New alarm licensing for Province of Quebec

I can under stand that if business were left entirely unsupervised it puts the consumer at risk, so "some" regulation is necessary, But,for some reason, the bureaucrats can never figure out the point that resonsble supervision ends and restrictive control begins and from that point on, the more restrictions they put on business the more corruption that occurs.

Licensing really proves nothing. unless there is actual hands on certification etc. any one can pass a test. It proves out all the time around here i see supposed UL certificated burg jobs that by no means should be certificated. same with fire alarms most would not pass a complete inspection yet the ones who call for license and permits etc are usually the biggest offenders.

RHC: Yes, I too can completely understand licensing and standards for what they are intended to do. Where I operate here in Ontario, there is absolutely no licensing required for locksmithing or alarm and security installations. We have our share of scummy companies, but not so many as seem to exist in Quebec. However, past a certain point, licensing becomes just another restrictive trade practice as it will in this case. Trade practices in Quebec are heavily influenced by the trade unions, and they swing a lot of weight with government. They've shown they will do anything they can get away with to restrict Ontario trades working in Quebec. I doubt that many mom and pop type security businesses will go through the hoops and costs to become legitimate, leaving only the larger companies to do so, with their generally poorer service to the buying public.

In some ways it's so typical of the Canadian approach to things....if a little "control" is necessary, bring it on strong instead, to give the government more intrusion into it than is necessary by any real standards or needs.

"tourman" a écrit dans le message de groupe de discussion : snipped-for-privacy@26g2000yqv.googlegroups.com...

Fine with me.. ;-) I am not really happy with that legislation also, and by the way it was pass on 2006 and it took effect last summer..

It was pass cause some american government asked that there would be more security in Canada.. dont worry it will come to Ontario soon..

e

RHC: No it was passed because of pressure from trade unions. If the American government wanted more security in Canada, anything that happened would happen at the border crossings, not just within the Province of Quebec.

And no, I doubt such an expensive licensing scheme would every fly in Ontario ! You work for a big company, so this affects you not in the least. However, smaller companies would be hit hard by such excessive charges (although some form of basic licensing probably wouldn't be a bad idea). But you don't kill a fly with a hammer !!

"tourman" a écrit dans le message de groupe de discussion : snipped-for-privacy@t13g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...

Bob it all started in 2000 with the Consultative committee on security. take a look at this cdoc and you will see that the union were there, but just barely..

I will copy who was there for the alarm section of the comity..

ANNEXE 3 MEMBRES DU SOUS-COMITÉ « ALARME ET SERRURERIE » M. Jean-François BouchardDirection des affaires policières et de la prévention de la criminalité, ministère de la Sécurité publique. M. Georges Belisle Emploi-Québec. M. Réjean Bérubé A.D.T. Sécurité Multi-Nat, Canada. M. Normand Bouchard Fraternité internationale des ouvriers en électricité. M. Robert Branchaud CANASA. M. Pierre Dussault Maîtres serruriers du Québec. M. Robert Dutil Service de protection Microtec. M. Michel Ferland Sûreté du Québec. Mme Louise Marcoux CANASA. M. Lionel Perron Les Laboratoires des assureurs du Canada. M. Réjean Ratthé Service de prévention Microtec. M. Robert Robillard Groupe Sécurité Robillard inc. M. Jean-Paul Roberge Protectron inc.

In all those people only one was from a Union.. all the rest.. alarm company or alarm association ....

So are you telling me that one men from one union is able to hammer down his way of thinking on all those poeple.. Wake up and smell the cofee Bob.. and stop playing cartoon in your head..

then after the comity 911 came.. it was followed by this:

I know its all in french..

Thenn in 2006 the law, if there would not have been 911 nothing would havwe change here..

No Bob i dont work for a big company, I represent the best part of all alamr tech in Quebec as there union rep.

Thats BS Big company have central station, all the poeple working there need the same permit then the tech, and who do you think pay for this? the low salary worker or the big company? and then all the direct boss of thos people need the permit.. who pay for that? the company, big of small they are all hit. I was not for the legislation, but what can I dio. its there and we need to play by it.

As silly as it sounds it does prove something, 20 years ago I attended an electronics school (the one Sally Struthers used to advertise for). Very simple 2-year course that 95% of the people I started with didn't finish, most dropped out after 2 or 3 months. Prospective employers looked more at the fact you attended AND finished the course more than what you learned.

Attending a class and taking a test for a license may not amount to a lot but I'd rather have that person in my house than someone who couldn't bother taking the time

RHC: Yeah, licensing can be a good thing if it serves only that purpose and doesn't get so elaborate and expensive that it acts as a deterrent. I would have no problem with licensing here in Ontario but not at the rates asked in Quebec. If as Petem says, CANASA was part of this fiasco, then I was right years ago not to trust them, and they obviously are only serving the interests of the large alarm conglomerates (as I also suspected then and it seems to be proving true now)

Back in the day ..... I created and taught a New York State Board of Regents approved course in alarm installation. I saw the same results as you. Dozens started the course. A hand full would finish. And only a few would get jobs in the trade. Back then I attributed it to the fact that most of the attendees where getting assistance and subsidies from various government and wellfare agencies. That is, they took the course because it was paid for or at least partially paid for by someone else not because it was something that they wanted to do as a vocation. Probably thought is was going to be easy or maybe they just wanted to learn enough to break into places. After about five years the applications slowed down and the technical school that I wrote the course for moved to far from where I lived for me to communte easily and was eventually bought by another school. I don't know what happened to the course after I stopped teaching it. Might still be being taught somewhere for all I know.

By the way, Sally doesn't advertise for that school any more because she ate it.

I used to wonder why they ever let her advertise for those poor hungry kids. I'm thinking they fired her because they found out that she was eating them too.

I think they went out of business long before she could start to chow down

Pity too she was kinda hot in The Getaway