Wed, 28 Jul 2010 08:25:05 -0500 From: "Porritt, David" <dporritt at mail.smu.edu> wrote: > Israel: > > If continuing education were required for maintaining RPT status, taking a class and answering some questions would no longer be a gold star but a professional enhancement. The problem - as I saw it - with the Passport program was that not doing it had no consequences. So, when I took a class and the instructor was too busy chatting with a friend to be able to sign my form I just left. If I had needed that signature to maintain my credentials, I'd have waited. > > dp > > David M. Porritt, RPT > dporritt at smu.edu > David, I suggest that you re-read the entire discussion between Ed and myself. If taking a class from the PTG and answering exam questions were a requirement for maintaining RPT status, there is a whole passel of anti-trust requirements that would make this a very complicated matter - which is why Ed has explicitly stated that his idea is not about continuing education as a certification requirement. But if it were, now that I think about some of the issue that we dealt with in connection with the old Associates Seminar back when Kent Swafford was PTG President, I am beginning to think that the entire concept of the PTG both issuing certifications and requiring that members wishing to earn or maintain certification take classes offered by the PTG is very problematic from the legal angle. Don't want to go into details here, but legally speaking, I don't think that a certifying body can legally require that a candidate for certification take classes offered by it. It is very possible that the same might apply to maintaining a certification. Think about it - does the Bar Association offer law classes? Does the various medical and nursing boards do the same? As a Trade Association, there are some things we cannot do, and others that must follow very strict guidelines. This might be one of them... Israel Stein
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC