The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Buildin

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby NK111 » Thu Feb 04, 2010 6:13 pm

RIAI: €490 membership =€50 stamp + €2000+ for Structured CPDs cost (20 points required, some free, most €200+ for a single point, i.e. you can get 4 points for some courses that cost €750.
This of course can be written off against tax i.e. free, if you own the business, the rates are also cheaper, but if you're PAYE you take it where the sun don't shine and be thankful you have a job!!!
Wonder how many "young" RIAI members there will be next year? Nice idea for some though, get your staff to pay for their training on their time, on their money!

To compare:

In South Africa registration with the South African Council for the Architectural Profession (SACAP) is R1168.50 (110EUR) for professionals and R655.50 (62EUR) for candidates and then annual fees are R1710.00 (160EUR) and R627.00 (59EUR) respectively

in the Republic of Texas, (each state in the U.S. sets its own fees) the fees are $305.00 per year for renewing an active registration

ARB in UK £86 a year (not 100% on this one)

Anyway, as you can see they're not protecting their members, just certain members. Why else has nothing REAL been done about tender pre-quals? you can't even design an office now without 200 years of experience and financial records!!!
NK111
Member
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:24 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby Solo » Fri Feb 05, 2010 3:05 am

Hi,

Only new to this forum and very surprised by this thread. There are a number of Architects presently working in Ireland who although they may not have had the luxury of a University Education they have nevertheless put in many many hours into learning their craft and do a fine job.

Least the elite among us should forget, you only have to look back at your early European Architecture where some of the most celebrated Architects were originally Artists or Stone Masons. How soon we forget our humble beginnings. The R.I.A.I is after all only a club for university qualified Architects they should not be allowed to control the profession.

This new act will do nothing for Irish Architecture or the general public. It will restrict access to the profession, distort the market and by present policy could very well lead to anti-competitive practice. We need to tread carefully and we like it or not need to take on board those who have established their credentials and have been operating successfully for many years.
Solo
Member
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 1:41 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:33 am

Solo wrote:Hi,

Only new to this forum and very surprised by this thread. There are a number of Architects presently working in Ireland who although they may not have had the luxury of a University Education they have nevertheless put in many many hours into learning their craft and do a fine job.

Least the elite among us should forget, you only have to look back at your early European Architecture where some of the most celebrated Architects were originally Artists or Stone Masons. How soon we forget our humble beginnings. The R.I.A.I is after all only a club for university qualified Architects they should not be allowed to control the profession.

This new act will do nothing for Irish Architecture or the general public. It will restrict access to the profession, distort the market and by present policy could very well lead to anti-competitive practice. We need to tread carefully and we like it or not need to take on board those who have established their credentials and have been operating successfully for many years.


The Act isn't something aspirational, its already in force since May 2008 and the Registration Boards is set up since November 2009. There is a separate body for processing registrations called the Technical Assessment Board and a route through which people who haven't passed any third level five year courses can apply. CPD is largely self administered and self assessed and you can acquire CPD points through many means. The AAI for example run lectures, events and site visits many of which are CPD rated and it only costs €80 for a years membership running from January in the year.

Whether the Act will perform the service its hoped for will be down to the regulation to be undertaken by the Architects Registration Board. The RIAI are providing courses and information for upskilling in relation to several key disciplines, including BER integration with design, Conservation, Health and Safety etc. I'm not saying their prices points are perfect, but its a start and once the market sees needs like this, private suppliers will arise and satisfy that need, probably for a lot less money.

In relation to the Act, it protects the professional title of architect. It doesn't stop persons providing architectural services, including Graduate Architects. I have no doubt there will be some upsets ahead for this apple cart, as persons who have been practising as unqualified architects for years try to defend their position, but the Technical Assessment route to Registration is a lot cheaper than taking a Court Case, for which the first requirement will be locus standi.

As long as the Registration Board requires only the level of skill and knowledge of a competent practitioner - the usual legal definition - from people applying, I suspect a goodly number should attain this level and the rest will see its within reach and will work towards it. Thsi level will become the norm in the profession and this will have implications for existing RIAI members if they are not up to scratch. I see the registration process as potentially a good thing in terms of setting/raising standards generally.

Like any process of registration, it cannot guarantee integrity and we see from the medical, legal and accounting professions that thsi applies across the board. A lack of integrity or similar serious transgression against a code of conduct can result in the offender being struck off the Register, which means he cannot practice as an architect in Ireland and b implication throughout the EU. That should soften a few coughs.

FWIW

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:58 am

CK wrote:Hi ONQ,

My personal experience about the registration procedure is that the RIAI is trying to limit as much as possible the numbers of architects to be registered. It is not related to the skills and the knowledge as it should be to protect the public.

For the purpose of comparing fees, I have contacted, the A.R.B. (UK), the C.I.A.T. (Technicians UK), l’ Ordre des Architectes (Architects France) and I.E.I (Irish Engineers). I found that these institutes request only a small fraction of the sum charged by the A.R.A.E. for a professional examination based on experience. The A.R.A.E. claims that fees charged for the examination only cover their cost €11,500 (exam) + €1,800 (lectures), so how can other institutes charge only a small fraction of these sums for an exam of similar level? The fees of €6,500 requested by the R.I.A.I. Technical assessment board are also very expensive compared to other institutes…

R.I.A.I. members were always privileged with the procedure. M.R.I.A.I. have paid the lowest fees for registration and they were the first on the register list. The R.I.A.I. were already informing the public about the necessity for an architect to be registered when the registration was in place for their members only and not for other applicants. The R.I.A.I. has used its position as the registration body to promote its members.

Part 3 of the BCA 2007, in its application for registration by the R.I.A.I., is not equitable for architects with more than 7 years of experience working in the state who are requested to pass a prescribed register examination. This examination as described by the R.I.A.I. and the A.R.A.E (appointed by the R.I.A.I. to prepare the register examination) requests the knowledge and skills of a newly qualified architect, it is not appropriate for experienced architects. Many experienced MRIAI architects would fail the exam, because it does not suit experienced professionals who specialized in a field of architecture. Architects, as many other professionals are specializing within small, medium or large practices, delivering services for small, medium or large projects. The specialization is also related to the type of projects, such as residential, commercial, industrial and so on. It can also be related to the practice of architecture itself, planning, design, project management, technology, theory, etc… The A.R.A.E. examination is focusing on every aspects of architecture in general, and this approach does not reflect the skills of experienced architects, but the academic skills of newly qualified and inexperienced professionals who have not yet found their way within the professional world.


Can I say that you're pushing an open door here and I am currently helping advise a colleague who will be taking the Technical Assessment Route so I know what he's going to have to face. In relation to the RIAI Members being given favoured treatment I think we should wait and see. The Registration Board isn't only about admission to the Register, its also about regulation of members and striking off members if required.

In relation to the free pass offered to existing Members, what else could the RIAI do? The standard for registration is the same standard their Members have already established, so its stands to reason they were eligible to be registered automatically. Graduate Architects who have not applied for their Part III's will have several routes to Registration, and all involve the submission of 4 no. case studies, a detailed self-assessment matrix [6,000 words IIRC] and a reputedly gruelling interview covering all aspect of the profession - an oral examination, if you will.

For Graduate Architects looking at the Technical Assessment entrants, they might feel hard done by. Graduates of the schools have already done five years full time college education, whereas most technician qualifications require only three. The course for Technical Assessment is run over a year, thus bringing up the total study time to four years, not five, the bare minimum required by the criteria set down for full time education in architecture by DIR 2005/36/EC the current standard for recognition of professional qualifications.

As for the standards set, I'm not sure what you mean. Everybody practising architecture has to update themselves on legislation the services they offer: planning, building control, environmental,, waste management, energy conservation, conservation of buildings, you name it you have to have a handle on it of you;re doing it. Whatever about BER ratings and Conservation, every architect should know about the laws governing planning, building regulation, health and safety, contract administration and certification. This needs constant updating as new legislation is published. You don't need to rattle them off verbatim, but you need a good working knowledge of the current legislation and how it may apply.

Whether or not you run a large practice or are a sole trader, you need to know how to run a practice competently, because that is one of the things an architect is expected to be able to do. People without qualifications or the necessary depth of experience really do need to cop themselves on and get it together and register if they want to call themselves "architect". As for unqualified success who have shown they have what it takes to be architects by the quality of their built work, the Registration Board has the power to consider them also and if found adequate to the task, to admit them.

Its a complex thing that is being attempted, but there are significant benefit accruing and an opportunity to weed out the slackers in the ranks. Painful, disruptive, costly - yes, but its also essential I believe to the survival of our profession in the face of very low cost competition from the former eastern bloc countries and Spain.

FWIW

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Fri Feb 05, 2010 7:02 am

NK111 wrote:<snip interesting cost comparison>
Anyway, as you can see they're not protecting their members, just certain members. Why else has nothing REAL been done about tender pre-quals? you can't even design an office now without 200 years of experience and financial records!!!


I understand that the OPW at least are looking at dropping or scrapping the annual turnover limit for practise seeking to do public works to allow small offices to enter the lists.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Fri Feb 05, 2010 12:24 pm

onq wrote:Can I say that you're pushing an open door here and I am currently helping advise a colleague who will be taking the Technical Assessment Route so I know what he's going to have to face. In relation to the RIAI Members being given favoured treatment I think we should wait and see. The Registration Board isn't only about admission to the Register, its also about regulation of members and striking off members if required.

FWIW

ONQ.


Your are turning a blind eye on the institute from which you probably have membership. If you were an architect non member of the RIAI you would admit that they have already listed all their members on the registration list, but non of the others... They are already advertising the fact that non registered architects are commiting an offence, but only their members had the oppotunity to register at this stage... The R.I.A.I., appointed by the government to carry out registration of architects, has to this date, registered noone except its members...

If that is not anti-competitive... Then what is?
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Fri Feb 05, 2010 12:51 pm

onq wrote:
As for the standards set, I'm not sure what you mean. Everybody practising architecture has to update themselves on legislation the services they offer: planning, building control, environmental,, waste management, energy conservation, conservation of buildings, you name it you have to have a handle on it of you;re doing it. Whatever about BER ratings and Conservation, every architect should know about the laws governing planning, building regulation, health and safety, contract administration and certification. This needs constant updating as new legislation is published. You don't need to rattle them off verbatim, but you need a good working knowledge of the current legislation and how it may apply.


ONQ.


You must be kidding... I have worked with registered architects in the UK. France and the R.O.I... Many of them use technicians for compliance with the Building Regulations, because aged 50 or around, they are completely out of touch with the new regulations. They would not even be able to prepare drawings for a planning application because they are not familiar with the 2001 planning regulations. The fact is that these architects are running a business, they are directors, employers, their employees are doing the practical work, the directors are in contact with the clients... These guys are doing the first sketches only... And they put their name on the project...

The majority of MRIAI over 45 years of age would fail the A.R.A.E. register examination, because this examination is designed for the knowledge and the skills of an inexperienced newly qualified academic... It is common knowledge that the skills gained within a university are not well adapted to the the one requested on the ground...

The fact is that a newly qualified architect never seen any of his/her design being built... What is architecture? Designing building that will never be built? or designing building that are built...

The very academic and unfounded belief that a qualified and inexperienced architect has more aptitude than a self-trained and experienced architect is a joke... A self-trained architect should not be subject to an academic examination but he / she should be assessed on his / her work on which he / she gained skills and experience... For this reason the A.R.A.E. examination is inadequate...

The problem is that the RIAI is interested first by titles, graduation, degrees and academism... Knowledge and skills only come second... The RIAI and some other institutes within the construction industry are the roots of a technocracy which goal is to protect the interests of some of their members first, quality, value for money and satisfied clients come only second on their list...

The reality is that the government and developpers always been blamed for problems occuring on projects such as the Dublin tunnel, floods in newly built estates or the crash in the property market... However, if the planning institute, the architects institute, the engineers institues and others injected the adequate professional influence at the time, then most of these problems could have been anticipated... But the fact is that these institutes have not fullfilled their role, instead they were part of the problem by supporting higher fees, protecting their members instead of the public, contributing to the evolution of an unsustainable growth rather than using their influence positively....

onq... You have to be M.R.I.A.I. or ignorant to pretend not being aware of that...
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby spoilsport » Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:53 pm

hi all,

I have been reading all the posts in regard to the above subject matter, some of which is very informative and thought provoking, and some quite immature handbags. but nevertheless i would feel that the RIAI when all the hot air and bluff has been blown away, is not primarily looking to promote better design / architecture in this instance , but rather trying its upmost to promote one group of persons over the expense of others. I would agree better regulation needs to take place in regard whom can carry out architectural services, and im not interested in mooting points of view as to the lack of architects technical knowledge of regs, and detail, in lieu of better design conceptualisation , yada yada yada over engineers and technicians etc..

The RIAI is in my humble opinion not the right body to be involved in the registration process, and has clear and biased vested interests as a whole. The competition authority outlined these concerns early on in the process, and was ignored.

Competition Law - Abuse of Dominance
If a business has a dominant position in any market then it must not abuse that dominant position. Competition law places a special responsibility on anyone who has a dominant position in the market.(RIAI) However, it is not a breach of law merely to hold a dominant position, it is the abuse of the dominant position which is the breach of the law.(radio bias advertising registered over non registered – peddled under auspice of only being informative)

It is possible to have a dominant position in a relatively narrow market and many companies are surprised to find that they are dominant. If there is any doubt then legal advice ought to be obtained as to the compatibility of conduct with competition law.

Abuse of dominance consists in such activities as predatory pricing, abusive acquisitions by dominant businesses, unjustifiable refusals to supply, fidelity rebates, unjustified discounts, “exclusionary tactics or similar unfair conduct.”
It is not possible to obtain an exemption or a licence in respect of an abuse of dominance. Therefore all abuses of dominance are breaches of competition law.
The European Commission and the Irish courts will punish abuses of dominance more severely than anti-competitive arrangements. Abuses of dominance attract the highest fines. :confused:


Listening to recent radio advertising and such like, certainly gives the impression to joe public that all non registered architects are cowboys, shysters, and con men trying to rip off their clients. The fact stands that the fees for TA & ARAE are a total rip off, compared to similar activities in other countries, and cannot be justified in this current economic climate , which these fees could be construed as exclusionary tactics, also that the panels for both avenues have still not been finalised, over 2 months since the premature launch of the registration, there is still no mechanism for non registered architects to begin the process toward registration, and thus are in a limbo till this is implemented.

The registration process should have been set up similar scenario as in the case of ARB in the UK, and not the RIAI as the competent body. The UK are also considering dropping the registration process, because no advantage has been gained by the process of registration to architects as a whole, rather it has been a hindrance, to new qualified architectural graduates.

The Building Regs, Building Control Act, PI cover, and Irish and EU consumer protection Legislation, already exists to protect the public against both rogue and incompetent registered and non registered practices. This title protection will not stop the so called woodwork teachers and moonlighters drawing the bungalow bliss house , which will be welcomed by planners. Are we not chasing down the wrong avenues here, we should be pressurising local authorities to ensure compliance with vernacular designs as laid out in their guidelines and dev plans, and ensure building control officers carry out inspections as they do in the uk. Self certification of buildings is essentially the crux of the matter, when it comes to unethical and economic driven decisions made by architectural firms. The designing firm should not be the one issuing compliance certs as well. If building certification was taken over by the building control depts, as in the north and uk, then scope for unqualified certification would be taken away.

I agree in most part for certification of practices , but the registration of title will not alleviate the problem, without protecting function as well. If a firm is a registered business, carries PI cover, pays it taxes and VAT, and is 10 or more years in business, as outlined by the law society guidelines and carries out architectural services at whatever degree, then it should be entitled to be registered without this undue, expense and deliberate bias as shown by the RIAI. The BCA pt 3 has set the bar so high, especially when compared to pt 4 & 5 of the Act. I could guarantee that a large majority of RIAI members if forced to sit it to gain registration, would fail in high numbers. Lets call a a spade a spade, and shite – shite. An Irish ARB is the only fair and equitable way to move forward with this issue, and I do no believe the RIAI, could, or will be unbiased against in any shape or form in the process of registration

peace out:D
User avatar
spoilsport
Member
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:05 am

CK wrote:Your are turning a blind eye on the institute from which you probably have membership. If you were an architect non member of the RIAI you would admit that they have already listed all their members on the registration list, but non of the others... They are already advertising the fact that non registered architects are commiting an offence, but only their members had the oppotunity to register at this stage... The R.I.A.I., appointed by the government to carry out registration of architects, has to this date, registered noone except its members...

If that is not anti-competitive... Then what is?


You seem like an active sort CK, always jumping at conclusions :)

You logic, however, leaves something to be desired. Re-read my posts and you won't find somebody putting the RIAI on a pedestal. My RL record doesn't reflect that either, and you might be surprised to know that there are differences of opinion between Members too. I'm just not knocking the RIAI while they are attempting something very ambitious. The RIAI have set out to do a job. There is a chance they will succeed, plus they have the backing of the Minister. I'm saying let's see where this goes. If they set reasonable standards, don't operate a policy of exclusion or adopt unrealistically high standards for Registration, then the profession as a whole will benefit.

Your assertion that only MRIAIs had the opportunity to register is incorrect. Only MRIAIs were entitled to automatic Registration because they have already achieved the Part III's Professional Practice standard which the Registration Board are now setting for everyone else. Anyone eligible to be considered under one of the several Options [A through to AFAICR] can apply to become Registered since November 2009 as I stated above. Nothing is preventing anyone from Registering. There are many different routes to cater for all situations. A lot of work seems to have gone into this to accommodate non Members and I will be surprised if this is shown to be just a cover for a policy of exclusion.

As regards what you have assumed as the RIAI's role, what you're suggesting is a logical impossibility. The reason the RIAI have registered only its own Members is simple - they have no right to Register anyone else! How did you miss that - it stands to reason doesn't it? Non-Members have to send in their own application to Register.

Can I respectfully suggest you stop making assumptions about the RIAI and me, because you lessen your own credibility when they are shown to be unfounded. Prior to the coming into operation of certain sections of the 2007 Building Control Act in May 2008 I actually was an "architect non member of the RIAI" to use your definition, entitled to provide architectural services and to practice quite legally as an architect throughout Europe because of DIR 85/384/EEC, recently superseded in October 2007 by DIR 2005/33/EC. The only change to my situation is the current restriction on calling myself an architect. For the record I am not a Member of the RIAI or Registered yet. I am a Graduate Architect currently preparing to apply for Registration and for Membership. Its not easy finding decades-old files in other people's offices. :(

FWIW

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby spoil_sport » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:40 am

spoilsport? Who the hell is this cheap imposter? I'm not a happy spoil_sport
spoil_sport
Member
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Sat Feb 06, 2010 1:03 am

CK wrote:You must be kidding... I have worked with registered architects in the UK. France and the R.O.I... Many of them use technicians for compliance with the Building Regulations, because aged 50 or around, they are completely out of touch with the new regulations. They would not even be able to prepare drawings for a planning application because they are not familiar with the 2001 planning regulations. The fact is that these architects are running a business, they are directors, employers, their employees are doing the practical work, the directors are in contact with the clients... These guys are doing the first sketches only... And they put their name on the project...

So the fact that I'm 48, run a sole tradership, and perform all my own work on planning applications, fire cert applications, tender documents, construction details, survey drawings, feasibility studies, master plans, compliance inspections, etc. and have taught myself most of what I know about computers, CAD, word-processing, website creation, company formation, employment law, Health and Safety legislation and the Companies Act makes me something of a sport does it? I don't think so. Many architects are all rounders. Many are sole traders. We have to sink or swim.
The majority of MRIAI over 45 years of age would fail the A.R.A.E. register examination, because this examination is designed for the knowledge and the skills of an inexperienced newly qualified academic... It is common knowledge that the skills gained within a university are not well adapted to the the one requested on the ground...

Graduates of a five-year course don't approach Registration through that route AFAIK. That's the technical Assessment Route for persons without Part II. You are quite wrong about the A.R.A.E. route from my reading of it. It seems quite an arduous process for someone not used to being challenged in design. My years in Bolton Street were demanding of me and I have five in which to develop my design ability. The A.R.A.E. route allows one year for such assessments, but its structured to allow repeats IIRC.
The fact is that a newly qualified architect never seen any of his/her design being built... What is architecture? Designing building that will never be built? or designing building that are built...

That's simplistic and trite - and wrong.
My first design work built was interior fit out work - the then new An Post public counters 3rd year working for an MRIAI. My next work was the revamp of Crowes in Ballsbridge, interiors and elevation. 4th year summer working for an MRIAI and with a fellow student. My next work was Arran Court, Arran Quay, 5th year during thesis year working for an MRIAI. I had several designs built before I qualified. Many competent architectural student get that chance. There's even a nasty switchback bend going into Riyadh in Saudi Arabia with my name on it. Working for an engineering firm in London after finishing 2nd year.
The very academic and unfounded belief that a qualified and inexperienced architect has more aptitude than a self-trained and experienced architect is a joke... A self-trained architect should not be subject to an academic examination but he / she should be assessed on his / her work on which he / she gained skills and experience... For this reason the A.R.A.E. examination is inadequate...

I cannot comment in detail on the A.R.A.E. route because its not my route, but I know from advising a colleague that he has to put forward completed work as well as sit the exam and be assessed on design work. It most definitely isn't geared towards newly qualified architects. OTC its designed to accommodate, assess and develop people who aren't graduates of a full time design course but who have provided professional architectural services for a considerable period.
The problem is that the RIAI is interested first by titles, graduation, degrees and academism... Knowledge and skills only come second... The RIAI and some other institutes within the construction industry are the roots of a technocracy which goal is to protect the interests of some of their members first, quality, value for money and satisfied clients come only second on their list...

What!? As soon as I saw the word "technocracy" I dozed off - sorry. Unfounded opinionated waffle affects me like that...
(irrelevance snipped)
onq... You have to be M.R.I.A.I. or ignorant to pretend not being aware of that...


My other reply to your previous post showing how you have made two totally wrong assumptions should have embarrassed you enough so that I don't need to comment on this, CK... :D

FWIW

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:06 pm

onq wrote:So the fact that I'm 48, run a sole tradership, and perform all my own work on planning applications, fire cert applications, tender documents, construction details, survey drawings, feasibility studies, master plans, compliance inspections, etc. and have taught myself most of what I know about computers, CAD, word-processing, website creation, company formation, employment law, Health and Safety legislation and the Companies Act makes me something of a sport does it? I don't think so. Many architects are all rounders. Many are sole traders. We have to sink or swim.


ONQ.


You then have specialized with small projects, otherwise you could not do all that by yourself... However, if you had to pass the ARAE exam, then they would also ask you to demonstrate skill for large projects as well...
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:10 pm

onq wrote:
Graduates of a five-year course don't approach Registration through that route AFAIK. That's the technical Assessment Route for persons without Part II. You are quite wrong about the A.R.A.E. route from my reading of it. It seems quite an arduous process for someone not used to being challenged in design. My years in Bolton Street were demanding of me and I have five in which to develop my design ability. The A.R.A.E. route allows one year for such assessments, but its structured to allow repeats IIRC.


ONQ.


Could you please give attention... I never said that the ARAE route was an easy one... I said that: "Part 3 of the BCA 2007, in its application for registration by the R.I.A.I., is not equitable for architects with more than 7 years of experience working in the state and who are requested to pass a prescribed register examination. This examination as set up by the R.I.A.I. and the A.R.A.E (appointed by the R.I.A.I. to prepare the register examination) requests the knowledge and skills of a newly qualified architect, it is not appropriate for experienced architects. Many experienced MRIAI architects would fail the exam, because it does not suit experienced professionals who specialized in a field of architecture. Architects, as many other professionals are specializing within small, medium or large practices, delivering services for small, medium or large projects. The specialization is also related to the type of projects, such as residential, commercial, industrial and so on. It can also be related to the practice of architecture itself, planning, design, project management, technology, theory, etc… The A.R.A.E. examination is focusing on every aspects of architecture in general, and this approach does not reflect the skills of experienced architects, but the academic skills of newly qualified and inexperienced professionals who have not yet found their way within the professional world."
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:17 pm

onq wrote:That's simplistic and trite - and wrong.
My first design work built was interior fit out work - the then new An Post public counters 3rd year working for an MRIAI. My next work was the revamp of Crowes in Ballsbridge, interiors and elevation. 4th year summer working for an MRIAI and with a fellow student. My next work was Arran Court, Arran Quay, 5th year during thesis year working for an MRIAI. I had several designs built before I qualified. Many competent architectural student get that chance. There's even a nasty switchback bend going into Riyadh in Saudi Arabia with my name on it. Working for an engineering firm in London after finishing 2nd year.
ONQ.


Why is it that you take eveything personaly? I was not talking about you when I said : "The fact is that a newly qualified architect never seen any of his/her design being built... What is architecture? Designing building that will never be built? or designing building that are built..." And the reality is that your built design were part of your work outside the university... Not part of your University studies... You are just confirming what I stated...
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:29 pm

onq wrote:
I cannot comment in detail on the A.R.A.E. route because its not my route, but I know from advising a colleague that he has to put forward completed work as well as sit the exam and be assessed on design work. It most definitely isn't geared towards newly qualified architects. OTC its designed to accommodate, assess and develop people who aren't graduates of a full time design course but who have provided professional architectural services for a considerable period.


ONQ.


Well I have looked toward this route... The fact is that they are asking knowledge and skills for any type of projects (Industrial, commercial, Public, Private), any size (Large, small, medium), all skills (design, conracts, Health & Safety, Project Management,...)

You know like me that only academic have this type of knowledge... They know superficialy everytihng but they have an approfondite experience of nothing... THe fact is that an experience architect is specialised. I have personaly never worked on public sector projects in the ROI, but I have done so in the UK...

A part of the ARAE assessment will be very academic, it will include an exam with questions to be answered by heart on subjects such as health and safety, contracts, and so on...

When I deal with a new type of project... I make some research before meeting the client and starting the design, because it is what an architect should do... Now part of the ARAE exam will ask me to answer by heart on any type of contracts available in the ROI... They will ask me to answer by heart on any planning or technical issue... These are not the necessary skills for an architect... These are the skills of an academic...
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:37 pm

onq wrote:
What!? As soon as I saw the word "technocracy" I dozed off - sorry. Unfounded opinionated waffle affects me like that...


ONQ.


You are entitled to your opinion... But how do you call this type of protectionism, if not "Technocracy"?

What do you have to say about RIAI misleading advertising and other anti-competitive actions...
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:42 pm

onq wrote:My other reply to your previous post showing how you have made two totally wrong assumptions should have embarrassed you enough so that I don't need to comment on this, CK... :D


ONQ.


You may not be RIAI, but you wish you were...

You may not be ignorant, but you choose to ignore important matters with tregard to the subject...

Then I was not that wrong after all...
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:43 pm

CK wrote:You then have specialized with small projects, otherwise you could not do all that by yourself... However, if you had to pass the ARAE exam, then they would also ask you to demonstrate skill for large projects as well...


"Small Projects"? Most people in a hole stop digging CK, but you keep showering yourself with dirt. You couldn't be more wrong.

I worked in a large office as a one-man team, occasionally partnering with up to three people for the larger projects. That's the benefit of being a competent all-rounder. You don't need endless workstations of draughtspeople backing you up. You don't need fleets of secretarial staff and you only need to confer with engineers and technicians on points of principle, as opposed to relying on them to "do your drawings".

I suppose 40,000 sqft of an office building already mentioned is a small project in a global sense nowadays, but in Ireland in 1990 it wasn't. Nor was Enterprise Zoning development in West Dublin for 1,000,000 sq ft for which the office I worked for won a Plan Expo/RIAI Award in 2000 for best building - for part of it. And the house we completed in South County Dublin in 2003 was circa 15,500 sq ft and remains one of the largest private dwellings in Dublin.

You don't pick up professional abilities and competence off the street y'know, or "teaching yourself" as you seem to think. The five year course merely grounds you in law and design and technical ability and history of the profession. You learn how to provide a professional service to your client from the best, try to improve on what they teach you and take long hours to upskill and practice your abilities with computers, draughting and word processing. That doesn't mean I don't have my weak points but the balance of my abilities allows me to operate as a competent member of the profession, with specialities in obtaining difficult permissions and carrying out remedial works.

For the record, I won't be sitting the AREA exam, a process on which you seem to be so fixated, for some reason, because Option "C" will be the appropriate route for me: I'm over 35, a graduate from a five year full time course, with more than ten years practising as an architect at all levels and more than seven years working under the guidance of Members of the RIAI. I am by no means cocky I can pass that test first time, because you can always be thrown by presenting in an unfamiliar environment or be caught by a question about a wrinkle in the law you don't know yet.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:56 pm

onq wrote:You seem like an active sort CK, always jumping at conclusions :)


You seem like an active sort CK, always jumping at conclusions

You logic, however, leaves something to be desired.[...]Your assertion that only MRIAIs had the opportunity to register is incorrect.


ONQ.


I am not an activist onq, or not in your definition of the term... I am not involved with any party or any political cause... I am just trying to defend my interests which are shared with others with regard to registration... Obviously we have different interests on this matter...

The position that you defend is anti-competitive and it is also socialy and academicaly selective...

You criticise my logic with unfounded arguments... You pretend that some non MRIAI have had the opportunity to Register... Can you tell me who else had the opportunity to be registered to this date since registration started in November 2009?

The answer is no one... Then why do you question my logic on this ground?
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:59 pm

onq wrote:"Small Projects"? Most people in a hole stop digging CK, but you keep showering yourself with dirt. You couldn't be more wrong.

I worked in a large office as a one-man team, occasionally partnering with up to three people for the larger projects. That's the benefit of being a competent all-rounder. You don't need endless workstations of draughtspeople backing you up. You don't need fleets of secretarial staff and you only need to confer with engineers and technicians on points of principle, as opposed to relying on them to "do your drawings".

I suppose 40,000 sqft of an office building already mentioned is a small project in a global sense nowadays, but in Ireland in 1990 it wasn't. Nor was Enterprise Zoning development in West Dublin for 1,000,000 sq ft for which the office I worked for won a Plan Expo/RIAI Award in 2000 for best building - for part of it. And the house we completed in South County Dublin in 2003 was circa 15,500 sq ft and remains one of the largest private dwellings in Dublin.

You don't pick up professional abilities and competence off the street y'know, or "teaching yourself" as you seem to think. The five year course merely grounds you in law and design and technical ability and history of the profession. You learn how to provide a professional service to your client from the best, try to improve on what they teach you and take long hours to upskill and practice your abilities with computers, draughting and word processing. That doesn't mean I don't have my weak points but the balance of my abilities allows me to operate as a competent member of the profession, with specialities in obtaining difficult permissions and carrying out remedial works.

For the record, I won't be sitting the AREA exam, a process on which you seem to be so fixated, for some reason, because Option "C" will be the appropriate route for me: I'm over 35, a graduate from a five year full time course, with more than ten years practising as an architect at all levels and more than seven years working under the guidance of Members of the RIAI. I am by no means cocky I can pass that test first time, because you can always be thrown by presenting in an unfamiliar environment or be caught by a question about a wrinkle in the law you don't know yet.

ONQ.


I will not go this way ONQ... You can pretend whatever... Stop your ego... I could talk about myself too... I am qualified too you know... But this thread is not about you or me... you are loosing the point...

I have to go for today... If you wish to continue talking about the thread subject, I will continue the conversation on Monday... I f you prefer talking about yourself, then find someone else to talk to...

Have a good weekend...
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Sat Feb 06, 2010 1:15 pm

CK wrote:Well I have looked toward this route... The fact is that they are asking knowledge and skills for any type of projects (Industrial, commercial, Public, Private), any size (Large, small, medium), all skills (design, conracts, Health & Safety, Project Management,...)

I understand they expect you to show competence in how you have dealt with the projects you have carried out, the way you have approached it, your correspondence, the finished product, any follow up, etc. I don't believe - although I may stand corrected on this - that they can require you to actually have done all the range of project work you list above. Certainly this isn't expected of 2 year graduates - it is sufficient they have been exposed to these projects and seen others work on them and monitored the process. This is stated in the RIAI documentation on what the "normal" Part III applicant is required to present as part of their own project experience. It may be difficult for the RIAI to adopt a different stance when dealing with AREA applicants in this facet of the assessment, because Ireland is a small country with only a limited number of larger projects available in any one year for graduates to be exposed to.
You know like me that only academic have this type of knowledge... They know superficialy everytihng but they have an approfondite experience of nothing... THe fact is that an experience architect is specialised. I have personaly never worked on public sector projects in the ROI, but I have done so in the UK...

I don't think that not doing any Public Sector work will define your competence. I think you will be expected to have a working knowledge of the GCCC contracts, the public procurement process, the pre-qualification process for designers and contractors, and so on. Academic learning as you might say, but the point of academic learning is to show you are competent in that field of knowledge.
A part of the ARAE assessment will be very academic, it will include an exam with questions to be answered by heart on subjects such as health and safety, contracts, and so on...

I have no comfort to offer here. Normally I have the luxury of having the references to hand when I approach a project and like you I perform my checks in the relevant fields of legislation and current practice at inception. I too expect a gruelling examination on ALL relevant legislation and intend to include this in my self-assessment matrix. If you're not familiar with this process, you should download all the available literature and explanatory documentation from the RIAI website - its free. Start reading, because it will explain in some detail the standards required for Graduates, and also read all the literature required for the ARAE assessment, It IS a mountain of work, and it certainly "gets in" on you, but I find one way to deal with the inevitable insecurity that comes with preparing for any formal exam submission or assessment is to set yourself higher standards [or what you THINK are higher standards] and work to those. Assuming you don't burn yourself out or go bankrupt because of the amount of time you're diverting from your business you may surprise yourself by developing a certain confidence in your new-found academic abilities.
When I deal with a new type of project... I make some research before meeting the client and starting the design, because it is what an architect should do... Now part of the ARAE exam will ask me to answer by heart on any type of contracts available in the ROI... They will ask me to answer by heart on any planning or technical issue... These are not the necessary skills for an architect... These are the skills of an academic...

Sorry, CK, on this we disagree. As a bare minimum you need a working knowledge of the Law as it applies to Architects and the RIAI contracts. You should download the RIAI reading list for the Part III Exam and make a start on that.

Two books that are essential are "Building and the Law" and "The RIAI Contracts" both by David Keane recently deceased, both out of print. You should be able to read these in any third level library offering an architectural qualification. i recall reading that poster to archiseek offered to e-mail these to those studying for the RIAI exam. However you may read them, they are both superseded by recent development in law. you might augment these by studying current works on contract, of which much may be irrelevant but building contract disputes are useful, even in other jurisdictions. I have found "150 Contractual Problems and their Solutions" very useful in grounding me in the broad principles in this branch of law.

You need a working knowledge of the Building Control Act and attendant regulations, the Health Safety and Welfare at Work Act and attendant regulations and the Planning and Development Act and attendant regulations - all these are available for free from either the Irish Statute Book Online or the Department of the Environment Website http://www.environ.ie/en/. But don't limit yourself just to reading these works because other issues such as competence in land law, declarations of identity, marking up planning and lease maps. and building in urban environments will require a more detailed knowledge of worked examples including the requirements for E.I.S. and how a local authority works to make development plans. again, guidelines no all this is free to download.

Why am I taking this time with a guy who's made so many false assumptions about me and had ring-fenced his mind into a no-win situation? Because I don't want to see ANY talent lost to the profession, whatever academic level they have achieved, whatever professional experience they have found. Including you :)

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Sat Feb 06, 2010 1:33 pm

CK wrote:You may not be RIAI, but you wish you were...

You may not be ignorant, but you choose to ignore important matters with tregard to the subject...

Then I was not that wrong after all...


There is no doubt here CK. - I am NOT an MRIAI.
I have stated that as fact, there is no "may" about it.

I am not ignorant of the process leading up to the Building Control Act 2007 - I have a detailed knowledge of it and the submission to government about it from interested parties.
I am certainly not ignorant of the implications of all of this for me and my practice.
And I am not ignorant of the mountain I have to climb merely to gather documentation in support of my claims of competence, much of which is over twelve years old and may be shredded.

None of that will stop me making my application for Registration.

As for "wishing" I was an MRIAI, that's a very loaded statement. I wish to be Registered. I wish for my competence and professional abilities to be recognised by the body competent to do this under Irish law. This happens to be the RIAI. To become Registered I must prove my level of competence to the standard of RIAI Part III. If I do this, this entitles me to become a Member. I think this will be a wise course of action.

Yes, I could "just" become a registered architect and not a Member of the RIAI. I could save myself €600-odd Euro a year and work alone for the rest of my career. But the professional environment we work in is changing. As one small example, some new laws require legal interpretation to establish how best to comply with their requirements - professionally, but economically. I have some ability in this area but I would prefer Counsels' Opinion. This will cost a lot of money going forward, particularly with European Directives and Irish Building Standards moving to Carbon Neutral of all building by 2018 and our own Green Minister looking to achieve this for all new dwellings by 2013.

The RIAI today are not the same organization as twenty years ago. They have grown and matured into a body of international stature providing useful - if very costly :( - lectures and publications to support their Member's CPD and a well thought out means of Continuous Professional Development assessment online. Their BER Course and Health and Safety assessment information alone is worth the price of admission.

I want to avail of the facilities and backup and heads-up notifications of changes in the profession that this body can give me. Because with more of my time being devoted to marketing in the current crisis, my job as a professional is to remain competent, and I'll rise to whatever standards I must to offer a competent service to my clients. That's the object of the exercise - get with the programme or fall behind. It'll be harder to survive as well as keep current if I do it alone. Plus there may be opportunities to contribute to, and best support, how the profession develops here.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:05 pm

CK wrote:I will not go this way ONQ... You can pretend whatever... Stop your ego... I could talk about myself too... I am qualified too you know... But this thread is not about you or me... you are loosing the point...

I have to go for today... If you wish to continue talking about the thread subject, I will continue the conversation on Monday... I f you prefer talking about yourself, then find someone else to talk to...

Have a good weekend...


CK,

You were the one who assumed I had only worked on small jobs and hereby developed my abilities. I clarified my position. You have a view of the profession based partly on your own experience. I have tried to broaden the discussion by outlining my experience.

This discussion is on topic for this thread since it encapsulates the two opposing viewpoints of two people who went down different professional routes faced with Registration. I haven't taken the time to write this for your benefit alone. I hope it can help others facing Registration

As for your being qualified, I haven't raised this issue in discussion, you just did. If you look back on our conversation my references to my qualification and my work arose partly as rebuttals and corrections to assumptions you made.

For the record, I consider trading on a qualification in discussion to be rude with fellow professionals and intimidatory with clients. The few professionals I've met who have done this didn't impress me. I've never traded on my being qualified in my career except when naming myself as an Architect on legal documents like Declarations of Identity, Opinions of Compliance and the like. People soon form an opinion of your competence or otherwise, particularly members of the legal profession.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:26 pm

CK wrote:I am not an activist onq, or not in your definition of the term... I am not involved with any party or any political cause... I am just trying to defend my interests which are shared with others with regard to registration... Obviously we have different interests on this matter...

You seem to be wound a little tight CK - referring to "jumping at conclusions" as exercise was a J-O-K-E. Geddit?
The position that you defend is anti-competitive and it is also socialy and academicaly selective...

Don't assume because I'm not singing harmonies with you that I am defending any position, much less that of the RIAI. They are well able to defend their own position. I am trying to get you to face reality, which is turning out to be a bigger problem than getting Registered at this point. The fact is that he Building Control Act 2007 is LAW! The time for talking and complaining is over. Either apply to be Registered, succed in thise and continue to use the title architect. Or if you are unsuccessful you could Appeal the result. If this also fails you could take the matter into Court and challenge the law.

If you're not Registered, haven't applied to be Registered and you don't stop calling yourself an architect you may be subject to legal action. We are in a transition period at the moment where the Registration Board are likely to tread lightly until they find their feet, but this won't last forever.
You criticise my logic with unfounded arguments... You pretend that some non MRIAI have had the opportunity to Register... Can you tell me who else had the opportunity to be registered to this date since registration started in November 2009?

The answer is no one... Then why do you question my logic on this ground?


Are you trying to make the point that you cannot automatically register now?

We have already traversed this ground. Only Members of the RIAI can do that because only they have reached the standard required, namely the RIAI Part III Professional Practice standard. Everyone else will probably have to work hard to reach this standard without the support of a third level institution or MRIAI Mentor giving them guidance and assistance. I know I have worked hard on revision, trying to bring all that I know to a stage where I can recall it on demand - a process that isn't completed yet.

If that isn't your point then I have this to say to you.

Since November 2009 everyone who was eligible to apply to be Registered could have applied. Before that they could not have applied because the Registration Board was not sitting, having only had its chairperson appointed in June 2009.

I have the opportunity to apply to be registered now, as does every graduate architect. I could probably sit the oral now with a 50% chance of passing it, but that's only part of the application assessment process. I haven't yet done so because of the difficulty so far in retrieving supporting documentation for my case studies. This documentation has to be assessed, compiled, referred back to matters of compliance covered in the self-assessment matrix copied, bound and presented. No small task and I can only start this when I see what documentation is available and its held on file by another office. Even if I still worked with them, this would be a slow process, because the extant files are more than 12 years old and archived - the rest are probably shredded. We'll see.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Sat Feb 06, 2010 5:16 pm

onq wrote:We have already traversed this ground. Only Members of the RIAI can do that because only they have reached the standard required, namely the RIAI Part III Professional Practice standard. Everyone else will probably have to work hard to reach this standard without the support of a third level institution or MRIAI Mentor giving them guidance and assistance. I know I have worked hard on revision, trying to bring all that I know to a stage where I can recall it on demand - a process that isn't completed yet.

If that isn't your point then I have this to say to you.

Since November 2009 everyone who was eligible to apply to be Registered could have applied. Before that they could not have applied because the Registration Board was not sitting, having only had its chairperson appointed in June 2009.


ONQ.


This is not True onq... for exemple the application form for the ARAE exam route was not available before January 2010...

Also, we were talking about being registered not applying for registration... Noone from the technical assessment nor the ARAE exam had a chance to be registerd yet, because the procedure is not ready...

Why was the register list created when the registration body was not in a position to register every one... The equitable procedure would have been to assess first everyone elligible and then to create the register... Can you realise the damage that they are doing to practices like mine and 500 other practices in a similar situation in the R.O.I?

In November 2008, the RIAI tryed to prevent non MRIAI to be listed in the Golden Pages, when in fact the registration procedure was far to be ready...

There were other exemples of anti-competitive actions from the RIAI carried out in discrimination of non MRIAI... Why do you refuse to admit the facts?
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland