CSLB Gestapo Tactics

The CSLB may be taking notes (knowingly? or unknowingly?) out of Germany’s Gestapo playbook.

CSLB Gestapo TacticsWikipedia says, in part: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestapo

“The basic Gestapo law passed by the government in 1936 gave the Gestapo carte blanche to operate without judicial review—in effect, putting it above the law.[13] The Gestapo was specifically exempted from responsibility to administrative courts, where citizens normally could sue the state to conform to laws.”

Here we are in 2015, and the CSLB has been acting in the same manner for years.

They create their own rules, laws, and regulations, none of which are subjected to judicial review. In effect, putting it above the law.

In a previous post I pointed out that the CSLB Spring Newsletter stated requirements that are not written in the law. Specifically, business name advertising.

In another post I discussed where the CSLB has been requiring out-of-state applicants to have their certifier’s signature notarized. Not written in the law.

Then of course there is the infamous “critical classifications” list. A list of specific classifications that are targeted and/or profiled and are subjected to additional review. The CSLB managers have told their staff that they can no longer use the term “critical classification.” Hmmm, I wonder why?

They continue to pursue this profiling by using the law that requires them to pull a minimum of 3% of ALL applications received for secondary review.

Pulling ALL “critical classification” applications is not a random sampling of ALL applications received. This is a prime example of the CSLB twisting the law as written in order to fit their needs.

The difference between the Gestapo and the CSLB is that there is no law that specifically gives the CSLB carte blanche. It’s worse than that…. they chose to enact these unlawful requirements on their own. No authorization by the legislature, nothing put to a public vote, No, they just make these rules as they go. Clearly, a State office that is out of control and in desperate need of being reigned in.

How long will the CSLB continue operating like the Gestapo of the 30’s and 40’s? Sadly, there is no crystal ball to provide that answer. All we can do is hope that someday the CSLB will stop using Gestapo tactics and will operate with transparency and within the law.

Please follow and like us:
error

Contractors State License Board Profiling

Is the Contractors State License Board profiling out of State applicants?

CSLB Profiling

UPDATE: Turns out the application was for a “critical classification” so the CSLB was true to form in asking for additional documentation. The applicant was able to prove his experience and his exam date has been scheduled!

It seems they are. Case in point: An applicant for a non “critical classification” was required to submit pay stubs, w-2’s, contracts, permits, etc. He also submitted copies of his licenses from Washington State and Colorado. I’m sure the CSLB would say that this app was part of the minimum 3% to receive a secondary review, that would be incorrect. That secondary review is to take place after the app has been posted. This particular app hadn’t been posted. So, it stands to reason, if it hasn’t been posted and isn’t a “critical classification” why are they requiring the additional documentation and a wage determination? There is only one reason… he was profiled because of out-of-state experience. What right, rule, law, or regulation does the CSLB have to treat applicants with out-of-state differently? None, nada, zip, zero!

Furthermore, he was also told that his two out-of-state licenses could be faked and would not be used to determine his eligibility. When he asked the tech what a wage determination was, he was told “I don’t know” by the application technician.

How can the CSLB make an hourly wage determination? What is that formula? What rule or regulation gives the CSLB the authority to do this? Will they be determining what he would have made if he was working in California? Or will they determine what he should have make in the two other States?

It wouldn’t surprise me if the CSLB attempted to determine what someone should have been paid in another State. Their level of arrogance is mind boggling.

So remember my rules of engagement:

1) Do not take no for an answer

2) Do not let the CSLB push you around. Push back!

3) Insist the licensing unit processes and makes a determination regarding your app

4) Get EVERYTHING in writing

5) Submit a complaint with your State Representative if you think you’re being treated unfairly. You can find your State Rep here: http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/

Please follow and like us:
error