Affiliated Monitoring is TMA 2018 Monitoring Center of the Year

ADT, Vector and Affiliated Honored with Personnel Awards

The four winners of the 2018 TMA Monitoring Center of the Year Awards were announced at the 2018 Electronic Security Expo (ESX) on June 19. They are:

  • Monitoring Center of the Year: Affiliated Monitoring
  • Monitoring Center Support Person of the Year: Beth Bailey, ADT LLC
  • Monitoring Center Manager of the Year: Carmelo Mosca, Affiliated Monitoring
  • Monitoring Center Operator of the Year: Patricia Fody, Vector Security

Single logo - color“All of us at Affiliated Monitoring are gratified to receive this honor,” said Daniel Oppenheim, Executive Vice President, Affiliated. “It validates our deeply held beliefs in professionalism, kindness and technological innovation. The Monitoring Association represents the best of our industry and being recognized in this way is very fulfilling. Affiliated looks forward to supporting our dealers and their customers through this exciting era of growth and opportunity.”

From left: Carmelo Mosca, Affiliated; Patricia Fody, Vector; Beth Bailey, ADT LLC

Affiliated 2

From left: Affiliated’s Stanley Oppenheim, SDM Editor Laura Stapanek, TMA President Ivan Spector

“This award belongs to our ADT team members on the phones right now protecting our neighbors, family members, and our communities,” said Support Person of the Year Beth Bailey, ADT Sr. Manager, Customer Care. “It is my honor to support them and my passion to find ways to make it easier for them to do what they do best – take care of our customers.” ADT had finalists in all four categories this year.

“I feel grateful and honored to receive this award from The Monitoring Association,” said Manager of the Year Carmelo Mosca, Managing Director, Monitoring Operations, Affiliated. “It’s a pleasure to go to work every day with the hundreds of caring and hardworking monitoring specialists in Texas and New Jersey. I’m proud of this personal award and how it reflects positively on the entire Affiliated family.”

The TMA Monitoring Center Excellence Awards recognize any FM Approvals, Intertek/ETL or UL-listed monitoring center (TMA members and non-members) and outstanding personnel who perform in the highest professional manner, thereby making a significant contribution to the betterment of the alarm industry and the alarm profession while demonstrating exceptional service to their customers and community.

The purpose of the awards program is to:

  • Establish and promote the inherent value of professional monitoring services in general.
  • Honor those who have made the most significant contributions to the service.
  • Promote the distinct level of professionalism attained by NRTL-approved monitoring centers.

The TMA Monitoring Center Excellence Awards Program is sponsored by SDM Magazine, which will publish a feature story detailing the accomplishments of the winners later this summer. Entries are judged by a blue-ribbon volunteer judging panel appointed by TMA.

“Each nominee must submit an extensive application detailing company systems like disaster recovery plan, education and training programs, technical innovations, and even community outreach,” said Lasko. “In the case of individual nominations, we ask for examples of how these employees go above and beyond their job descriptions to pursue excellence. Our judges had an extremely difficult time choosing winners from the amazing submissions we receive each year. We hope everyone will read SDM’s profiles of the winners this summer for inspiration!”

For past winners and more information, visit www.tma.us.

 

NFPA Members Vote Overwhelmingly to Accept Updated Language on Fire Alarm Monitoring

June 14, 2018
by Tim A. Scally
Reposted with permission of SDM

View article on SDM Website

This afternoon, at the annual NFPA Conference & Expo held in Las Vegas, members voted 304 to 128 to accept the updated language proposed for the 2019 Edition of NFPA 72.

The change to the code has a direct impact on alarm companies and monitoring stations because it involves where and how fire alarm monitoring is provided to commercial locations.

The main point of contention in this language is Section 26.5.3 of the code, which specifies the requirements for supervising station alarm “facilities.” A certified amending motion (CAM) was presented on the floor to accept “Public Input 6” that specifically revises 26.5.3.1.3. This language was intended to clarify the position that listed central stations are able to provide remote station service if that is the level of service desired. Specifically, within the proposed final edition is a paragraph that reads:

26.5.3.1.3 Alarm, supervisory and trouble signals shall be permitted to be received at a listed central supervising station.

This language — which was submitted by Rick Simpson, vice president of technical services at Vector Security and chair of The Monitoring Association’s (TMA) Standards Committee, and was voted in favor of — changes the original language by striking out the introductory words, “Where permitted by the authority having jurisdiction…”

Many people spoke in favor including Ivan Spector, TMA president; Jay Hauhn, TMA executive director and CEO; Patrick Egan, founder of Select Security; Kevin Lehan, public relations manager, EMERgency 24; and a representative from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

The reason this language matters is that many in the industry believe the code should reflect that a facility meeting the stringent central station listing requirements automatically meets the lessor remote station facility standards. According to ESA, this updated language will prevent a central station from arbitrarily being denied recognition as a remote station, as has happened in Schaumburg, Ill. (www.SDMmag.com/illinois-esa-schaumburg), where in 2016 the city passed a law requiring any new alarm installation for commercial fire in Schaumburg to be monitored by Northwest Central Dispatch, which is the 911 center for 10 nearby communities.

Kevin Lehan, former executive director of the Illinois Electronic Security Association (IESA), said the Schaumburg law would be tantamount to the government confiscating customers from private alarm companies.

In areas where this practice is occurring, ESA reported, the AHJ designates a single remote station, typically operated by or in partnership with the AHJ itself, as “approved” under the code. The AHJ then rejects the use of all other forms of private fire alarm monitoring, including monitoring via a NRTL-listed central station. This eliminates all private competition and leaves a government entity, who is also the AHJ, as the sole provider of fire alarm monitoring services.

Since the code revision process is a three-year cycle, correcting this now rather than pushing it to the 2022 cycle prevents potentially adverse language from being in effect for nearly a decade.

Not everyone agrees with this take, however. Some, according to ESA, believe the proposed language in the CAM was poorly worded, possibly in the wrong location, and possibly does not address other subsections in the same section that could then cause issues with interpretation. Some subject matter experts said, even before the vote, that the proposed language update should be rejected this cycle in favor of building a consensus on modifying the code in the next cycle to address all the relevant sections that would apply. Others opposed modifying a national code for solving what they deemed a local issue.

Roy Pollack, an SDM columnist and ESA representative on the NFPA technical committee, said before the vote, “I will be attending the NFPA technical committee session in Las Vegas and casting my vote against the CAM. I personally have experience in the fire service, the alarm industry and on several industry committees and do not feel that the way the CAM is written is in the best interest of anyone but a select few. While I understand and agree with the underlying issue, I believe that the proposed language is poorly written, in the wrong place and does not address other sections of the code, thereby potentially causing confusion and conflict. The issue needs to be thoroughly discussed and reviewed by both the ESA and TMA and a comprehensive public comment submitted during the next cycle of the code for consideration.”

While ESA is taking a more neutral approach, attempting to educate the industry about the issue, TMA has been open in its support of changing the language to the CAM.

According to TMA, it was involved in an effort to overturn the NFPA language in 2016 when it was first modified to include the controversial language, but it was unsuccessful. TMA supports changing the language this year, fearing that the language as it stood before the vote would have caused alarm companies to be subject to a loss of customers because fire departments will commence monitoring themselves.

“What is happening,” said Jay Hauhn, executive director, TMA, “is that municipalities are not allowing NRTL-listed central stations to monitor fire alarms, and yet they allow the use of something called remote station. The standards to be a remote station are incredibly lax.”

“Where permitted by the authority having jurisdiction” language in the code, Hauhn said, “is very common. However, using it to block an entire class of service is unprecedented, inappropriate and makes it easier for municipalities to prohibit NRTL-listed central stations from monitoring fire alarms. We’ve been monitoring fire systems safely and effectively for 100 years.”

Before the vote, Hauhn said this proposed change to strike out AHJ language was being spun by opponents as usurping AHJ authority, but contends that the proposed change “takes unfair language out of the fire code, given the way it was being used.”

Following the vote, Hauhn told SDM that this vote goes a long way in protecting a consumer’s right to select a NRTL-listed central station of their choice. “Many municipalities will still write their own fire code that will counteract the action we just took with NFPA 72 — municipalities are allowed to pass their own fire ordinances in many states,” he said. “In other states, a municipality cannot write a fire code that conflicts with the code at the state level; so in those municipalities where the state levels are overriding, it means a lot.  When a municipality does consider enacting an ordinance that takes away the rights of consumers to use a NRTL-listed facility, we will review it and hopefully work with the municipality to implement a fair ordinance.”

Hauhn said TMA would contest that when it happens.

“This is not an affront to the fire services,” Hauhn added. “The entire monitoring industry, everybody in the fire protection business, totally respects what those in public safety and the fire services do to protect the community. This was simply an action to do away with an inequity and make things fair.”

Finalists for 2018 TMA Excellence Awards Announced

Four Winners to Be Revealed at ESX on June 19

VIENNA, VA (May 7, 2018) – The Monitoring Association is pleased to announce the twelve finalists for the 2018 TMA Excellence Awards. Listed in alphabetical order by company within each category, they are:

  • Monitoring Center of the Year Finalists
    ADT, Affiliated, Vector
  • Monitoring Center Operator of the Year Finalists
    Duane Hilton, ADT; Linda Reed, Dynamark; Patricia Fody, Vector
  • Monitoring Center Manager of the Year Finalists
    Shari Wilson, ADT; Carmelo Mosca, Affiliated; Bill Fisher, UAS
  • Monitoring Center Support Person of the Year Finalists
    Beth Bailey, ADT; Lamar Shroyer, Dynamark; Boris Pejic, G4S

“We congratulate our finalists for being recognized as the best of the best,” said Elizabeth Lasko, Vice President of Communications, TMA. “Our judges really had a challenging time choosing the finalists, let alone the winners, from all the nominations. Our applicants all submitted stories that clearly demonstrate the breadth of excellence in companies and individuals across our industry.”

The TMA Monitoring Center Excellence Awards recognize any FM Approvals, Intertek/ETL or UL-listed monitoring center (TMA members and non-members) and outstanding personnel who perform in the highest professional manner, thereby making a significant contribution to the betterment of the alarm industry and the alarm profession while demonstrating exceptional service to their customers and community.

The purpose of the awards program is to:

  • Establish and promote the inherent value of professional monitoring services in general.
  • Honor those who have made the most significant contributions to the service.
  • Promote the distinct level of professionalism attained by NRTL-approved monitoring centers.

The TMA Monitoring Center Excellence Awards are co-sponsored by SDM Magazine, which will publish a feature story on the winners later this summer. Entries are judged by a blue-ribbon volunteer judging panel appointed by TMA. The four winners will be announced at the Opening Reception of the 2018 Electronic Security Expo (ESX) on Tuesday, June 19. For past winners and more information, visit www.tma.us.

TMA Excellence Awards Deadline March 23

The Monitoring Association is now accepting applications for the 2018 Excellence Awards!

Is your company the best of the beTMA-Excellence-Awards-2018st? How about your staff? You can gain recognition throughout the industry for your efforts and success — apply now for the 2018 TMA Excellence Awards.

Sponsored by SDM Magazine, the TMA Excellence Awards recognize outstanding FM Global, Intertek/ETL or UL-listed monitoring centers and their exemplary personnel.

Award categories are Monitoring Center, Monitoring Center Manager, Monitoring Center Operator, and Monitoring Center Support Person of the Year.

Check out coverage of the 2017 winners in TMA Dispatch, SDM, and the TMA Blog. The 2018 winners will earn the same recognition following acknowledgment at ESX 2018.

Entry deadline is March 23. To apply, visit TMA Excellence Awards.

2015 CSAA Excellence Awards Winners

CSAA International announced the winners of the CSAA 2015 Excellence Awards on June 25 at the Electronic Security Expo (ESX) in Baltimore, MD. The winners are:

  • Central Station of the Year: Guardian Protection Services
  • Central Station Support Person of the Year: Kyle Johnson, DMC Security Services
  • Central Station Operator of the Year: Susan Farris, Security Central Inc.
  • Central Station Manager of the Year: Randy Ambrus, Cooperative Response Center

Read the full press release (including all the finalists and nominees) and watch for the feature story in August SDM. SDM is the awards program co-sponsor. More photos will be posted soon!

(L-R) SDM Editor Laura Stepanek, Guardian Protection Services Vice President of Customer Service Mike Overby, Guardian Protection Services Director of Operations Jason Bradley, CSAA President Pam Petrow

(L-R) SDM Editor Laura Stepanek, Guardian Protection Services Vice President of Customer Service Mike Overby, Guardian Protection Services Director of Operations Jason Bradley, CSAA President Pam Petrow. Photo by Brandon Freedman.