I'm about to register with a part-p scheme and I must admit to being in a real dilemna over who to join.
I've narrowed it down to either Elecsa or NIC.
Why those two? Well, the bloke I work with is with Elecsa and the feedback from him and forums such as this is that they are a great no-nonsense and friendly organisation who also come under the umbrella of the ECA. The NIC because they are so well marketed and publicised. A lot of Joe Public almost see them as "Part - P" and recognise them straight away.
I do admit that I see joining the NIC almost "going over to the dark side"; I don't like the way they portray themselves as the definitive and only scheme - there's a degree of dishonesty there - but this is where I would have to have to guts to stand up to my principles and put them to one side and join Elecsa isn't it? Trouble is, when faced with the possibility of getting possibly more work with a NIC symbol on the van it's not so easy to stick to ones principles - gutless as I am.
There is the possibility of course that Elecsa will publicise themselves as aggressively as the NIC do - and why not? I would have thought that the ECA would have even more clout. So why don't they? Their members would be much better off if they did. Why moan about the NIC and their never-ending steamrolling advertising and pomposity? It's not the NIC's fault that the other schemes seem to sit meekly by and let them get on with it with no opposition whatsoever.
Once the principle aspect is overcome there is the issue of cost - both schemes seem to be much of a muchness in that respect. But then I would be a new start-up company - do the NIC allow this? At one point they wanted your company to be active for at least 12 months.
Then there is this PIR issue. As we know, you do not need to be part-p registered to carry out PIR's - but it would be nice to be able to use logo headed PIR's wouldn't it - although at what financial cost?! And do they require 2391 also for this privilidge?
I´ll weigh all this up and come to a decision soon.