NATE or not

[mark beiser]

Recognize a program like RSESs CM or Specialist cert. They don't rip you off. They train just for the sake of training.

The RSES CM test has a passing rate of around 30%, and you have to be an RSES member to take it, which limits it to people that are actually interested in increasing their knowledge.

Some RSES CMS tests are harder than others, but overall they have about a 20% pass rate, and until recently, you had to be a CM to take a CMS test.

So if you have one of the CMS certifications, you are one of the 20% of the 30% who had enough interest in learning to join RSES, then enough interest in testing their knowledge to take the CM test, and were able to pass.

The NATE core and specialties collectively have a published passing rate of 68%, and I would bet that a significant percentage of the people taking it only do so because their employer makes them.

It is pretty clear to me which certification is a better indicator, though still not a guarantee, of a technicians competency.

I'm not bashing NATE, I'm actually pretty neutral about them.
Its just that as a RSES CM I find it annoying that I have to spend energy and time maintaining a clearly inferior certification so the 2 man company I work for has the minimum number of NATE certified personnel to satisfy some manufacturer/distributors stupid requirement for participation in particular programs.

At least the state accepts my CM certification to be a "Certified Technician" instead of just a "Registered Technician".

[Gerber]

Do you honestly feel that NATE certification is gonna change a bad installer into a good one?

Lemme tell you something: I have seen work done by guys who had nationally recognized certs (both NATE and others) and their installs sucked vacuum.

Getting a cert that cost you rip-off money does not guarantee you a good installer or a good tech.

Our newest phone book just came out and there was one company ( a one man shop) who used the NATE emblem in his ad. All the big companies---- no NATE emblem.

Lemme tell you something ironic: The biz owner does not advertise NATE employees, but he has three guys who are NATEDed, rest of the work force
(twenty five people) don't have it or want it..

Now explain that one to me.

I agree that being NATE certified is in no way going to guarantee that someone is going to be an honest service tech that works with integrity and does the best job that they can do every day, thats on the individual.

However, having studied and taken the core and gas furnace exam, I truly believe that a solid understanding of a lot of different information pertaining to our field, including safety, is a must in order to pass these tests.

It seems that if some sort of certification was required, like for plumbing, then at least the industry standard would be set a little higher. Im not saying it would have to be NATE, just some sort of universal certification showing that in order to work on this equipment you have a full understanding of what you are doing.

I may be wrong, but I would think that for all of us that try to be the upper tier, this would be a good thing for our industry. Maybe I'm off base?

[hvaclover]

The RSES CM test has a passing rate of around 30%, and you have to be an RSES member to take it, which limits it to people that are actually interested in increasing their knowledge.

Some RSES CMS tests are harder than others, but overall they have about a 20% pass rate, and until recently, you had to be a CM to take a CMS test.

So if you have one of the CMS certifications, you are one of the 20% of the 30% who had enough interest in learning to join RSES, then enough interest in testing their knowledge to take the CM test, and were able to pass.

The NATE core and specialties collectively have a published passing rate of 68%, and I would bet that a significant percentage of the people taking it only do so because their employer makes them.

It is pretty clear to me which certification is a better indicator, though still not a guarantee, of a technicians competency.

I'm not bashing NATE, I'm actually pretty neutral about them.
Its just that as a RSES CM I find it annoying that I have to spend energy and time maintaining a clearly inferior certification so the 2 man company I work for has the minimum number of NATE certified personnel to satisfy some manufacturer/distributors stupid requirement for participation in particular programs.

At least the state accepts my CM certification to be a "Certified Technician" instead of just a "Registered Technician".

Sounds like a good reason to me why RSES CM and SPECIALIST certs should replace NATE.

I am A Past President of one of the local chapters and I have never met any chapter member holding a RSES Cert who was not exceptional...except for one guy.

[numbawunfela]

Alter Ego???

Don't tell me there is somebody running around this forum pretending to be me!

Naw - THIS alter ego:

Every commercial - industrial guy I know makes more that $35. Not one gives a hoot about NATE.

And please cal me Clover. Mr. Lover sounds like a porn star(I left part of my life behind).

hehe I still laugh about that.

This was at the tail end of a very productive debate as to the usefulness of nate - where a supporter and non supporter agreed to disagree but still took something usefull away from the conversation.

In my laziness, I will not participate in that discussion again - too much time, and I did that already!! But if some here wish to look - look for posts in the 80's to the end.

http://hvac-talk.com/vbb/showthread....ss+nate&page=6

If nothing else you fellow supporters will see hvaclover has had to face many of these questions before.

The bottom line is that - yes RSES and some state exams are more rigorous than NATE. NAte does have costs, and requires renewal - more trouble than other certs. But with a pass rate of about 30%, RSES is better suited to confirming a tech is a member of a top tier of techs, but poorly suited to confirming a tech is capable of fixing what 80% of techs see 80% of the time. RSES is too discriminating, it is over-testing to meet that goal.

NATE is a great entry-level exam to ensure it is FAR less likely the tech with his head in your machine is not a bone-head. Not only because NATE tests for things that are more common and less complicated than RSES, but because since the NATE pass rate is around 50%, more techs will walk away feeling either like they can do this - and not like they got victimized in a college hazing ritual with a bag over their head. This means techs will actually take the test, and any test that has no takers is not really all that useful in the end.

easier is not worse, it is a matter of fitting the application. NATE and RSES are complimentary, and UA STAR plays a role as well. RSES for res service is like taking a sledge to kill a fly. Nate for Comm service is like having a highschooler take a 3rd grade math exam - not really fitting (but if he don't pass - it might still serve a useful purpose )

All the business stuff is secondary - onlly marginally related.

Besides any discussion of eliminating NATE needs to be accompanied by a discussion of what would replace it - RSES is not the test for that - it is overkill.

[mark beiser]

and not like they got victimized in a college hazing ritual with a bag over their head.

This characterization of RSES tests made me laugh.

[numbawunfela]

This characterization of RSES tests made me laugh.

I talk to a lot of guys who sit for their first NATE test and it shakes them up pretty bad. One guy passed the heat pump test but failed the core. I know that when I took the senior systems efficiency analyst test it was hard to keep my cool. With an 70-80% FAILURE rate, I am sure guys walk in a little scared and nervous, and walk out feeling like the test bent the techs over it's knee and gave them a spanking.

Glad I could pass on a good chuckle.

Numba

[hvaclover]

.................................................. ...............

[numbawunfela]

.................................................. ...............

Speechless!!!

Hehe