Lloyd Spear <[log in to unmask]> wrote:IMHO we should not rely on the Dept. of Ag. to sort out those who would abuse their position and should instead have a ban on employing those with a conflict of interest.

Lloyd, I agree but with one cavet.  The inspectors should be paid a salary which would support them and their families at the level which the degree of intricacy of their job would entail.  In other words, not at the level of a ditch digger nor at the level of a college professor.  With the degree of education, continuing education, physical work, long hours, etc. that the job entails, they should be adequately compensated for that work to the degree that they can adequately support a family, not on a luxury scale but not on a subsistance scale either.  Alternate work, along with continuing education would need to be provided during the off time during the winter season.  You cannot expect the inspectors to be qualified, dedicated individuals if they can't earn a living during the time in which they can't work as inspectors due to cold weather.  I feel I'm not adequately explaining my position but right now this is the best I can come up with.

Mike    Located in LA - Lower Alabama

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---