My vision with this is simple:
- Test those who want to be in business on the basics of what is needed to run a business. The Generic Business Licensing does this, by testing the owner on certain business tasks and processes. You wouldn't have to go to college and get yourself that fancy business degree. How many of us here, when we started, knew how to run a business? I know I didn't, I relied on friends, family, those I met through the Chamber, and online searching.
- Ensure that business owners have a basic concept of the most common legalities in this business. No need to go to deep in to the understanding, that's what lawyers are for. But I'm sure many of us have seen EULA's and Copyrights being violated left and right. Individuals being sold free-software (excluding labor if you install it for them). Is it because these techs don't know what the laws are or how these licenses work? Or is it simply they don't care? I'm sure that some know and still don't care, but I wouldn't put it past some of these techs that they honestly don't know.
- Ensure that technical staff and owners have been taught best practices, or at least know about them. How many times have you walked in to a utility/communications closet, and seen the rats nest of cables everywhere? How many times have people asked on here how long can an Ethernet cable be? How many techs are helping clinics, lawyers, CPA's, and don't even know what compliance laws apply to their customers? How many times have you found the router on top of a microwave? (I've found routers/AP's on top of microwaves 23 times. Of those 23, 17 were placed by the previous IT provider)
- Ensure that businesses are protecting themselves. The truth is, no license or regulation enforcement will ever eliminate bad companies and services. I know this. But if you legitimize businesses by ensuring that certain steps are taken, such as "competent" staff, business insurance and/or bonding, you are not just protecting the consumer, but you are also protecting the business. How many of us are running around without basic business insurance? If you are a one-man shop, and you can't afford basic business insurance, then 1 of 3 things is going on. 1) You think you can't afford it, even though you never shopped around for it. 2) You did shop around, and you still can't afford it. This might be a sign that you need a second job. 3) You can afford it, but you're too cheap to buy it. I'm sure this offended some of you, but honestly, if you never shopped around or you are too cheap to purchase it, then you are voluntarily opening yourself up for bad things to happen. If you can't afford, and you looked around, you might have get a second income, and place your computer business in the part-time section until enough business comes through the make it support itself. Nothing wrong with this. In the end, I see this point about the business owner ensuring that they are protecting themselves. I don't feel bad for people who chose to forgo business protections because they thought nothing bad would happen to them, and now they are the on the street collecting cans because they lost a lawsuit and had no insurance to help them.
For those of you making comments about this would only make the local governments richer, and "they already have enough money"...I can tell you aren't involved with your local government at all. One of the things I absolutely love about my local chamber of commerce is that they are heavily involved with government policies. They have helped the government officials shoot down bad ideas, revise the half-baked, and pass the good. Not all of the policies have been swayed, passed or declined by chamber involvement, but enough to make a difference that promotes, supports, and encourages small businesses to flourish, regardless of them being out of the home, in and office, or on a store-front. If you aren't involved with your government at all, then I don't see why should have a say as to what gets passed. If you only vote, you are helping to make a difference more than someone who does nothing. But not as much as the person who tries to actively work on making sure the government only passes policies that do good. I try to be as active as I can be. I stood by for 6 years watching my government make policies, while I fought on the front lines of our wars. Now I'm trying to fight on the front lines of our governments (local) policy making. Not every war is won, not every battle comes with out its casualties, but I'm trying to make a difference. I know where my tax dollars are going, and not all of them do I support where they go, but I'm trying to keep more and more money going to where it needs to go.
Will good techs suffer? Yes. Will bad techs still find a way around it? Yes. Sorry, but that is how the game works. But the thing I see from this is that good techs can flourish, and bad techs can be weeded out. Sure, some good techs may have to wait a little longer before starting their own business, but that gives them time to learn the business. Licensing doesn't have to cost an arm and a leg. A couple hundred bucks (That's $200), an exam fee, and they are ready to go plus the costs of whatever else is needed. Failure to get a license, something bad techs will do, would cost them so much more than $200. Those who are terrible but still get licensing, can loose their license, and therefore be out of the game.
The difference between a professional and a hobbyist is this: A professional gets paid for what they do; A hobbyist does not get paid for what they do. I'm not worried about a hobbyist, because he isn't in the game to make money. Therefore, there is less likely of a chance that he would steal any real potential customers from me.
Those that would suffer would be the Independent small business. It would do a lot to start the creation of monopolies in the market. Barriers to entry are not the answer.
Some small businesses would suffer, yes. They'd be required to purchase things like insurance, maybe buy workers compensation for their employees, etc. But I do not see how it start the creation of monopolies. How many contracting businesses are in your city? In mine, there is a lot of them. In the state of Arizona, it costs almost $1000 for each commercial general construction classification. And yet, I see, I've met, tons of these guys. Most of them are 1 or 2 people operated. Are they millionaires? No, but guess what, they've been in business for years. Some guys I've met, they've been in business for about a year, and they've told me they have a second job to get them through the no-work days. Is it a barrier in to the market? Yes. But it wont help create monopolies. A
monopoly is the absolute control of a particular market, and honestly, I don't see it happening. I don't see enough of us not being able to afford the licensing, and recover our investment of it, to put enough of us out business to create these monopolies some of you are talking about.
Would licensing increase the cost of our services? Maybe. Maybe only have the requirement of licensing for those of us who do Business to Business work, and not for Business to Consumer if that is the worry. But at the same time, do you not forward the costs of your advertising to your customers? How about your insurance? How about to pay your employees? Building and equipment maintenance? Why should your customers have to pay for you to advertise on Google, or pay for you to have insurance? Why can't you pay for those yourself? If your customers are paying for a little bit of your license (like they pay for your insurance and advertising), then in essence, they are paying for you to be a legitimate business. They are paying for someone to be a professional business.
The only time a license should be required by law is when you are dealing with physical safety.
@phaZed, I have to call you out on this one, but please don't take it personal. Why then do CPA's have to be licensed in many states? Not too mention insurance brokers? Realtors? I don't see how a CPA has anything to do with your physical safety, or an insurance broker, or even a realtor. Yet, most states require them to be licensed. A CPA handles my money and files my taxes. An insurance broker sells me insurance, and have nothing to do really with how the medical treatment is given. And a realtor just shows me houses. It's not his fault if I don't ensure the house is structurally sound. If you ask me, CPA's, Insurance Brokers, and realtors are a dime a dozen. There is no scarcity what so ever, and they have nothing to do with my physical safety. Going back to licensing would create a monopoly, then why are there so many realtors? Why is it when I throw a rock, I have a good chance of hitting an insurance broker?
