Exterior Restoration Specialist
He is from ohio, Ok will see what happens. I looked at the ip on the PWNA site. none, they dont have them public.
I am an honest person
No one person is able to teach all the classes my comittee is planning on adding to our current list and no one person could spend as much time away from their business or family to teach every class every time it is being taught wherever in the U.S. or Canada,
Yes I am a board member, BUT, I have absolutly NO interest in bidding or teaching that would sway my decisions any way.
IF there is a BOD that is participating in bidding, I feel the most honest way to place the actual voting is to simply have that person step out of the room and wait for our discussion and voting to be over.
Beth & Rod said:This is a good read....
Squirtgun said:What if you are the only honest man in the room?
This won't stop that BOD bidder from apply peer pressure prior to the vote to sway a decision in their favor.
MarkH said:You all slam the guy that is making the decisions as to bod's having upper hand on bidding and blah blah blah.
StinlessDeal said:No matter how many members, for whatever good reasons, come here claiming that the board is an honest group; no person has a reason to believe that in this instance. This will be true for as long as the board countenances a clear conflict of interest in this bidding process. Directors should not be eligible.
MarkH said:I can say that the bids have came straight into the PWNA office and either cc'd or faxed straight to me. I have several bids that the office has not even seen. I am just a power wash guy that is trying to help others succeed.
MarkH said:I may be doing all wrong and I was ticked off by all the posts of how this would not be handled honestly, and I would be swayed by other board members.
MarkH said:I have calmed down and I am just wanting to let everyone know that this is still happening even though it has brought up so much debate.
MarkH said:When we sent the bids out on January 4 2006, we used anyone that was in our database at the headquarters starting with members first and reaching to non members second.
oneness said:Let me ask you a question, and no, I'm not attacking or bashing, I'm genuinely curious. If you're the guy dissecting the bids, how do you know if a course is the best, if it is in an area outside your areas of expertise? Are others also going to be dissecting them? For example, if I were in your shoes, I would have no idea what would make a good KEC course, or a good Wood course.
I don't think anyone has said that anyone wouldn't be honest...the point is that there is POTENTIAL there for dishonesty, and as someone else pointed out, while YOU may know you're honest, how do we (excluding myself, of course, as a non member and thus with no real say in anything).? As someone else pointed out, if this were a county contract that the county commission was to award bids, and a commissioner was bidding, it would be all over the papers...
As Doc mentioned in another thread in this forum, "BOD members are accountable to each other, the organization, and are held to a higher industry standard because we are in front leading by example." I would think leading by example and holding each other to a higher standard would include avoiding even the appearance of dishonesty.
As far as board members profiting from their service, they can't, plain and simple. It's illegal.
oneness said:As far as board members profiting from their service, they can't, plain and simple. It's illegal.
Doc said:We talk about how arrogant PWNA BOD is and how we continually remind non-members if they want to do more, if they want to see change, or if they would like a voice they must be a member.
Perceive this as you may, I believe this format has continually proved this not to be the case considering many of the BOD reads and posts within this format and others. Why? Because we care.
Doc said:I encourage all of you to look at past and present instructors particularly on the BOD. How much money has the PWNA paid them? The answer is easy, zero, notta, nothing. Surprised? PWNA provides certification "on the road" going to different cities in the US to help students afford and attend class. Would anyone care to send a check for the flight, hotel, food, time away from work, and time away from family? Why is it all right for BOD members to take money from their pockets to donate to the organization but not all right to be paid for performing a services?
Doc said:We talk about the BOD having an unfair advantage to bid on courses yet we never discuss how unfair it is for the PWNA to take advantage of its instructors. My attempt is not for sympathy but for understanding. There is so much more to share but not enough words to condense this topic for reading purposes.
Doc said:As a side note: I have posted in the past in several posts on this site and others, recently in this thread to call me to discuss further. No calls have been received from this thread and very few in the past pertaining to other threads.
The door is open to call the PWNA BOD or myself. We are willing to listen to those who disagree with the PWNA. Are those who disagree willing to share thoughts outside of a public format?
I always thought it was praise in public, punish in private. I believe some of us reading the post feel numbers and support are needed to beat some sense into the PWNA BOD. Maybe I have misunderstood posts written. It is difficult not to feel under attack.
Doc said:Why is it illegal for individuals teaching a class to make money? Why is it illegal for PWNA BOD members teaching a class to make money? The charter is not-for-profit but does not mean we cannot pay individuals or companies for services.
No calls have been received from this thread and very few in the past pertaining to other threads.
" Should businessmen look for an organization that seems to say, "Join now, we want to make a difference, your opinion and good ethics are not required,"?"We don't know each other, and you haven't taken the oppurtunity to identify yourself definitively here, but I think it takes unbelievable gall to post something like the sentence above in a thread where current and prospective members of the organization under discussion are raising legitimate questions ANY director of ANY organization should realize are a matter of course.
I'm sure it is painful to hear and read people doubting the motives of directors you have come to know as good, hard-working people you trust. You've served together on this board for a while, and you wouldn't have some rube from Nebraska casting aspersions upon them.
I feel for all of you, but the relationship described above, despite all your protests to the contrary, is exactly why people have a right to expect a little more circumspection on the part of the board. Collusion is not necessary to this problem, more dangerous is just the chance that a member voting on the bids, might give some tiny, even unconscious, advantage to the friend that has stepped out during the discussion.
The specific duties of board members are to guide the organization they are in stewardship of, and answer (and take into account) the views of the people that pay the dues. When a board member repeatedly claims that everybody on the board is honest, we believe it (perhaps) but we can only be SURE they will behave honestly if the board members (and everybody else) knows that they CAN NOT unduly benefit from decisions that the board makes: That is, they are ineligible to participate in bids let by the organization.
This is not, "Blah blah blah," this is common, garden variety ethical behavior.
I have no reason to suspect any particular board member is in any way corrupt, I just have to say that the question can't be seriously raised if the members cleave to the commonly accepted rules. I will iterate here, unequivocally, that I am not saying there is a corrupt member or members on the board. I am saying that people that have not even met the members of the board can't know for certain and shouldn't be expected to rely on anyone's word for this.
This is why county board members that own construction companies, for example, are not allowed to bid on county construction projects in the county in which they are board members. If something like this went on in your county, I imagine you would cry foul, and you wouldn't want to be told that you were just complaining with your blah blah blah.
You'd be offended.
You'd even be offended if you heard this from Board members of a county in which you were contemplating purchasing a new home. Just because you don't live there yet, doesn't mean you don't have a right (indeed, an obligation) to cry foul. You would have a legitimate stake in this because you hope to one day make your home there. This might persuade you to look elsewhere for your new home.
If the PWNA board doesn't listen to members now, why should any prospective member choose to join? Should businessmen look for an organization that seems to say, "Join now, we want to make a difference, your opinion and good ethics are not required,"?
I have not posted here to discredit the PWNA, in fact I have been leaning toward joining, I posted here originally because I was so surprised by this situation that I was sure the Board members couldn't be aware how this looks to the public. I actually am trying to help.
Two more quick points from earlier in this thread: First, a question to JohnT, a man I esteem as a police officer and a contributor here and elsewhere. If a person is found murdered, but nobody complains, or even if only a few people close to the situation complain, is the murderer any less guilty? No, and we all know it. The number of complainants has little bearing at all on whether or not ANY action is moral or ethical.
Next, I'd like to address the issue of a director having to abstain from bidding, and thereby depriving the good members of the organization of the oppurtunity to take the best possible class.
Saint Paul of Tarsus said it best, "We shall not do this evil that good may come." In the 2000 or so years since, no more apt words have been uttered.
I would submit that any board member so talented that their class is the obvious choice could easily leave the board, bid, and win in good conscience. That is, as long as board members have not yet seen even a single other competitor's bid. Once any board members have seen them, the opportunity exists for unfair advantage to accrue to the director who otherwise would have bid. He or she might have been made privy to another's work, and would be hard pressed not to take that knowlege into account when placing the bid. This is the heart of the conflict of interest. To wit: The "conflict" exists between the director's "interest" as a business owner, and his or her "interest" as a director of an organization expressly dedicated to the good of the industy as a whole. Stepping out of the room during deliberations hardly begins to address this conflict.
These points really should be self-evident to any person that would claim to have the best interests of any orgnization in mind. It should be obvious also, that this situation hands ammunition to the critics of this organization, and credence to all but the wildest claims of the most rabid anti-organization people out there. The board is probaly sincere in its desire to do the best it can, but good arguments now exist that this may not be so.
I AM NOT impugning any person or people here, I'm stating the truth: People have been given (probably unnecessarily) a reason to doubt the motives of the board. In a nutshell, it looks bad, and shouldn't.
No matter how many members, for whatever good reasons, come here claiming that the board is an honest group; no person has a reason to believe that in this instance. This will be true for as long as the board countenances a clear conflict of interest in this bidding process. Directors should not be eligible.