b'Ato "Ignorance:" Response Focus on the IssuesAinwould be thebility issue. Please refer tohsixth paragraphs casepointlia fift and of the Fricklas "Ignorance" letter. Onlyindividualhas never experienced th type anthatis of risk would be so cavalier in attempting to trivialize thisI obviously quite concern.t\'s Dick Fricklas has done aof good thingseasy for Mr. Fricklas to dismiss an issue, ifrisk is someone else\'s co work /lotatmpany, life\'s regardsgs. for the roofing industry, especially intoor life\' savineducational matters. The little test on FM isRoofing contractors now have more than enough at ri2,k, without having additional indeed vintage Dick Fricklas. Except for thedesign liability dumped on them. This liability is rightfullyresponsibility of others. the 1test, when reading Fricklas\' letter entitled "InItbe the same as expecting the design community toresponsible forworkwouldbeour Defense of Ignorance?" ii quicklymanship or manufacturers\' materials.Adevelopment is th itappears that becomesrecentatnow obvious that it may be Mr. Fricklas\' ignor F.M. is also misguidedlyaaccreditation program.If so,is anceconsideringDesigner\'sththat may soon need to be defended- again. In hiscould eliminate some of our liability concern, ifis enacted. 4490 Fricklas undertookthatfor last writing regarding the MRCA, Mr.An example,perhaps would be easieran educator to comprehend: ls whereby chastising the MRCA T & Rregarding a-coating program. Within thatteachers would be responsibleto p the penalty for the deranged actions of Committeeroof and haveay letter he made statements that contained numerous inaccuracies and exhibited a fun their students thaton alling rampage. Ludicrous you say, a ed; but then so is the goki gredamental misunderstanding of the subject matter. An independent and acknowledgedattempt to trivialize the liability issue. expert -Mr. Ken Rhodes with UL-severely took Mr. Fricklas to task, due to theAWORD: If time, space and patience allowed, one couldtinue dissecting FINALcon"naivete of his opinions" expressed in that article. Now comes Mr.opinion onthis inane FM4490 apology.,excellent articles au by the curFricklas\'However numerousthored FM4490, and again, his naivete and misunderstanding of an issue will be scrutinized.rentPresidentwritten on th subject. Icopies of each MRCAhave beenisrecommend that becauseoneder As an educator, he has an excellent understanding of that field. That\'sand everyof those articles be provided to Mr. Fricklas in or for him to gain a he\'s "been there,that." Without real-world roofing management or ownershipbetter understanding of what thisall doneissue isabout. experience,teacher becomes an apprentice and his letter becomes the prattle ofSincerely, the inane opinions.L.B. Morris Letter to Kurt BaumgartnerMichigan RCA Letter to FM DearDear Mr. Smith: Kurt, Iyour articleEveryone enjoyedon freedom. should read this and take heed. More lawsAs result of our recent BoardDirecto Meeting, the Michigan Roofing Conofrs willcreate moral people.tractors Association (MiRCA) has voted unanimously to "oppo Factory Mutual\'s notse" In the same light, Inot believe nonproposed Standard 4490. do FM-certified roofing contractors wilrefrainWe join with the Midwest Roofing Contractors Association (MRCA) and other I from biddingawarded athatr ional, state and local contractor associations across thein or beingprojecteg countryopposition is not FM-insured just because they are notto your proposed approved roofer standard program. FM-type roofmembers FM-certified.They will bid aand ifOur roofing contractoragree with the reasons expressed by the Midwest low, and the owner isF ,will get the job.RCA and are convinced th this s isinbestrests ofroofing notM-insured heattandardnottheinte most Price will overcome the lazy spec writer and correct the unfairness of FM4490.contractors. T already too manynegative forces working toinge here areoutsideimpThis is proven everyday by contractors bidding none specified products (if thereon aability to control their ownTh program pcontractor\'scompany.isresents is such aand if low,willrorthe low bid to priceanother unwelcome infringement on ato make ain this thing),the ownerconside themusecontractor attemptingliving shop the legitimate bidder.financially hazardous business. We do need to educate the owner in that not all roofers are equal.FM4490The cost to obtainmaintain FMisunneeded additional andapproval statusan ightwayseparatesmall,the unwantm be atoourselves. Large orrecord keeping is an expenseexpense to contractors.Exposure to fur red office and field audits by yet we alhave to bear.another outside source is intrusive. Contr do not need toto their overhead Iactorsadd As you can tell, Ihave too much time onh which happens in thiswith more burdensome record keeping requirements. definitelymyands, business when you can\'t go up ladders or play golf.But, itbe long before IWe recognize that you have atorove the quality ofMutual won\'tcan.desireimp Factory Idig out my old photos and ship them to MRCA.Ilooking forward toInsuredf Systems.However, we suggest that manyh alternatives exist to willamRoo ot er attending the 50th convention in Kansas City, Mo.accomplish your goal,raising the ire of roofing contractors across the without Sincerelycountry.Initialing Factory Mutual Roof inspectors on FM insured projects would ougl Kirbergcumbersome D as 0.seem to make sense of your plan to institute aand unpopular contractor approval "Standard". The Michigan Roofing Contractorsion is strongly opposed toe orts\\ Associat yourffto create an approved roofing contractor standard,our membership does not and intend to participate in your proposed program if. establishedSincerely, Eric Schultz 6Executive Director'