Certified and Qualified

Date 04-25-2001 22:49

After reading the single letter in the recent issue of Inspection Trends, a subject that has precipitated much controversy has again come to light by Mr. Te Brugge, the author of this lone letter.

Many inspectors and technicians are out there performing inspection or testing who do not have the experience and knowledge to perform as an inspector/technician. I know of at least a dozen or more individuals who fall into this classification of "Certified, but not Qualified". I could make your eyes roll with some of the activities these certified inspectors/technicians have attempted to perform.

We all know it takes experience to learn any trade or vocation, but the training should come first, followed by on the job experience under the supervision of someone who already has this training and experience. I can go to at least 4 "training centers" right now within a 10 mile radius from my office and purchase the questions and answers to the CWI exam. It's that easy. If you are proficient at rote memorization, you will not have any problems becoming Certified.

My point here is that there are gaps in the system here, not just with the CWI or any other AWS or ASNT examinations. I feel there should actually be someone verifying the experience of any individual's application and contact their references. There are many ICBO inspector's out there as well who are inspecting the structures which we work and live in who do not know what a fillet weld is or what tension those A325's should be trensioned to. But, they are Certified.

Any suggestions to minimize this problem should be posted here. Can you believe it, 10 years ago I actually took the time to fill out my CWI application exactly as they requested, had I known I could have fudged my certifications and experience, I still would not have.

I am very curious regarding any suggestions pertaining to this subject, there have been some post's in this forum on this very subject. I sit back and watch the replies on this particular issue. I think we should all try to participate more to resolve problems, and try to come up with some constructive remarks to help out. This was one of my reasons for my post on SCWI, CWI and CWE.

OK people, the ball is in our court, any replies, suggestions, remarks, comments? (please keep to the subject and make them constructive)
DGXL

By CHGuilford (****)

Date 04-26-2001 18:34

The NACE Coatings Inspector Training Program comes to mind for use as a template for a certification program. For those who haven't heard about that, NACE has 3 -one week long training sessions that combine lectures, group discussions, hands-on lab work, and such to get the "victim" ready for the Peer Review. Knowledge, interpersonal skills,honesty & integrity, and practical training are the main focuses. The Peer Review is a verbal examination before a panel of 3 paint industry experts.

Certification levels depend on how many sessions a person has sucessfully completed- from Basic, Intermediate, to Certified Coatings Inspector. Certified status requires passing all 3 sessions (with written and practical exams for each)and the Peer Review. Then it is possible to add to the credentials by sucessfully completing the requirements of other NACE training. The NACE program isn't perfect, some people are good test takers and do well in personal interviews, but lack common sense and "practical" experience. Others are excellent, knowledgable inspectors, but fall apart under testing pressure. I do think the Peer Review helps to equalize some of that.

As one might guess, it is very expensive and time consuming. But there are some very good aspects about the program. I think some parts of that would be useful for CWIs or any kind of inspectors for that matter.

Another thought is that some time ago AWS was looking at making the CWI program compatable with European practices. NDE certification was also being looked at for the same reason. What ever happened with that? Was there anything useful discovered that could be incorporated into CWI certification besides the SCWI?

I agree that it isn't good to have programs designed to "crank out CWIs" in order to keep up with the demand. Now that more jobs require it, many employers want their QC to get certified simply to comply with the contract requirements. Unfortunately the goal is not always to improve the department, rather the bosses just someone "qualified" to sign off the work.

Requiring more money and more training for CWIs is not going to be a popular idea. Even worse will be if there are enough "underqualified" people doing the work, the entire industry will have a bad opinion of inspectors. We all have heard of persons who do their inspections from the golf course. Or others who just don't have a clue but fill the position. Anytime I have come behind one of those people, I can see the popular opinion of inspectors is not good.

Employers are in the best position to be sure only fully qualified people do the work, or at least make sure the person works within the limits of his qualification and experience. We all know how that can work when the pressure is on. I agree that AWS and all of us should do what we can to update and improve the CWI program.
CHGuilford

By gibster Date 05-08-2001 11:23

I get the impression from your post that you think that you're the only qualified and honest CWI out there.

I was referring to the post by DGXL.

By CHGuilford (****)

Date 05-08-2001 17:08

Gibster,
If you mean me , then I apologize to you and everyone else for giving that impression. I was only trying to say that there are other training methods out there that could be adapted for CWI training. I know I sure could have used more training when I started out and I still have more to learn. I simply would like to see more available for people to get training where they might need and want it.
My other point is that I do what I can to show that most inspectors do a good job. That just because one person charged an 8 hour day when he was really golfing all day, it doesn't mean that the majority are doing that. (That really happened. He was fired, I was the replacement, and the client did not trust any inspector. I had a tough time earning his confidence.) I certainly don't mean to say that I am the only one trying to do it right. Most of the CWI's I know are professional and knowledgeable in their work. I only meant that it takes a lot of "attaboys" to erase one "uh-oh!".
CHGuilford

By - Date 09-26-2001 07:03

I agree with you. Presuming honesty, all that is required to become certified as a CWI, for example, is some experience, a good memory, and good test taking skills. If you are a high school graduate with 5 years of experience in issuing welding consumables to the welders in your organization, you are qualified to take the test. Also, AWS does not verify the experience and educational credits claimed by test applicants at a 100% rate - some sampling is done (though I'm not sure of the extent of the sampling). Note however, that both QC-1 and the "Guide to AWS Welding Inspector Qualification and Certification" put the onus on the EMPLOYER to determine that the CWI is capable of performing his/her duties and to provide any additional education and/or training as needed. The situation is much the same regarding other certs/technical societies.
When I have encountered individuals who should not have been working in the capacity of a certified inspector/technician, etc. (and like yourself I've run into quite a few), in every case the employer had not taken the steps to determine the proficiency of these people. You could therefore make the case that the employer is at least guilty of some degree of ignorance or negligence.

In the above comments, I have presumed honesty in all parties. If you presume that in the real world you will occasionally encounter some degree of dishonesty from time to time, the situation is worse.
Mankenberg

By NDTCMTInsp Date 10-01-2001 20:58

>>>>You could therefore make the case that the employer is at least guilty of some degree of ignorance or negligence.<<<<

I think the nail has been hit on the head with the above statement. In my area a "so called" top 100 ENR inspection/testing company is using soils/environmental people as management (this particular branch) to bid on and manage projects that requires the use of qualified/certified inspectors.

Metals/NDT people are considered "nonprofessional technicians" with this company. What that means is that you could have 40 years of hardcore advanced welding/NDT experience, have every inspection certification available, and yet a 22 year old soils engineer (that likely thinks MIG welding has something to do with Russian jets) is considered management over any welding/NDT inspector.

As a result of this incompetent management (at this one particular office), they are using NDT testers in lieu of qualified inspectors. In other words, you take a lower payscale man, teach him to use a MT Yoke, throw a level II MT cert on him, and you got a "good to go" welding inspector. If he's over the age of 23, you can bill him out at senior inspector rates. Due to the fact that they are a top 100 ENR company,they are not being questioned by their clients.

Hopefully, the above scenerio is the exception to the rule for this company but I think INCOMPETENT MANAGEMENT PLAYS A LARGE PART in the use of unqualified/uncertified people.