From: Shirley Kalogeropoulos
Sent: Thursday, 9 September 2010 12:52 p.m.
To: Ali Spencer (ali@spencerpr.com); Auckland MPA - Chris Sumich; Auckland MPA (akmpa@xtra.co.nz); Beverly Sellers; BOP/Coromandel - Christine Nickel; BOP/Coromandel - Steve Dearing; Canterbury MPA - Barbara Dawson; Canterbury MPA -Martin de Gouw; Gisborne MPA - John Ward; Hawkes Bay MPA - Alan Davidson; Hutt Valley/Wairarapa - Alan Twohill; Hutt Valley/Wairarapa - Rod Miller; Manawatu MPA - Leigh Basile; Manawatu MPA - Peter Mudgway ; Nelson MPA - Kevin Harris; Nelson MPA - Roger Taylor; Otago MPA - Marlene Marsh; Otago MPA - Peter Ryder; South Canterbury MPA - Shaun Breen; South Canterbury MPA - Tony Allnutt; Southland MPA - Judith Knowler; Southland MPA - Mark Jesperson; Taranaki MPA - Karen Fergusson-Monk; Taranaki MPA - Paul Garner; Waikato MPA - David Whitfield; Waikato MPA - Michael Foote; Wanganui MPA - Andrew Palmer; Wanganui MPA - Brian Rhodes; Wellington MPA - Eric Palmer; Wellington MPA - Justin Harriss
Cc: Bruce Trenwith; Craig McCord; David Strong; Doug Brennan; John Gutry; Mark Whitehead; Ray Galt; Wellington MPA - John Leen
Subject: MESSAGE FROM MASTER PLUMBERS CEO
 


Hello All
 
I am sure most of you will be well aware of the emails which are being circulated to practitioners by a small number of tradesmen who are disgruntled.  Often these emails fail to outline the real issues and do a disservice to those of you who respect your profession and who are committed to upholding standards and quality of workmanship.
 
Until now we have declined to become drawn into the email traffic, however, we have now received the email at the bottom of this email string which was addressed to a wide audience and which cast doubt on the activities of Master Plumbers.  To this end I have responded to Allan Day (also below) and I would ask that you forward this to your members as an indication of our position but also as a way of communicating what is reality.
 
If members have any concerns about CPD or any other activity being undertaken by Master Plumbers I would welcome them contacting me as I would be happy to talk to them.
 
Regards Fiona
 


From: Fiona Gavriel
Sent: Tuesday, 7 September 2010 2:57 p.m.
To: 'Allan Day'; Craig O'Connell; Kern Uren; Bridie Wilkinson ((MIN)); maurice.williamson@national.org.nz; Legal; nicola.white@oag.govt.nz; Nathan Guy Horowhenua
Cc: Andrew Finnie
Subject: RE:
 
Allan
 
Firstly it is a real shame that you are so constantly sending out vexatious and poorly worded emails to all and sundry.  All this is doing is raising concern amongst a small group in the sector who regrettably believe what you are saying is correct.
 
To date I have resisted spending my time on answering your emails however as this is addressed to Master Plumbers, I feel the need to respond.  I trust my response will assist you in ensuring the informed and correct story is told.
 
Master Plumbers is not working in conjunction with the PGD Board around upskilling – nothing could be further from the truth.  The Board is the regulator – it has the role of implementing the legislation as defined in the 2006 Act.  This legislation clearly provides for a competence programme as determined in Sections 51 and 55 of the Act.
 
Under this section, “the Board may set or recognize competence programmes … for those who hold practicing licenses or provisional licences, or who apply for renewals of practicing licenses or provisional licences”. 
 
It is doing this through a CPD programme for plumbers, gasfitters and drainlayers.
 
Master Plumbers is a membership organisation – funded by those who wish to belong to it and who I am proud to say believe in standards and quality in this industry.  They believe in their trade, are committed to meeting the needs of the consumer and do not waste time in trying to dummy down their profession and abdicating responsibility for their own workmanship.
 
If you knew more about Master Plumbers you would understand that we are working hard to support not only our Members with their CPD needs, but also the wider sector.  For your information, we have trained over 1,100 practitioners this year alone – this is certainly not an indication that all agree with you.  For the record the feedback has been excellent, the uptake excellent and the quality of the courses excellent.  Interestingly I have not seen your name on the attendance list for this or any other of our courses so how you have judged this course as being lacking is beyond me.
 
Can I also put another misnomer away that I have seen written - that we are making money out of this.  We are not.  Master Plumbers is offering CPD as a membership service but again also to non members at true cost in the hope that others will see a clear value in joining our organization and having a legitimate, well informed voice speaking for them.   I am pleased to say that we are attracting new members – because the value we offer them is obvious.
 
As for the course in question there is a legitimate and testing process that our courses – along with those from other providers – have to go through to be awarded points.  We submit a powerpoint presentation, workbook, trainers guide, assessment and answers to the Board.  These are then reviewed independently by ITO moderators who make a recommendation to the Board as to whether the course should be accredited.  If the Board agrees we are advised accordingly and points allocated.
 
Questions are often asked or improvements requested when the material is submitted.  Only when all parties are happy with the content do we get points awarded.  We spend several thousand dollars developing a course – and for your information the topics are requested by practitioners – what would be the point of preparing courses that practitioners see no value in?  No-one would attend.
 
When a course is submitted we are required to cross reference the course to the competency requirements of a plumber, gasfitter and/or drainlayer at either registration or certifier level.  Exactly what happened with this course.   
 
For the record this course includes information on more than testing.  It includes an explanation of G12 and as important highlights The Drinking Water Standards for NZ 2005 which all plumbers should be well aware of.  Given the relative newness of this standard I am certain it was not covered in your apprentice training.  A good example of the reason for CPD as the world does not stand still and we all have a responsibility to keep up with change.
 
In addition it covers backflow – a very basic principle of plumbing practices, source water including rainwater (where technology and the environmental concerns are now taking us), point of use devices and filters etc.
 
As for the balance of your email and practitioners being placed in a position of liability, this has always been the case and if practitioners have failed to recognize this I am very concerned for their customers.  Plumbers, gasfitters and drainlayers have always been liable under the 1976 and now the 2006 Act for their workmanship.
 
Again, gaining an overview of the wider environment in which practitioners work – particularly in relation to water quality – has to be a good thing.   As has been demonstrated during the earthquake in Christchurch, clean good quality drinking water is an absolute essential of existence – as no doubt many citizens are now fully appreciating.  Whilst the plumber might not be responsible for the quality of the water supply, he is certainly responsible for what happens inside the boundary – that hasn’t changed since the invention of plumbing.  I would also like to think that a rural property owner has an expert to turn to for advice – the plumber.
 
Alan, your emails often confuse one issue with others.   You may well have complaints lodged with the Regulations Review Committee – lodging a complaint does not mean you are right.  Perhaps you should wait for the outcome before you start casting doubt in a sector which is undergoing change – I find this irresponsible of you.
 
Given you have yet again copied this to the Minister, OAG etc, I will take this opportunity to assure them that the rest of the industry is working hard to ensure they can demonstrate their ongoing competency, along with their absolute commitment to their own industry.  One which Master Plumbers is completely focused on supporting – in the end if practitioners cannot have pride in themselves and their profession, perhaps it is time they considered whether they want to be plumbers, gasfitters and drainlayers.
 
Finally Alan, I regret that you see it necessary to set time limits on recipients of your emails to get a response.  This is unnecessary but please bear in mind that my time and energies are spent in supporting the industry and doing what my Members pay me to do – providing services that they value.
 
Regards
Fiona Gavriel
 
Fiona Gavriel
Chief Executive Officer
Master Plumbers, Gasfitters & Drainlayers NZ Inc.
MasterLink Limited
NZ Plumbers Journal Limited
Ground Floor, 119 Ghuznee Street
PO Box 6606, Marion Square, Wellington 6141
 
Tel:    (04) 384 4184
DDI:   (04) 801 2013
Fax:   (04) 384 2456
Mob:  0274 303 629
fiona@masterplumbers.org.nz
www.masterplumbers.org.nz
 
 


From: Allan Day [mailto:allan-day@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Monday, 6 September 2010 4:18 p.m.
To: Craig O'Connell; Kern Uren; Fiona Gavriel; Bridie Wilkinson ((MIN)); maurice.williamson@national.org.nz; Legal; nicola.white@oag.govt.nz; Nathan Guy Horowhenua
Cc: Andrew Finnie
Subject:
 
Good afternoon Craig Kern and Fiona

May I request that you read the following sections from the Auditor Generals Report, then my letter following.

 
We found problems with the way that the Board was performing nearly all of its functions:  To ensure that it puts legality at the heart of everything it does, because at present we consider that it simply does not have a clear enough focus on the requirements of the legislation and administrative law disciplines, and of the legal risk attached to its activities

9.22
We have devoted some time to these issues because we see them as indicating a more general organisational problem. Our concern is that the Board has, in the past, not shown enough appreciation of the need for a public sector decision-maker to be scrupulous about the legal basis for its actions, and about the process by which it is making decisions that affect the rights of individuals.

9.23
In our view, many aspects of the Board's basic activities had a significant level of legal risk that the Board does not appear to have been aware of until now.

 
 
Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers:
 
Have you considered that If you attend any Board CPD course that allocates points as a condition of your eligibility to obtain a practicing license you maybe placing yourself in a situation where you are held liable for matters that should not and would not normally be attributed to you? 
 
For Example:
The Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board, in conjunction with the Master Plumbers, present TWO courses called  "Household Water Quality Part (1) & (2)"
 
The 2006 Act does not state that you are licensed to be involved in water quality, nor is it your responsibility. 
 
In towns and cities across NZ, that responsibility is the domain and responsibility of Local Authorities and in the case of rural tank or bore water,  the Property Owner.
 
The Board, Master Plumbers and other course providers are now recording against your Registration,  as a condition of your License that you are competent by their standards in matters that is not your business or their business, nor is it for what you are Registered and licensed for in many cases.
 
The Board, Master Plumbers and other course providers maybe placing you in a position of liability for matters that could never have been applied to you before,  but may well be in the future as the Board maintains a list of competency's obtained, by their standards,  accessible by Insurance Company's and the Public at large for viewing and consideration.
 
(1)  After considering the above, should you demand in writing from the Board that any CPD course you undertake carries NO points or RECOGNITION whatsoever that the Board can attach to your Registration or license as a condition of the license?
 
(2) Should you protect yourself and demand in writing from the Board and the Course Provider,  a document from both parties that they accept any and all liability of any matters arising from attending their course,  this is so as to  indemnify you from any and all claims or liability what so ever arising from the fact that you have demonstrated competency by their standards on matters outside of what you are licensed for and as such they acknowledge that their CPD course takes you outside of the protection afforded you by the Act?   At this point in time we have a number of complaints lodged with the Regulations Review Committee in relation to CBL,  FEES and the current ONE year license when the Act provides for a FIVE year license. Therefore if you are attending a CPD course for the sole reason to obtain points for your license, should you consider extracting an agreement from the Board before attending such a course, to reimburse you of all costs incurred should our complains be upheld by Parliament?   
 
 
Please consider protecting yourself and fellow tradesman by forwarding this email to as many people as you can.
 
To Craig the CEO and Kern the acting Registrar of the Board,  how do you view the above matters? This is the third time I have made you aware that your CPD / CBL connection is not legal.
 
To Fiona the CEO of Master Plumbers, how do you view the above matters in relation to your promoted course, on matters for which Tradesmen are not licensed, should your body have know better?
I look forward to you reply,  as you can see this is in the main directed to Fellow Tradesmen,  as a mark of respect I will wait 24 hours for a reply before considering to on send in mass.
Kind regards
Allan
 

Linkback: https://www.plumbers.nz/master-plumbers/66/who-does-she-think-she-is-another-routhan-maybe/497/

Firstly I have to say I find the title of this thread offensive.  There is no value in dividing the industry - we have to be big enough to acknowledge that everyone sees things from a different point of view.  Master Plumbers is a membership based organisation - they do not have to service anyone other than their members.  Practitioners have a choice as to whether to belong or not.  They have for many years been the ONLY organisation representing practitioners in industry.  I do not condone "personalising" the current issues being debated in the industry.  Ms Gavriel is the CEO of an organisation and as such I believe she deserves respect for what she has done.  She is not the villan here.  Her reply is professional and well thought - and reflects the mood of the organisation she represents - and this is fair enough and exactly what I would expect from her.  I would hate to see this forum reduce to name calling or disrespecting people who are doing their job.  Lets keep it issues based.  It would be a great shame to see the two different factions within the industry name calling and point scoring with each other - however I do believe the PGDB would love it and so would the Minister, becasue if we are fighting internally then we are not addressing them and their shortcomings.

I believe that we need to find COMMON ground to work on together - and then simply respect each other's differences.  I believe Master Plumbers has been too gentle with the PGDB and this is where the latest group Wal is forming has been a shining light.  I think the one point both groups agree on is that upskilling is good for the industry.  The format and legality around the TYPE of upskilling sees differing views, but I believe there is common ground to work together.

Hi Robbo only one small problem with us all joining Master Plumbers if the got some changes made you have to be a CRAFTSMAN to join there is no representation for licenced or apprentices to join this is where Wals group is picking up the slack and moving forward he is trying to trully represent the whole industry not just the employers

Hi worker - like I said previously - Master Plumbers/Fiona is not the villan here.  CPD has come in under the PGD Act 2006 and for gasfitters was covered under the previous act.  Master Plumbers has always supported upskilling as part of its membership package and members have been attending courses, like many other tradesmen, for years before it became mandatory.  Don't blame them for being part of the problem - it is not of their making.  Sure, MP is providing courses for its members because its members, like all practitioners, have to do upskilling and get points.  There is nothing wrong with a membership organisation organising something for their members - this is why members belong - to get these things taken care of.   

The CEO of MP doesn't need to be a plumber - they need to be a manager.  There are other people in this industry who own businesses who are not plumbers either.  It doesn't preclude them being able to do their job properly and well.  We need to be able to separate out the issues - and the issue here is that the PGDB have interpreted the 2006 Act into various upskilling courses - some of which may not have a legal basis.  I believe practitioner's energies should be put into challenging the PGDB about the legality of all those CPD courses which do not directly relate to the competencies of being a plumber, gasfitter and drainlayer as opposed to courses on Sexual harrassment, Stress in the workplace and a myriad of other courses, which although perhaps interesting to a business owner, are not directly related to getting pipes in walls and measuring how much you know as a practitioner. 

I don't believe MP is trying to shove BS down anyone's throats either - they are simply providing a service to their members and extending this service, at a cost, to non members. 

Hi Badger
Let me just explain a little as I understand it - the Code of Ethics actually says "Members shall not publicly criticise fellow members."  You will be aware within the organisation that we are sometimes called upon during the complaints process to visit another member's work and make some suggestions.  So, in some cases this may involve criticising another member's work, but it is done within the confines of a clear set of rules within the organisation.  I think the problem you allude to is MP members who are also on the PGDB - and this is what presents the conundrum.  I think it is great that we have practitioners on the PGDB - otherwise heaven knows what more of a mess it would be - the problem with the ITO its seems to me is that they employ NO practitioners.  Members of MP should be able to stand for the PGDB, but I do not agree with Board Members of Master Plumbers being also Board members of the PGDB.  I see ordinary everyday members, say like yourself, should be able to stand for the PGDB, if they have an interest in industry and want to make a contribution.  We all belong to lots of organisations - but the muddying of the waters starts when prominent positions in one area, also have prominent positions in another area.  And this is where the Minister's great idea of cross seeding comes undone.  One of the other Codes of Ethics of MP is that all membes shall be loyal tothe Society and active in its work - and shall always act in accordance with good industry practices, and in a manner that reflects well on the Society, its members, and the industry.  Now if we all did this, then there wouldn't be any need to publicly criticise any other members.  How this fits in with the prosecution system I'm not sure, but one would hope that practitioners judging other practitioners is better than members of the public who are uneducated about plumbing, gasfitting or drainlaying judging us.

i think if they have people from the MP on the board then they should also have people from the federation on the board as well because we all know that those MP members will only have vested intrest in MP policies and intrests and only MP members...which is only to be expected...but i feel to have full industry across the board representation mandatory seats must be set aside for members notonly from MP but also members from the federation...look at it this way the MP wouldnt give a toss if i fell off the face of the earth tomorrow because im not a member...in fact they would be happy because it means more work for there PAYING members which is easy to understand...the same goes for the ITO...its simple like the statoarty maori seats on the auckland council we need statory seats given to both industry groups and a statory seat given to an impartial accessor to ensure this board is kept under control...or something like that...and i have no problem with any other plumber criticing my work cus i dont do cowboy work at all and sometimes people provide bennifical criticsim only helping you to move forward and be a better plumber...Not allowing others to critise others in the same group only means that group has something to hide....well thats just my view anyways.

Thunderhead - the positions on the Board are appointed by the Minister of Construction and Housing - Mr Williamson, they don't apportion them to Master Plumbers, or other organisations.  Everyone can apply to be a Board member and DBH interview you and then they make recommendations to the Minister.  The fact that many members are Master Plumbers simply means that they are probably people that are proactive in the industry and care about what they do.  I don't believe in bagging anyone personally - anybody in this industry that puts their hand up and offers to assist has their heart in the right place.  I'm all for laying it on the line to the "organisation" but I don't agree with bagging individuals for doing their job.  The board's job is to protect the health and safety of the public - they are NOT there for practitioners.  That said, their lives would be a lot better if they engaged with industry and wanted to work together with them.  Federation members can put their names forward the same as everyone else - and I would hope that some do.  But you won't ever see a % of "seats" allocated to various factions in the industry.
JD - mate you really need to stop attacking people personally. The COE of Master Plumbers is not a waste of space - she does a good job.  We may not always agree with her, but she has made huge strides since she took up her job.  There's an old saying you get more with sugar than vinegar and this is so true.  I know you are frustrated with the situation of overseas tradespeople - and it may well be that you personally have been done an injustice, but I think the main problem lies with the fact that Immigration gave you incorrect information before you arrived here.  The PGDB have been singing the same song for years - and have required overseas immigrants to do the testing etc - it is not a recent thing, however I believe immigration don't sing from the same songsheet.  Hopefully after the meeting that is coming up you will get some good news.

hi guys/thunder,i would like to know when the health and safety of our clients and customers was never considered, it must have happened and been identified at some time in the past or we would not be going through todays upheaval in the trades, can`t say i remember any from the last 30 yrs or so.
  I heard one of our leaders'kern uren'on the radio this morning trying to frighten prospective customers into thinking that because a qualified tradesman did not have a licence the work would not be carried out correctly, a tradesman is no less qualified just because he cannot afford to pay the exorbitant fees to obtain a licence, i wonder how many tradesmen will sign on the unemployment benefit for that very reason come April 1st sighting affordability,cheers