PVC King wrote:Put simply if you want to call yourself a qualified architect the RIAI sets the bar, if you want to state that you have an architecture degree you are free to do so.
I was a qualified architect from June 1990 until May 2008 and the school of architecture from which I qualified set the bar.
The RIAI had no function in setting the bar then, and I fail to see where its competence derives from now.
That is the problem.
As a consumer I have purchased the services of someone with a qualification but who was not accredited; would I do that with someone elses money?
Are you suggesting you're stupid with your own money but not other people's?
Are you being dismissive of someone who was qualified but unregistered because of incompetence on his part, or because that's the RIAI party line?
Did he not in fact give you a good service, making your below comments about "assurances" illogical?
That is about as logical as your comments which appear to confuse Nationality with Race.
No I'd need to know that they had completed the structured training and had ongoing monitoring of their CPD so that I could confirm that I had completed the necessary checks that they were appropriate to do the job to a designated standard.
That is defined as making an assumption based on an assurance
Hardly the definitive route to corporate governance you appear to be suggesting is your preferred route.
Are you not aware that with so many indians and so few chiefs in the bigger firms, post-graduates who couldn't get positions of seniority were reduced to looking over the shoulders of MRIAI's to watch - the architect as voyeur?
Monitoring the project, I believe it was called.
You can call it what you want to, but I'd prefer someone with 10 years experience actually working on jobs as opposed to watching other people do it.
And in relation to the assurances of their work, there is a tried and tested method whereby you can have all the relevant assurances you want.
Can you guess what it is?
Not dependant on any "list" on the RIAI website.
Available to all for the price of a phonecall, usually reliable.
Gives a warts and all account of the professional you want to find out about.
Hint: its independent of any CPD course or "structured training" and is very relvant to the consumer.
As good as any university is; all any institution can ever do is state that an individual passed or received honours in a course at a particular point in time.
(Round of Applause)
This is precisely what defined every MRIAI in practice before May 2008.
There was no structured CPD course in place via the Instutute before that date - and guess what?
The profession didn't collapse under the weight of its own ignorance because archtiects in general are quick studies.
This comment applies to post graduates, self taught practitioners and yes, even some MRIAI's I've met - though some trade on the badge and fail to keep up.
Perhaps you're suggesting all MRIAI's have been scrambling to attend CPD courses to catch up on the last 20 years of "progress" in the building industry?
The class sizes run by the RIAI and tell a different tale.
Oh no, wait, you must be thinking of the online
The online CPD course is largely self assessment, with no independent regular assessment of those "attending".
When I see every MRIAI sitting annual externally reviewed examinations to assess his/her fitness to practice, then I'll accept your comments above about the assurances you claim to be offered by the MRIAI affix.
Until then MRIAI's are no different from me or any unqualified success who take their own steps to stay "current" in terms of the legislation, which is fine by me.
This involves reading the new legislation and practices, discussing them with colleagues and public servants and research on every project.
Some offices will attend courses on how to do new things like Disability Access Certs - some will work it out for themselves.
Every competent practice has to do this and MRIAI's are no different than anyone else in their success rates.
Why do you think there were 60% failure rates for planning applications returned as invalid in 2002.
MRIAI's have feet of clay just like anyone else and the much vaunted CPD won't change that.
In other words, CPD is yet more window dressing.
Very expensive too, if you buy at the RIAI shop.
Also the EU commission would if a complaint were made alleging that a valid accreditation were not accepted in another member state investigate; clearly no one has made any valid complaint to date. How you could think the most over zealous politically correct institution on earth would seek to be racist is beyond me.
Your sentence doesn't parse - I presume you meant to say:"Also the EU commission would investigate if a complaint were made alleging that a valid accreditation were not accepted in another member state; clearly no one has made any valid complaint to date"
They have done so on numerous occassions.
I specifically stated AS FACT that the EU have already taken actions against Member states who imposed restrictive practices against citizens from othe rmember states.
Would the public be any safer in the case of debarred solicitor if all the solicitor needed was a degree versus a practicing certificate renewed annually? How many universities withdraw degrees unless specific wrongdoing is found during the examination process?
Apples and Oranges.
A disbarred solicitor is still a qualified solicitor.
His disbarment arises solely from criminal wrongdoing, behaviour likely to bring his profession into disrepute, or non-payment of his annual registration fee.
I have no problem paying an annual registration fee as long as its not extortionate and doesn't oblige me to join the RIAI.
I am not guilty of criminal wrongdoing or behaviour likely to lead to discrediting the profession.
I am seeking recognition of my rights under the law - a commendable pursuit.
But to turm your own question back to you -
Would the public be safer if a private organization got every qualified Architect barred from practising because their qualification wasn't gained through them?
In the case of the disbarred solicitor, there must be evidence he committed some wrong.
In the case of qualified architects no wrongdoing is assumed, and their right to call themselves "architect" is supported by an Irish Statute and two EU Directives.
This should translate to an automatic right to be registered unless there were interference in the process to benefit a private organization.