Fereastra - Portal de afaceri - revista de specialitate pentru furnizorii de sisteme si producatorii de tamplarie din PVC, Aluminiu si lemn stratificat cu geam termoizolant. Aici gasiti informatii utile despre: ferestre, usi, pereti cortina, termopane, geam termopan, etc.

 

On a first analysis, the initiative is admirable and may have beneficial effects towards regulating the sector activity. More concretely, it envisages the creation of evaluation commissions, organized per various specializations, made up of acknowledged professionally-attested experts. These entities’ main task is to verify companies’ technical capacities and include them in a coherent classification system, according to which the companies could subsequently qualify for the tenders organized for the execution of various project types, irrespective of their financing means (from public or private funds). Once the legislative act has been adopted, methodological application norms will also have to be approved, accurately describing the grouping method, according to each sector’s specificity. Against this background, the Employers Association of Joinery Manufacturers from Romania (EAJMR), by means of the Board of Directors (BD) members, decided to urgently adopt the respective documentation, in order to facilitate the implementation of the future law as soon as possible.

The idea is by no means new and was applied at the level of several European Union member states. For instance, France imposes companies’ obligation, for any entrepreneurship activity carried out in the construction sector, to hold a technical approval issued by the line ministry from the Hexagon. Also, a quality insurance institution (RAL) was organized in Germany - at the level of the window and façade sector - and the application of the respective mark represents, for federal state beneficiaries, a performance guarantee, without which the acquisition probability is almost null. Such norms could be twofold, according to the community authorities: they are either intended to ensure the application on the various EU state territories of individual quality-related rules, or have a protectionist role. If in the first case, the respective efforts are justified, the attempt to ensure the presence on the market of compliant products being understandable, interpretations are different in the second, and we can consider that such rules could represent barriers for free trade in the European economic space. It is obvious that this last aspect directly infringes the regulations for construction products trade recently adopted by the European Parliament (CPR) and whose application is compulsory. In other words, it is necessary to carefully verify the formulation of the new Romanian law for construction sector companies’ professional certification, as any element potentially leading to the idea of obstructing the process of launching any type of product on the common market (technically corresponding to the provisions included in the harmonized European standards) could generate incompatibilities with the community principles and the start of the "infringement" procedure. In order to solve this problem, it is compulsory to set an experts commission, made up of local and European representatives, intended to analyze the new norm contents and eliminate those provisions potentially contrary to the EU regulations.

This is not to be understood as a resistance to the market regulation initiative, but rather as an obligation to observe common rules, valid within the political-economic entity that Romania chose to be part to. The justification of this initiative, accepted by all construction sector members, consists in an attempt to eliminate companies having displayed unprofessional behaviour and encouraging disloyal competition practices. It suffices to remind you of cases in which companies, although holding neither the necessary technologies nor qualified staff, won tenders for highly complex objectives. There are also companies which, in order to obtain contracts, offered dumping prices and subsequently failed to respect their commitments. The need to eliminate such "competitors" is acknowledged by all fair entrepreneurs, but, with the uniform application of the "purification" criteria, it is possible to exclude companies which, in the absence of the respective law, would have the capacity and know-how to perform compliant works. A good example would be that of certain companies from abroad (currently performing commercial operations on the national territory) and for which certification procedures would imply unjustified additional costs and potentially the risk of non-participating in tenders due to delays generated by bureaucracy. We have a case-history for this category for certain European Union states, where, for example, the company’s mere registration in a certain country could delay the conclusion of formalities for the execution of other projects on the national territory. This is precisely the type of approach that European authorities are trying to avoid, and the promotion of a norm risking to perpetuate the respective abnormalities is both unwanted, and forbidden. Therefore, a dialogue between the involved parties and the identification of a common solution are a must.

Reserves are also displayed by certain local entrepreneurs, who express doubts on the idea that an additional law could solve the existing problems, since not even the provisions of the European harmonized standard SR EN 14351-1 are currently fully observed. Thus, companies not applying the CE marking for windows or taking over from suppliers testing reports in a cascade system, without observing the manufacture indications or changing the initial systems, will have no reason to meet the requirements of an activity certification norm, except maybe in case of open tenders. The other companies will continue to operate in the same conditions as they have so far, without worrying about legality. Another impediment is related to costs. If the conformity marking can be applied - as a last resort - by earmarking an amount between EUR 1,000 and EUR 2,000, and entrepreneurs are often not willing, for objective reasons, to settle this legal obligation, the new certification could imply the earmarking of additional funds, with almost null implementation possibilities, particularly by small entrepreneurs. A logical solution could be represented by a control level increase. In this sector, according to the legislation in force, responsibilities are incumbent on the State Inspectorate in Constructions (ISC). Although since recently subordinated to the line ministry, the lack of financial means and the faulty operation method caused by the interpretable regulations lead to the respective institution’s very low efficacy. This statement could be simply proven by the high number of companies operating on the local insulating joinery market and, in certain situations, even participating in open tenders, without having the right to apply the CE marking.