I think the wording they used was "suspended" the audit scheme while they review it.  I don't think we will see a return to the old audit scheme where you were asked a series of questions based on 5261.  I think we will see a different scheme whereby they are likely to target gasfitters where competency is an issue. 

I thought the audits were - they selected a random number of gas jobs you certified and then the Gas inspector went onsite and inspected them? Or is that something else?

So to be clear - licensing year ending 31 March 2011 - gasfitters need to have 16 points.  The following licensing year ending 31 March 2012 you will need only 12 points if you are a gasfitter only or a plumber only, or a drainlayer only.  Any two of the disciplines will require 20 points and if you add drainlaying to your list of achievements then you are looking down the barrell of needing 24 points to be currently licensed on 1 April 2012.

Those of us employing gasfitters have been used to this system for some time now, but I understand that plumbers are feeling like they have been hit by a bus as the costs in terms of time and money are now fully being realised.  I remember when the gasfitters tried to get support when they complained about this system initially and I am sorry to say that plumbers weren't interested in supporting the gasfitters with their complaints, but boy oh boy are the complaints coming now!   There are good and bad things about this mandatory upskilling - the upside is that there are some excellent courses that will add value to your business - no doubt about that.   The bad thing is that there are some poor courses, they cost a lot of money and practitioners are not being treated like grown ups.  There should be points awarded for going to industry meetings, for reading technical literature and there should be more courses available electronically so you can do them at home.  All of this would assist - but unlike other professions there are no points begging for these particular items. 

I think the crux of this exam crap is not who and where the exam is held...more so it is who marks the exam...some nzqa marker who could be anybody and anyone with the traning...Or someone with knoweldge in the industry that can understand the questions and therefore can desipher the answer correctly...not just looking for stupid key words...as there is always more that one way to skin a cat as there is always more that one way to explain a situation without using stupid key words!...these pgdb people are talking about being experts in our industry then why is there not experts in the industry marking the papers???!!!.

it is my understanding that all the markers are in fact practitioners...im just going off what the tutors at tech said so i dont know..i hope your right cus it the correct thing to do.

Yea i understand that jax...that is exactly  where the system fails alot of people because alot of us are practical types and not suited at all to exams...off the top of my head i would not have a clue how much water is in two meters of 20mm pipe(i remember seeing this somewhere).628litres? csa*length...Pi*r*r*L but i had to reference it cus i dont use it!. Which is a shame cus if i did use it reguraly then forsure i would remember it!.The same goes for truncucated cones and the like....But some how now i have used it in a real life situation hopefully i dont forget it hahaha...Thats another problem alot of over information i find only works to confuse people...how often do you use this formula jax in your day to day job?
"The key will be getting exams held each year at the end of each state of the apprenticeship"...This is what happnes with nzqa we have qualifing exams each year so far...at unitech if you dont do 100% of your corrospondance work then you are required to sit an nzqa exam to pass on to the next year of traning and that exam pass mark is 100% which is a damb sight harder than doing the book work...

Your defentaly right with the brain lock that many traniees display...the problem is during the exam we cant get anyone to clarfiy the question so we can understand exactly what info the marker is after...even 37yr old me had a hell of a time trying to understand what info they are after when i did the nzqa exams...Im not a damb mind reader and if they want precise answers then is it fair that i only have what is written to go off and i am not able to get clarification on the question so i fully understand what is required of me...remember we all interpert things diffrently and this is where the written exam systems fail us as we read things in to the wording that isnt what is required because we interpert the wording diffrently(because we are not litertary scholars) which promotes brain lock and second guessing...for rego a one on one three hour verbal exam would be much better as it would give the examiner a very good idea if the trainee was confident in what he was doing or was just going through the motions...paper work is just that paper work and has no bearing on the actual ability of the indervidual...it just means that you have good memory retention...which i dont rearly have anymore cus my brain aint so fresh anymore already packed with info...I guess im an exception as most traniees are young bucks with blank minds ready to be brain washed in to a world of plumbing hell...lol
I remember when i sat my CLM(comerical launch masters) ticket required to undertake commercial fishing...it was a one on one exam with a master i was able to get clarfication on questions and to demostrate my ability to him i got one major question wrong because i was so damb nervous...but he could see this but still was very serrious about his job...but he passed me as he could see that i knew what i was doing through a series of verbal and written exercises.
I think if the PGDB are so  serrious about this cpd well it should start right at the begginning and strip the whols apprentise scheem and rebuild a solid scheem...i started off at wintech in hamiliton did one year there before moving to auckland unitech...the problem i found was that they were teaching diffrent material at diffrent times so it made changing schools almost impossible as each tech was at diffrent stages...this to me is silly as all plumbing cources in NZ should run off the same criculum like secondary schools so it makes it possiable for students to change schools if required and not have to go back to dot one that nearly happned to me when i switched but after some smooth talking i continued this is one thing that any proffesional person can easerly see needs to be rectified...
Any way jax if you managed to drag your way through my waffling cheers for the reply.

I recently sat the Certifying exams in November both the common and plumbing.  As per the boards rules regarding the exams, we were to be tested in regards to the 1976 act for the last time and the subsequent exams after November on the 2006 act.  My understanding was any questions and format could only be tested on acts and regulations that were valid/currrent as of the 1st Jan 2010.  The board changed the format of the exams this year to include open book and a few multi choice questions.  In the common exam pricing and taxation questions were totally ommited from that exam.  Included in the open book parts of the exam were E2 External moisture and the H+S in Employment act.  Other sections included HVAC, Internal wall linings, a question relating to the Kelvin Scale and some other obscure questions.

It appeared to me that the questions in the common exam were quite random and were not really geared to testing ones ability to run a succesful business operation.  Which I took the common exam at certifying level to be the main objective.  The fact that E2, HVAC, Internal wall linings and H+S act took up alot of the exam meant not much room for other topics.
I questioned the board at a consultation meeting recently regarding the common exam and its content and why it deviated so much from the previous common exams in particular the practice/past exams posted on there web site.  The registrar who had a big role in setting the exam pointed me to the boards GAZZETTED NOTICES.  He explained that the examination changes epecially from the Business side of things to what was tested in the common exam were all in the GAZZETTED NOTICES. 

So I checked these GAZZETTED NOTICES on the boards web site.  And low and behold I found the one that the board was talking about.. yes it did state what the exams would be tested on and no there wasnt any mention of pricing and /or taxation.  Great!!! they got me by the balls, then I checked the date of the GAZZETTED NOTICE, it was dated March 2010.

As I mentioned before the board stated that the exams including the November 2010 exams would be tested on those acts and regulations valid and current on the 1st Jan 2010, which this GAZZETTED NOTICE clearly wasnt. 

What are your thoughts on this issue?

PS. not sour grapes, as i have already contacted the examination contact at the board JOSE GOMEZ and asked the question(s) to him and also the registrar at the cosultation meeting.  I just want a fair go for my friends who sat the same exams and myself.  The board preach the act and they really love quoting the GAZZETTED NOTICES, but on this occasion they are preaching from a song book which differs from the one they are supposed to be singing from. 

thanks jaxcat i will contact wal in regards to this and other issues relating to the board.  Im only quite young to the industry and simply cant wait to have my certifying qualifications, but the board keep moving the goal posts and not sticking to their own regs and act.