You are here: Home / Archives for Inside626

Don’t make a “Goal” instead make a “Promise”

January 15, 2012 By

This is the time of year that many of us start to think about ‘setting goals’.

I try to pull out my “Goal Plan” (a sheet of paper I wrote them on) to see where I am on their achievement on a regular basis.

I end up ‘hitting’ some and not others.

I started to give this more thought and study this month in anticipation of the New Year (Resolution). I came across a Bill Bateman video on iLG where he was talking about his “10 Step Goal Setting” process. It was all really good information – much that I had already learned, but it was good to revisit. He said ‘one thing’ that completely changed the way I’m looking at my personal and business ‘goal setting’.

He said to replace the word ‘Goal‘ with the word ‘Promise‘ when we go about this task. He offered up a study by Harvard that indicated that people “miss their Goals” 76% of the time – but “achieve their Promises” 98% – and that got me thinking about how my own mind interprets the difference between the two words.

First off, I am rare to make ‘Promises’ – I completely understand on a very “Conscious‘ level what that means and I always remember both Mom and Dad teaching ‘how you never make Promises you can’t keep’. Which explains on my subconscious level how I feel about this same word… It is to be taken very seriously!!!

As to ‘Goals’ – for some reason I seem to have an entirely different internal perspective about that word. I’ve made them most my life and if I did not achieve them I would refine either the goal or the time frame and simply forgive myself – or hit a mulligan (do it over).

This year I intend to do this one simply thing; I intend to create my ‘Promise Plan’ for 2009 and in it I intend to make some real ‘Promises’ on what I ‘will do’ both Personally and Business wise this coming year. So far the list is already much shorter as it forces me to ‘filter’ things better and interestingly it also ended up covering the ‘most’ important things.

Maybe this will help you as well. Best to you and yours in 2009 – I ‘Promise’ :)
Everyone’s Blog Posts – 626 Local Business Networking

Filed Under: Inside626 Tagged With: , , ,

The Golden (Platinum) Rule = The Social Networking Rule

January 15, 2012 By

We speak of it and we try to live by it – “treat others as you would like to be treated.”

To me it’s the main rule one needs to follow within Social Networking.

The Golden Rule was a common principle in ancient Greek philosophy.

A few examples:

“Do not to your neighbor what you would take ill from him.” (Pittacus)

“Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing.” (Thales)

“What you wish your neighbors to be to you, such be also to them.” (Sextus the Pythagorean)

“Do not do to others what would anger you if done to you by others.” (Isocrates)

“What thou avoidest suffering thyself seek not to impose on others.” (Epictetus)

A couple snippets from different world views…

Christianity:

Matthew 7:12
“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”

Luke 6:31
“Just as you want others to do for you, do the same for them.”

Judaism:

“That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn.”

Buddhism:

“One who, while himself seeking happiness, oppresses with violence other
beings who also desire happiness, will not attain happiness hereafter.”

Confucius:

“Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself.”

Hinduism:

“That man who regards all creatures as his own self, and behaves towards them as towards his own self, laying aside the rod of chastisement and completely subjugating his wrath, succeeds in attaining to happiness.”

Islam:

“Woe to those . . . who, when they have to receive by measure from men, exact full measure, but when they have to give by measure or weight to men, give less than due”

Taoism:

“Regard your neighbor’s gain as your own gain, and your neighbor’s loss as your own loss.”

The “The Platinum Rule” adds a nice addition to the “Golden Rule”…

“The golden rule is a good standard which is further improved by doing unto others, wherever possible, as they want to be done by.”

You’ll see lot’s of “Top 10 Rules of Social Networking” – pick any of the above and I think you’ll have it covered.
Everyone’s Blog Posts – 626 Local Business Networking

Filed Under: Inside626 Tagged With: , , , ,

Dual and Multi-State Licensed Nurses Targeted by California

January 15, 2012 By

California Campaign to Revoke Licenses of Nurses with Prior Out-of-State Disciplinary Records. 


  A 2009 newspaper exposé of California-licensed nurses who have been disciplined for professional misconduct in other states has resulted in a California-wide effort to revoke all of those nurses’ California licenses. So committed was California’s last Governor to this agenda, that he fired the head administrator and replaced all of the members of the Board of Registered Nursing. The new appointees were then given their marching orders, and more than 2,000 Registered Nurses were slated for license revocation on the basis of prior conduct in other states. LVNs and other health-care licensees may face similar issues soon under the current Governor, Jerry Brown.

     Obviously, some nurses and related health-care licensees should not be practicing anywhere. But California apparently assumes that all nurses with past misconduct in other states should now be barred here. Nurses who are now on California’s hit-list might assume that loss of their California licenses is inevitable. Neither of these assumptions is supported by logic or law.

License Discipline and Revocation in California. 

      A nursing license—RN or LVN— like all California professional and occupational licenses, becomes property of the nurse, once earned. And, like any other property, such as real estate (think foreclosure) or money (think of fines imposed by courts), the nursing license cannot be taken away (revoked), even for a short time (suspension), and cannot be diminished or restricted in any way (probationary conditions) without two things: good cause and due process.

     There is a vast body of law as to what constitutes good cause. But here’s the take-away the licensed R.N. needs to remember: the mere fact that some other state revoked or disciplined a nursing license issued by that state does not, by itself, constitute good cause for California to discipline a California nursing license.

     As for due process, that means that California cannot simply unilaterally revoke or discipline the license based on what State officials believe to be good cause. Instead, California must notify the nurse of the State’s intention to discipline or revoke the license. The State must offer the nurse an opportunity to deny that the license should be disciplined, and an opportunity to demonstrate why. The demonstration of why the license should not be disciplined takes place at an administrative hearing where the nurse’s advocate can challenge all or any of the State’s reasons and evidence in front of an impartial Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). Also at the hearing, the nurse’s lawyer will introduce evidence that the nurse is presently competent and that there exists no current reason to deny the right to practice nursing in California.
          The ALJ will give due consideration to the evidence put before him or her and issue (1) findings of fact that explain what evidence the ALJ finds credible, (2) conclusions of law that explain what laws the ALJ thinks apply to the case, and (3) a proposed decision. The proposed decision is then forwarded to the Board for action, and the nurse and the nurse’s attorney can appear before the Board to argue in favor of or in opposition to the ALJ’s proposed decision.

Opportunities at the Disciplinary Hearing. 

      Anyone who is not familiar with the hearing process might not realize that the hearing offers many opportunities to the nurse to avoid or reduce the discipline against the license proposed by the State. For example, the records of prior discipline in another state may not be available. Or the out-of-state records may not meet the standards of admissible evidence set forth in the California Evidence Code (California law will apply at the hearing.) The discipline imposed by the prior state may have been based on conduct that is lawful in California. Many procedural defects may exist in the out-of-state disciplinary process.

     Many more reasons exist for invalidating or reducing the State’s claims. The out-of-state discipline may have occurred a number of years ago, and the nurse may have current relevant work experience that may show any previous performance problems have been addressed and resolved. The nurse may have evidence of further professional training since the time of the out-of-state discipline, or the nurse may have completed rehabilitation or received counseling. The nurse may be able to demonstrate a new maturity, significant changes based on life experiences (parenthood, military service, successful employment, religious enlightenment) and improvements in professional competence. Any similar facts would be compelling evidence where the State’s only basis to discipline the nursing license is out-of-state prior misconduct.

     These are only a few of the more obvious kinds of evidence that may be utilized to defend a nursing license in an administrative hearing. Countless others exist. The process unfolds over a lengthy course of time, allowing the R.N. to make sure that many of these evidentiary considerations apply by building into the R.N.’s life and history such facts as additional training, recovery programs, etc.

The Economics of Defending Against Discipline of the Nursing License. 

      Some nurses (and other professional and occupational licensees) believe that they cannot “afford” to defend their license against the State’s current campaign. But consider: what do you earn in a year from nursing? In two years? In three? A license revocation will prohibit re-application for a new license for at least three years and probably longer. At the end of the revocation period, if a Petition for Reinstatement is successful, the re-issued license will be burdened by difficult and expensive-to-monitor probationary conditions which will severely limit the reinstated R.N.’s employment opportunities. And the Board of Registered Nursing will require the reinstated R.N. to pay all costs of probation monitoring and enforcement over the course of the probationary period — usually another three years — an amount always in the thousands of dollars. Do the math: can you afford not to defend your license? Your right to earn your living?

How to Begin to Defend Against Discipline of a California Nursing License. 

      The one certain way to lose your California nursing license on the basis of prior out-of-state professional discipline is to do nothing when you receive a notice of proposed action from the State of California. Do not let this happen to you!

     Read the notice. It will give you a very short window of time in which to provide written notice of denial of the charges and demand for hearing. Do not let this deadline pass! It is critical to get your denial/demand in before the time expires. Then, get a lawyer. As the State will tell you, you are not required to have an attorney to defend your license. But you should. Because these cases will feature out-of-state records that may be subject to challenge on the basis of California evidentiary standards, these are not the kind of cases where it will be okay if the only party without an attorney is the nurse with everything to lose. Your nursing license is your asset. It has value: real, quantifiable, actual value. Protect it by exercising of all of the legal rights it carries. California may be at war with its dual-licensed nurses, but you need not be one of the casualties.

More Information Is Available …
at www.LicenseAdvocates.com or contact us at info@LicenseAdvocates.com 


Creative Commons License 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. You are free to Share — to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work under the following conditions: 1. Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). 2. Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes. 3. No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.



Read more: License Advocates Law Group: June 2010 http://licenseadvocateslawgroup.blogspot.com/2010_06_01_archive.html#ixzz1AeabyVpL
Everyone’s Blog Posts – 626 Local Business Networking

Filed Under: Inside626 Tagged With: , , , , ,

CAUTION Re CONTRACTORS OFFERING “CONSTRUCTION EXPRESS SERVICE”

January 14, 2012 By

An article in the Winter/Spring 2010 edition of the California State License Board’s informational newsletter “California Licensed Contractor” highlighted a new and promising business practice, generally offered as “express services” or “express van services.” The point of the CSLB article was to suggest to General Contractors that they can expand or develop their businesses by providing customers with a “broad palette of construction trade skills” for new projects or repairs. See http://www.cslb.ca.gov/Resources/Newsletters/

ContractorNewsletter2010WinterSpring.pdf .


However, a careful reading of the article will reveal the more subtle point that a General Contractor considering offering a Handyman-type repair or remodel service may need one or more additional licenses in additional classifications.  This concern originates in Sections 7057(a) and (b) of California Business & Professions Code. Under those statutes, general building contractors can accept a prime contract for one speciality — framing or carpentry, for example – and oversee projects and coordinate specific subcontractors for the work. However, specialty or subcontractors must be hired to perform work of a single specialty. For example, if a general contractor operating as an express service is offered a job calling only for electrical or plumbing work, the general contractor must decline the job as more appropriate for a contractor licensed in that particular specialty.

The sole exception is where the job requires more than two types of work. In that case it is appropriate for a California-licensed general building contractor to contract for and oversee the entire project. For example, a general contractor may lawfully perform a complete remodeling job if the work involves plumbing, electrical and carpentry work under one contract.  Under these circumstances, a general building contractor may perform all of the work on a building, or may subcontract parts of the job to contractors with specialty licenses.

Understanding that a typical real-life scenario for express van or handy-man services would likely involve smaller home improvement work like plumbing and electrical repair, it will serve general contractors to be very cautious about accepting such work. Always consider the resources the CSLB expends and can expend in enforcing the prohibitions against unlicensed contracting activity.

Written by Michael L. Claessens, License Advocates Law Group LLP



Read more: License Advocates Law Group: CAUTION Re: CONTRACTOR OFFERING “CONSTRUCTION EXPRESS SERVICE“   

http://licenseadvocateslawgroup.blogspot.com

Everyone’s Blog Posts – 626 Local Business Networking

Filed Under: Inside626 Tagged With: , , , , ,