually asserts that CEDIA tries to mandate the EST Certification within our legislative language. The word "mandate" cannot be found in any document nor has it been used by any CEDIA professional during testimony. Our position maintains an open door of communication and a partnership with different associations in the electronics industry.
CEDIA's intent with our legislative efforts is for the betterment of the whole industry. It is not to position one's education or certification as the standard. Furthermore, attempts at select associations trying to gain state recognition and ignoring the rest of the industry would not be looked upon with favor from any legislature.
We welcome and encourage all stakeholders' participation in the legislative process including their presence and participation at committee hearings. Currently, CEDIA has more than 4,000 certified technicians, and we will continue to protect their right to work through our efforts in the state houses across America. In doing so, CEDIA continues to take steps to educate legislators on the electronic systems industry and how it is a separate and distinct profession from the work of an electrician. We will continue to fight restrictive legislation in states that do not properly address our growing industry. All industry stakeholders are welcomed and encouraged to participate.
Sincerely,
Ken Smith Don Gilpin
Board President Executive Director
CEDIA CEDIA
Date
Thursday 02 Nov 2006
