There's one rule that needs to be changed in our ethics and guidelines of professional conduct as real estate agents, and that rule is the one telling us that we must present all properties equally to our clients and prospects regardless of the commission being offered to us as the cooperating agent. While there were many, many years when this guideline made complete sense to almost everybody, it no longer makes sense now in today's world of ever-changing business models.

When I began my career as a full-time agent in 1980, we didn't have the continual downward grinding on commission rates that we have today. A full sales commission on improved property was generally considered to be 6 percent, and a property owner in some situations might end up negotiating the rate as low as 5 percent before signing the listing. In situations like these, the agents were pretty much in agreement that they would treat listings offering 5 percent commissions the same as listings offering 6 percent commissions when presenting the properties to their clients and prospects. This was deemed to be the reasonable and honorable thing to do by almost everyone in the business.

Now let's fast forward to today.

In today's business model, owners, discount brokerage companies, and listing agents have changed the real estate model dramatically. Listing agents sometimes take listings where the owner is only offering a 1-3 percent commission. In addition, listing agents will sometimes offer a cooperating agent a fee that is less than half of the total commission being paid by the owner. I've even seen situations where the cooperating agent was told that any commission they would receive would have to be paid by their own buyer, and that the entire commission being paid by the seller would go to the listing agent only.

So in looking at today's situation, a lot has changed since 1980. And while this change has been taking place, a lot of owners have been demanding lower commissions before signing listing agreements. But when these owners demand this and put their properties on the market offering commissions far below the normal rates, in my mind there's no longer any reason for agents to be obligated to submit these properties as aggressively as others to their prospects.

In following through with this line of thinking, if you've been in the business for a number of years now, the following scenario may sound familiar to you:

You're negotiating a listing agreement and the owner wants you to substantially reduce the listing commission before signing the agreement. You mention how this may impact the number of times the property is presented by other agents to their prospects, and the owner then says something like, "Aren't all you agents required to present my property just like all the others regardless of what amount of commission I decide to pay you?"

And in hearing statements like this from owners we recognize that a rule that made great sense for all of us years ago should now be thrown completely out the window. It's unconscionable to both have our commissions be completely beaten down by others and simultaneously not have the right to choose where our time is best spent as business professionals.

If an attorney charges $400.00 an hour, wouldn't it be rather unfair for a prospect to be able to tell the attorney, "I'm only going to pay you $200.00 an hour, and according to your association's code of ethics you have no choice but to accept it."

Once again, the underlying reasons for the original rule in our profession were valid at the time, but they're not valid anymore.

A quick review of the NAR's 2004 NAR Code of Ethics, shows no provisions in the 2004 Code of Ethics obligating agents to submit all properties equally to their clients and prospects regardless of the amount of commission being paid. While I'm not an expert on all the previous editions of the Code, that provision has been so deeply ingrained in so many of our minds that I know it has appeared in previous editions. But what's strange is the fact that very few agents seem to know that this provision no longer exists. It's somehow been removed, but the word just hasn't been disseminated to the troops. In any event, I'm absolutely thrilled because it's a change whose time has definitely come.

The only problem I see with this is there still may be some situations where agents don't fully disclose all the important facts to their clients. To handle one area where I can see a potential problem, we could consider putting a box to check or leave unchecked in our listing agreements that says something like the following:

Owner has been advised by the listing brokerage company that the cooperating commission being offered to other brokerage companies may result in both fewer showings and the owner receiving a lower price for the property.

By including a statement like this, the listing agent is now on the hook for full disclosure to the owner about the pitfalls of offering a lower commission in the marketplace. It also makes listing agents responsible for disclosing situations where they plan on keeping the lion's share of the commission themselves while offering a lower-than-normal commission to cooperating agents. (For example: The listing agent offers only 2 percent of the 6 percent commission to cooperating agents.)

Also, if there's a property on the market that may be ideal for an agent's buyer, but the commission being offered to the cooperating agent is very low, the agent could approach his or her client and say something like the following:

"There's a property on the market that may be ideal for you, but the owner is offering a ridiculously low commission to the agent who sells it. If I show you the property and you like it, can I count on you to include an additional 2 percent commission for me in the transaction to provide what we both would consider to be a fair commission?"

In my 25 years in our industry, I've found that most buyers will be willing to agree to this provided you ask them before you tell them the details of the property and exactly where it's located. If you show them the property first and then ask them to provide an additional commission after they've toured it ... it may be another story entirely!

Ideally, one of the best ways to handle this in advance is to have it all spelled out in an exclusive buyer agency agreement with the people you will be representing on their upcoming property purchase. This way they will have agreed to provide you with additional compensation in the event that a fair commission is not already being provided for you.

As real estate agents we have the right to protect our own business interests and not be held hostage by owners and other real estate professionals who want us to work for unreasonably low fees. But in doing so we must also take great care and make sure that the highest and best interests of our clients and prospects are always protected.