I would not support a situation where a company was able to claim a Certified Developer listing for a person who was not an employee of the company.
In the case of FMTraining, it would be reasonable to say that all FileMaker trainers were currently Certified in version 16.
So you do not have any employees?
Ofcourse it should be a legitimate listing and certificate. None of our teachers are employees in the normals sense but we are a group of independent developers.
Not all of them are always up to date with the latest exams. The requirement is one of the teachers within six weeks of the exam becoming available. So marking a certified trainer automatically as all teacher having the latest certification seems inappropriate.
It would already be an improvement if the policy was changed to multiple companies but of different types (as used in Find a Partner): consultant, trainer and reseller.
The certification requirements actually covers ALL FBA trainers:
"CERTIFICATION EXAM. Company must ensure that its FBA Trainers are in compliance with the following certification exam requirements. Within six (6) weeks after the FileMaker, Inc. (“FMI”) certification exam is made available, FBA Trainer must receive a passing score on the FMI certification exam or the applicable test currently offered by FMI. FBA Trainer may not use their certification to represent more than one FBA company. "
Nevertheless, my question is if anyone else has problems with that last sentence. I mean, at least here in The Netherlands (EU), there are more and more independent working people (often in coöperation with each other) and less real employees.