| |
 | |
I have been involved in the Locksmithing and Security Industry for over forty years, over 25 of which included Institutional focus. It has never been boring, and being a Director on the National Board is no exception. It is more challenging than the positions I have held on the executive Board of other associations by far. Like most, my focus as a Director is on what I can accomplish to benefit the membership and the in-house Locksmithing community as a whole, including our employers and institutions. To the members, our mission could be said to be to provide: * Help with key control and master keying issues * Help with technical information * Help locating parts, supplies, key codes, etc. * Help communicating internal needs to their institution. To the Institutions it could be: increasing our professionalism through.... * Education * Communication * Cooperation * Certification These are not always as easy of tasks as one might think. The association has always tried to offer: * Free or low-cost training * Products updates * New product reviews Probably the hardest of these is the free or low cost training. Educators typically demand large fees, and rightly so. It takes a great deal of time and expense to put on a proper educational program, especially if it is to include hands-on, which of course the members always expect. That does not mesh well with "free" and usually not with "low cost". As a result, we are usually diminished to accepting classes from those with the "hidden" agenda of selling product. We try to emphasize to the instructors that we are not looking to provide them with a free site for a sales presentation, but actually expect an educational class. But the reality is that our only hammer in this is that we will not re-use ones whose attendees complain about it being "all sales". That is not really much of a hammer. However, the way many institutions (too many) are set up, the inhouse Locksmith is often not entitled to have the institution pay for their classes, and most in-house locksmiths are sadly underpaid (as are in-house plumbers or electricians or other tradesmen who are not merely handymen). This is somewhat a catch-22. To make matters worse, the association includes a directive to the Boards not to endorse a product or service. That has been seen by some Boards as a blocade to signing a teaching agreement with professional trade educators or other providers. What can be done to overcome such obstacles? Why are Institutional Locksmiths not always entitled to have the institution provide the funds for their training? After all, the institution clearly benefits from having a better trained individual, especially when it comes to protecting the lives and safety of their employees, customers, and property. Probably the largest obstacle is that many are seen as "working for the Union" rather than for the institution. In much of the United States inhouse Locksmiths, like other staff members, are members of AFSCME or the Carpenters or Electricians Unions. Because the institution has to deal with the Union rather than directly with the individual on so many levels, they often see the employee as being the responsibility of the Union. And unfortunately, these are not Locksmith Unions. The Locksmiths are a small representative portion of the membership. To further complicate things, inhouse Locksmiths are often exempted from licensing regulations which typically require continuing education. Why? Because in the eyes of many lawmakers, they are "working for the institution directly". They are caught between a rock and a hard place. Their Union is often more qualified to provide software training for a secretary than skills training for a Locksmith, but the institution expects the Union to do it and refuses to help. The Union will often not fight very hard to change this because they are so few amongst the membership. This is where the ILA comes in. Unlike other Locksmithing Associations, their focus is on the institution's needs and they understand the roles the in-house Locksmiths play. They understand that the inhouse Locksmith cannot always make a manufacturer's sales rep happy. And yet, this seems to be the only source of education for their members in most cases. You can see our dilemna. Worse yet, if a member writes books and booklets or offers training seminars on computer, the Association can do little to promote it due to the endorsement limitation. This is especially true for those on the national Board, such as myself. I have been an educator in the trade since at least 1973. I have authored or co-authored over forty books and booklets in that time and continue to produce them. I have written for almost every trade magazine, and been a staff writer with a monthly column on several occasions, as well as being Associate Editor of a trade magazine. Instead of this being an asset, it is almost a handicap because I must be so careful to avoid a conflict of interest. Walking this thin line is another important part of what I do as a national Director for the association. Educating you, the reader, whether you are a member, manufacturer's rep or a member of the client public, is what I consider my primary job. So what can I do to better serve you? You now have more of an idea of what I face. How can we work together to find better solutions? We face an aging Board at the national level, and few members attend the national membership meeting annually. We need to attract newer, younger (in trade years not physical age) Board members willing to serve. Often just electing an Executive Board can be a tough job, because so few step up to the plate. Our society as a whole tends to rely on the internet for their education, but the truth is that the education provided can be doubted on quality of content. But it is pre-eminent enough in the hearts and minds of the public that few see the need to volunteer for association service. Help us. Offer suggestions (constructive ones) and make reasonable requests. Offer solutions. Provide options. You can find our address on the ilanational.org website. Contact us and give us input. You'll be glad you did. I know I will be glad you did! |
