California C7 license 13

[crooter]

I have been installing phone systems and network cabling for years for Telcomm Companys I was employed with and decided I would do this myself and enjoy a little more of the rewards.

I found out what I needed to do from the State of California and invested $400.00 or so for a contractors study guide, practice tests, a California Contractors License Law and Reference book.

This C7 Study guide is 85 percent Electrical---with topics of Low Voltage exterior lighting, Meters and electrical measurment, Conduit and Electrical wiring codes, Transformers, ohms law and Electrical circuits. Nothing I want to invest my time in to learn----

I guess the questions I am now asking to all who cable:

1. Do other States have the same standards for professionals that want to do Voice/Data/Audio/Video cabling and require that you must know as much or more about Electricity as California?

2. Has this same issue stopped some of you from going into business or pursuing a license in California or other States?

3. Why isnt there a specific seperation between low voltage electrical---and voice data audio and video? For that matter then, anyone that has their MCSE and works indepently, should have a C7 as they deal with the same issues?

Is it just me being upset that in order to go into business for myself in a field that I truly enjoy and am good at, I have to learn a completely different occupation that I dont want anything to do with? I wonder if any of the Telephone/Communication companies I worked for had a C7 license?

I am anxious to hear any of your feedback on this

 

[randall5]

CRooter-

I know that most of this thread is about California, but I can share some info on the other side of the country for you. I work as a telecom guy in Rhode Island. Here, we have a separate group of licenses, with their own test, and an inspector who travels around and can check anyone for the proper license, journeyman to appprentice ratio, etc. To properly perform work, a company MUST have a TSC, which is a contractors license. The technicians must have a TST, a telecom systems technician, essentially a journeyman. Bleow that is the TSLI, which is a limited installer who can work alone or under a TST but not with an apprentice. Finally, there is the APPRENTICE who must be with a TST at all times, in a ratio no greater than 2 to 1. All of that works fine, as it has been in place for 8-10 years. Problem is, the electricians are grandfathered in by virtue of their license, and most of them have NO IDEA what to do with low voltage. Often times, they want nothing to do with it, as the prevailing wage projects are less money for telecomm than for electric.

Also, Connecticut has separate license designations for low voltage systems, though not specifically telecom. You have to have a certain number of hours worked and classroom instruction before you can take the test (C-5 is the contractor and C-6 is the tech) though my work in RI can be used to waive that requirement and I am sitting for that test in a few weeks.

Hope that helps.

Randy

 

[sdbriggs]

In the State of New Mexico we have a license system that gives different classifications based on what you do. The ES-3 license covers low voltag systems including alarm, CCTV, access control and interestingly enough, data and fiber.

The ES-7 is telephone and telephone interconnect systems, but not data per se. Although there is a lot of Cat 5 and 6 being pulled and inspected by ES-7 licensees. No inpsector in the city of Albuquerque has ever asked why I'm pulling "data" with a ES-7 license.

I have my ES-3 and ES-7 both now because I was doing a lot of IP cameras.

The EE-98 license here is the general electrical license. They are allowed to work on low voltage systems, regardless of type, but holders of the ES-3 and ES-7 cannot (legally) install conduits for our systems, but we can sub an electrican.

Is all very arcane and a huge PIA if you want to be a ethical contractor and follow the rules.

And to top it all off, we have a lot of Native American governments here and to do work for them, or the base or National Labs, you don't need a New Mexico license, so we have a bunch of "outlaw" contractors that are still doing work off from these sites and not jumping throught the same hoops the rest of us are. Add in all the "my cousin installs cable" guys we've got running around out there and it makes for a very tight market for the licensed contractors.

 

[RikRodgers]

I know I'm about 8 months late replying to this, but the question was asked. In Michigan, you don't need a license to work in telecom- copper or fiber. That has it's pros and cons.

Pros- Costs are kept down for the customers. Although the CWA (of which I am a dues paying member) claims otherwise, requiring a license doesn't seem to make a difference in the end wage technicians earn. Only what companies charge to do the work. It only adds another hoop we need to jump through, and more fees to pay.

Cons- There are a lot of hacks in this state that call themselves technicians, and most electricians don't understand the first thing about Telecom- Ohm's Law, or not.

If a state is going to regulate technicians, the testing needs to be designed by someone who understands the industry, and not lumped together with the IBEW. A lead tech should have a basic understanding of basic electronics theory. (yes, ohm's law, AC and DC circuits and components, fire code, etc...) Find me an electrician who knows what a MOSFET is.

 

[w6ire]

I have a C-10 California license and can tell you the test was laughably simple. Being licensed is not proof of anything, other than proof that you paid the state fee.

I would say that 99% of the people doing low voltage installs in California are unlicensed. For all practical purposes the CSLB (Contractors State License Board) does not police this industry. There are 310,000 licensed contractors in California and 1.2 million unlicensed.

If I were contemplating starting a cabling business in California in today's environment, I would put zero effort into getting a license.

I'm a cabling contractor and NONE of my competitors are licensed. This puts me at a disadvantage because I have to pay fees and am subject to disciplinary action whereas unlicensed installers are not.

Licensing is a joke when there is no enforcement.

 

[Deweyhumbolt]

Having the C7 has one nice advantage. If the customer decides to be lax in paying, a notice from Small Claims with a Marshall delivering it, has way more impact if your licensed.

I have never not been paid in the 16 years I've had my C7. Twice I've had to start a Small Claims action, and both times they paid before Court.

Adversity is Opportunity

 

[Karlg]

Deweyhumbolt makes a good point. In CA, if you don't have a license, a customer can wait for you to finish a job and then refuse to pay. If you then try to file any kind of action to collect, the courts will tell you "too bad, you get nothing". Depending on the amount, you can also be fined and/or arrested for unlicensed contracting.

 

[CEPro]

Thanks Deweyhumbolt. Yeah, sounds like a good move to have the C-7. Half way through Cedia Installer I book. C-7 to follow. Can you recommend reading materials to study for the C-7.

Thanks