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

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

Postby CK » Sat Feb 06, 2010 5:20 pm

Onq,

I have practiced during 6 years in the UK before starting my own practice in Dublin back in 2001. I have also worked during 2 years in France before that and I obtained a Master in Arts & Architecture which is not listed in the EU DIrective for the recognition of proffessional qualification. My degree in valable for registration as per section 16 of the BCA, but I can not obtain an attestation of competance from the French Registration Body because I would need to register with them first. I can not register with the French Registration Body because I would need to pass a register exam and as I am not practicing in France, not even resident in France, I cannot pass it...

The matter of the fact is that like many others, my only option is the ARAE exam... However, like many others, I cannot afford €11,500 for the exam plus the €1,800 for the lectures… But even if I could, can you explain the point for me or others learning by heart some contracts that we will never use? In what way will that improve our services…

When working for one dwelling I am proposing to my clients the contract from the Law society of Ireland or the RIAI (white contract)… MRIAI do not even give this type of choice to their clients… I know these 2 contracts because they are the ones that I use for my projects. I have also drafted with my solicitor a contract for domestic extension and another one for small commercial projects…

Why should I learn about contract for public works if I do not intend to carry out public design? I understand that it is important for an academic who has not yet found his way to know any type of contracts because the person needs to keep all doors open…

But please explain why it is necessary for me or other architects who have already specialised otherwise to learn about public contracts when we do not intend using them?

Same scenario with health and Safety… I am keeping updated with the latest Health & Safety procedures related to the type of projects that I am involved with… But the ARAE exam will question me on health & safety with relation to any type of projects… Why shall I be aware of procedure related to high rise buildings if I do not work on these types of buildings and do not intend to do so? Once again, I understand that it is important for an academic who has not yet found his way within the profession to know a beat of everything about health & Safety because the person needs to keep all doors open… But not an experienced architect who has already made his choices…

The reality is that on large projects staff are specialised… A specialised team, generally not architects, will be appointed to deal with Health & Safety. Within large company a member of the staff is specialised with contracts, but not all the architects within the practice have this knowledge…

The ARAE Exam asks me to come back where I was 16 years ago when I was interested in architecture, but not yet specialised in one field… They are not willing to judge my skills on the work that I am producing…

In these difficult economical times during which I am struggling to make a living because sole traders do not have any help such as unemployment allowance or social welfare allowance. The RIAI is trying to prevent me practicing as an architect, it is also asking me to pay a total of €13,300 to follow lectures and pass an exam. And most of all, when I am struggling to feed my family, the RIAI would like me to disconnect from the preoccupations of my practice and learn about contracts, health and safety and other issues that do not concern the type of work that I produce… Issues that will not benefit my practice or my clients…


I cannot afford to go back to school learning matters that will not help my practice… My turn over is far to low to compete on public work… Why should I have to bother about issues related to public work? Why can’t I continue practicing as an architect as I have done before… My clients are satisfied… I never designed estates that were flooded a few month after completion… None of the roof of my buildings been blown away by the wind… The large majority of my projects are delivered on time, within budget… I found my way, and all I want is continue forward…

If you do not admit that registration involves a selection that is not related to my skills as an architect, but related to my financial situation, then you are obviously biased on this subject… Even if I could afford the fees for the exam, the fact is that I have no more staff to help me in the office, and that I need to focus on my practice and not on an exam which will take me away from it…
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 11:52 pm

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

I did say I wasn't that familiar with the ARAE route. My advice to my colleague was to advise him on what's needed, in terms of documentation, just as I have tried to do here. I accept I might have in error on the earliest date ARAE candidates could apply - I just assumed that once the Registration Board sat, anyone could apply to Register including AREA candidates, thus kicking the ball off on their course of studies. If you say that's not the case, fine, I accept that, but there's nothing stopping ARAE candidates applying now is there? Except for the numbers they are accepting for the course each year, which I believe are somewhat limited...
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...

Well, no, I thought we were talking about applying for Registration. I made that clear in the post abvove. That's where the confusion has arisen.
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?

I think your first sentence is poorly worded. Did you mean to ask:

"Why was the Register created when the A.R.A.E. application process cannot process everyone?"

If that is what you meant I have no answer for you. As I posted above, I am not here to defend the RIAI, the Registration Board or teh Minister, or to justify the way they are doing things. I was not privy to the discussions with the Government setting up this process.I heard recently they were looking for competent persons to become assessors. I cannot confirm this, not being an MRIAI.
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...

This is a reference to teh notice in the Golden Pages radvising that only registered archtiects could advertise there as archtiects? Yes, I read it, but don't give the RIAI credit for this - their reach isn't that long. I expect the Golden Pages were just covering themselves legally in case someone paid for an advert in the Archtitect's Section who wasn't registered. Nothing more sinister than that.
There were other exemples of anti-competitive actions from the RIAI carried out in discrimination of non MRIAI...

Well if you know of any, post them - add to the discussion here. Don't keep them to yourself.

But the Golden Pages example above doesn't wash - the Golden Pages aren't controlled by the RIAI or the Registration Board - they were just being seen to be compliant with the provisions of the BUilding Control Act 2007.
Why do you refuse to admit the facts?

I have no problem agreeing with someone posting facts. I have already admitted to the correction you pointed out above and I think we are on the same page now about Registration as opposed to Applying for Registration.

However for matters to fall out as you suggest, the test for Registration cannot be the Part III MRIAI standard, but something less. Is there any other standard that all would agree on. Would an MRIAI agree to sharing status with someone who hadn't a good workign knowledge of planning, building control or health and safety legislation? I doubt it.

As for the whole Registratino process being anti-competitive, I don't think its anti-competitive to set a high standard. I think I know what you mean though and I have to say I'm not sure I would have gone about this the same way myself if I were in the Minister's position and the only intention was to protect the general public from rogue archtiects.

You cannot insure good service merely by protecting a title. You have to inspect all complaints and take action where the people concerned are clearly incompetent. An Architectural Ombudsman with a staff of twenty would have been able to do the job, together with more pro-active Building Control Officers, and a uniform standard of inspections. The inspection rates across the country are all over the place.

But I think that isn't the only intention here. Read the vision document put out by the Minister's office regarding the role of architecture in Ireland. They are looking for standards of excellence in design to be implemented, not merely for compliance with regulations and laws. This takes it out of the realm of people who can provide a competent service and into the realm of pure design. I think this is where its all going. I could be wrong.

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 » Sun Feb 07, 2010 12:23 am

CK wrote:Onq,
I have practiced during 6 years in the UK before starting my own practice in Dublin back in 2001. I have also worked during 2 years in France before that and I obtained a Master in Arts & Architecture which is not listed in the EU DIrective for the recognition of proffessional qualification. My degree in valable for registration as per section 16 of the BCA, but I can not obtain an attestation of competance from the French Registration Body because I would need to register with them first. I can not register with the French Registration Body because I would need to pass a register exam and as I am not practicing in France, not even resident in France, I cannot pass it... (snip)


Do I understand you correctly? You obtained a Masters Degree in Arts and Architecture?

My understanding of qualifications is that you don't just ""get a Masters. First you have to obtain a Bachelor of Arts or a Bachelor of Science or a Diploma of Degree standard. Then you proceed to study for your Masters. Was that not the case with you?

What primary course did you do and what duration was it? If it was a full time five year course followed by a two year full time Masters degree, you may be eligible for Registration through a route different to ARAE. I'm not well versed in this Masters application route any more than the ARAE process, but I seem to remember reading something about this option. I don't want to give you false hope of their being an easier or less costly route available to you, but I think you should check into this further.

My recollection is that Degrees at the level of Masters and above are recognised in DIR 2005/36/EC and I thought Masters level degrees were accepted by the Registration body as evidence of competence at Part III level. I think you need to review the entrance requirements again and perhaps approach the RIAI and ask for a definitive on your position. Even if you're not automatically eligible you may only need to do the presentation and the interview and you can ask for a direction from the RIAI on this. As I say I'm not a Member so this isn't definitive advice and things may have changed since I last read about this issue - but I think you should check this out anyway.

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 » Sun Feb 07, 2010 4:12 pm

onq wrote:But the Golden Pages example above doesn't wash - the Golden Pages aren't controlled by the RIAI or the Registration Board - they were just being seen to be compliant with the provisions of the BUilding Control Act 2007.
ONQ.


I know... But however the RIAI tryed to prevent non members to be listed in the Golden Pages... THe RIAI were trying to implement this request, but follwing protests from non members, it was agreed that the registration procedure not being fully in place, the protection of the title could not yet be implemented...

The RIAI is now waiting for the technical assessment to be completed before renewing their request. I have wrote to the Golden Pages to explain that:

"The new law related to architects registration (Building Control Act 2007) was drafted to protect consumer’s interests, but we believe that such dissociation would not protect the public, in the contrary. The reality is that, the large majority of consumers are searching for value first. Only a small percentage of the public is interested with the services of registered architects.

If the Golden Pages dissociates registered architects from other professionals proposing identical services, we think that the public will be misled. In fact many consumers are not aware that non-registered architects such as technicians, engineers, self-trained architects and other professionals can deliver quality architectural services. It is the wrongly founded belief of many, that only architects can deliver architectural services.

If the dissociation between “Architectural Services” and “Architects” is created within the Golden Pages, all registered architects will be listed first. We consider this situation as anti-competitive. Golden Pages users will not be fully aware of a listing called: “Architectural Services” and will not be aware that practices in this listing could act as their architect and deliver the exact same service.

We believe that one section grouping registered and non-registered architects should be created under the title: “Architects and Architectural Services”. This would prevent the consumers to be misled about the service that they are looking for, and it would create fair competition between registered and non-registered architects."

I am waiting for their answer...
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 » Sun Feb 07, 2010 4:13 pm

onq wrote:You cannot insure good service merely by protecting a title. You have to inspect all complaints and take action where the people concerned are clearly incompetent. An Architectural Ombudsman with a staff of twenty would have been able to do the job, together with more pro-active Building Control Officers, and a uniform standard of inspections. The inspection rates across the country are all over the place.


ONQ.


At least we agree on something...
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 » Sun Feb 07, 2010 4:30 pm

onq wrote:Do I understand you correctly? You obtained a Masters Degree in Arts and Architecture?

My understanding of qualifications is that you don't just ""get a Masters. First you have to obtain a Bachelor of Arts or a Bachelor of Science or a Diploma of Degree standard. Then you proceed to study for your Masters. Was that not the case with you?

What primary course did you do and what duration was it? If it was a full time five year course followed by a two year full time Masters degree, you may be eligible for Registration through a route different to ARAE. I'm not well versed in this Masters application route any more than the ARAE process, but I seem to remember reading something about this option. I don't want to give you false hope of their being an easier or less costly route available to you, but I think you should check into this further.

My recollection is that Degrees at the level of Masters and above are recognised in DIR 2005/36/EC and I thought Masters level degrees were accepted by the Registration body as evidence of competence at Part III level. I think you need to review the entrance requirements again and perhaps approach the RIAI and ask for a definitive on your position. Even if you're not automatically eligible you may only need to do the presentation and the interview and you can ask for a direction from the RIAI on this. As I say I'm not a Member so this isn't definitive advice and things may have changed since I last read about this issue - but I think you should check this out anyway.

FWIW

ONQ.


I have followed 8 years universty courses to obtain a 5 years qualification (I was working part time to pay my studies)... My qualification is in Arts with a specialisation in Architecture... I have the french equivalent to a Bachelor degree and a Master degree...

The fact is that my qualification is accepted as a qualification in Architecture, but the RIAI wants me to produce an attestation of competence... This attestation must be deliver, they said, by the Fench Registration Body... The French registration body is not interested with me because I am not resident in France, not Registered in France either...

To be registered in France I would need to be resident and practicing in France, or to have done so before leaving France... I did not register before leaving France because my qualification being in Arts and Archtiecture, and not purely in Architecture, the French Registration body requested that I gain 10 years of experience prior to my registration... Now that I have 16 years of experience (only 9 in the R.O.I.), I could go back and register in France but I am kind of stock in Ireland with a mortgage, 2 children and a practice...

The RIAI never orientated me in anyway... In the contrary their only attitude has been to try stopping me to register through any route...

This is a never ending story for me... I always acted professionaly, but it is not enough... It seems that it is not about my skills but about a very administrative procedure refusing to admit that there are some people out there who deserve more attention and deserve a chance to be assessed adequately....

Instead we are considered as unwanted competition... It is not about protecting the public anymore...
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 » Sun Feb 07, 2010 4:35 pm

A- Part 3 of the BCA 2007, in its content, is not equitable for professionals who are proposing architectural services. These professionals are technicians, technologists, engineers, surveyors and others. The public is not aware that many professionals can deliver architectural services, to deny these competent professionals the right of calling themselves “Architects” is very damaging for their businesses.

B- Part 3 of the BCA 2007, in its content, is not equitable for self-trained architects who have less than 7 years of experience working in the Republic of Ireland. The fact is that many have worked in the UK, US, Australia and came back recently to work in the R.O.I. These self-trained architects have as much knowledge and skills than the others, but as per the Act they are not able to register. There is an obvious discrimination there.

C- Part 3 of the BCA 2007, in its application for registration by the R.I.A.I., is not equitable for architects with over 10 years of experience working in the state and specialized in residential developments. The R.I.A.I. Technical Assessment board does not recognize experience within the residential sector only as sufficient for registration. However, some self-trained architects have specialized in this field during the last 10 years. It must also be noted that many M.R.I.A.I. architects have specialized in the residential sector too and that specialization is a natural progression for an architect.

D- 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.

E- Part 3 of the BCA 2007, in its application for registration by the R.I.A.I. and the A.R.A.E, is not equitable for self trained architects who have to pay disproportionate fees. 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…

F- Part 3 of the BCA 2007, in its application for registration by the R.I.A.I. demonstrated that 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.
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 » Sun Feb 07, 2010 9:37 pm

CK,

I am not going to challenge or respond to your every word. You have obviously thought very deeply about these issues as they affect your own position and to some degree you have adopted an entrenched position.

As I have already confirmed, I am not a Member of the RIAI or Registered - yet!
I am preparing for Registration. In the interim I have stopped advertising my sole tradership as that of an "architect", out of respect for the law, namely the recent Building Control Act 2007.

However, there is one thing you really need to get your head around - and fast.

Any client has the right to expect their architect to be up to speed on the law as it affects the practice of architecture. You cannot have this knowledge as a layman may have it - "the man on the Clapham omnibus" - nor are you required by law to be an expert in your profession. You are required to operate at the level an ordinary competent practitioner of the profession of architecture. To do this, you need to know at least the following areas of law and practice:

You will require a good working knowledge of the planning, building regulation, health and safety, contract administration and conveyancing laws as they relate to an architect. You must have the commensurate experience to deal with problems at the level of a competent architect, not as a draughtsman, or even a newly qualified technician or graduate architect.

You will need to be familiar with the technical aspects of construction that satisfy the requirements of current regulations, and building practices that support them, not those that were current when you obtained your qualification.

You will need to familiar with the Health and Safety Regulations, not only as a Designer under the Health Safety and Welfare at Work (Construction) Regulations, but also under the general regulations, to prepare you for dealing with the range of briefs uses and building types an architect practising in Ireland may reasonably be expected to encounter.

With respect to every architect who has pursued a career in residential design, only doing private houses may not be enough to satisfy this requirement. You will probably need to show competence in relation to a commercial development, although several large apartment blocks or a complex or small to medium office buildings may be deemed sufficient, given the limited palette of work available here.

With particular regard to your recent posts CK, pointing the finger at Members of the RIAI and saying the older ones aren't up to scratch is a fallacious argument in terms of establishing your competence. Merely saying "I'm not as bad as him" doesn't mean you yourself have reached the required standard. You will be expected to prove you have reached the required standard before the Registration Board or a Court of Law should you be taken there as a consequence of continuing to practise as an architect without being Registered.

The issue you most clearly fail to win on is the issue of Continuous Professional Development, which must be followed by every professional, precisely to keep up to date with current requirements. Go to the RIAI website this evening or whenever and take a look at the various CPD courses they are currently running for Members.

Here are the documents that govern the recognition of qualifications under EU law:

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/education_training_youth/vocational_training/qualifications_recognition/l23022_en.htm
85/384/EEC
http://www.eaae.be/eaae2/documents/docs/ad.pdf

Amending Acts:
2001/19/EC
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2001:206:0001:0050:EN:PDF
2005/36/EC
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2005:255:0022:0142:EN:PDF

If you can find an accommodation to your situation under these DIRectives, I suggest you pursue it. If not, you should take legal advice on the risks you will run if you intend to name yourself as an architect and practise in Ireland. My best advice is to embrace the requirements needed to reach the standard of a competent practitioner. That way, if you continue to practice and you are prosecuted, you will at least be able to show you have a current competent skillset, whatever about the necessary accreditation which apparently has been denied you through an unusual combination of circumstances.

Legislators in Ireland are said to be good at dealing with offences. Judges are said to be good ad dealing with offenders. If your Catch-22 situation results in your coming before a judge, you will need to be up to standard in your practice in order to ask the Court for any kind of acquittal of the offence.

HTH

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 » Sun Feb 07, 2010 9:45 pm

CK wrote:(snip) It is the wrongly founded belief of many, that only architects can deliver architectural services.


CK,

You need to be careful here and read the links I posted to the various Directives. Only a subset of professionals are entitled to provide architectural services under either the Directives or the Building Control Act 2007. Acquired rights are only established by doing particular things for a particular length of time. It is not a free-for-all. The perception that used to be prevalent in Ireland that "anyone can be an architect" is one of the factors that prompted the current level of regulation.

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 » Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:13 pm

CK

This links to an old seminar, but you should look at the range of headings to get a feel for the depth and range of knowledge that the RIAI expects of its Members:

http://www.riai.ie/public/downloads/PAI_BkForm2005.pdf

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 Solo » Mon Feb 08, 2010 12:35 am

There are alternatives to bending over and taking it from the Minister and the RIAI on this thorney issue of Registration of Architects.

I here on the grapevine that some group are handing out flyers at the RIAI meetings offering non-RIAI members an alternative.

If anyone knows anything about them perhaps you could share with us because I do not believe that the Minister and the RIAI possess the necessary skills to properly implement this Act in the manner that is necessary to ensure that justice is done and seen to be done.

The new Registration of the Title Architect will not in itself give any additional protection to the public. The competition authority also had a similar view. They also believed that the registration body should be independent of all existing associations due to the obvious conflicts that could arise.

The Department of Trade and Enterprise will accept complaints from aggrieved persons. Also aggrieved persons can lobby their public representatives. Although that route would have to have a real obvious political gain before anyone is likley to run with it.

The European agencies that govern competition would be very interested in any allegations of restrictive practice or any organisations that operate anti competitive practice. So if you chaps really do have a genuine grievance why are you not exploring the avenues open to you.

A blind person could see that the Act itself and it's giving statutory powers to the RIAI was going to lead to dominance and anti competitive restrictive practice.

In addition to this the RIAI have also embarked upon predatory practice by if my information is correct (and I will stand corrected by subsequent posts) that they have attempted to prevent the Golden Pages from taking advertising from non registered Architects. It has I understand also paid for and run radio advertising advising the public that they should not be using non registered Architects and if I hear correctly issued a health warning to those contemplating using non registered Architects when they have no process in place for any other than their own members to be registered.

As I said in a previous post this is ringside seat time positively riveting stuff and I am sure that the legal Vultures (not eagles) are already circling. I personally can't wait to be shelling out as a taxpayer for another ill conceived (e voting) type scenario which will see the taxpayer yet again cleaning up for obvious difficulties easily foreseen. We will not need hindsight with this one just read the posts, there are, if the posts are true many many grounds for legal actions. As I said before it's going to be a hoot. When will we actually get Ministers who, actually know what they are doing and having sought advice listen to it and accept it rather than the usual I know best attitude.

What is it they say "You get the Government you deserve and you deserve the Government you get"

Reserve me a seat,
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 CK » Mon Feb 08, 2010 10:18 am

onq wrote:CK,

I am not going to challenge or respond to your every word. You have obviously thought very deeply about these issues as they affect your own position and to some degree you have adopted an entrenched position.


ONQ.


And so have you...
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 » Mon Feb 08, 2010 10:43 am

onq wrote:CK,



Any client has the right to expect their architect to be up to speed on the law as it affects the practice of architecture. You cannot have this knowledge as a layman may have it - "the man on the Clapham omnibus" - nor are you required by law to be an expert in your profession. You are required to operate at the level an ordinary competent practitioner of the profession of architecture. To do this, you need to know at least the following areas of law and practice:

You will require a good working knowledge of the planning, building regulation, health and safety, contract administration and conveyancing laws as they relate to an architect. You must have the commensurate experience to deal with problems at the level of a competent architect, not as a draughtsman, or even a newly qualified technician or graduate architect.

You will need to be familiar with the technical aspects of construction that satisfy the requirements of current regulations, and building practices that support them, not those that were current when you obtained your qualification.

You will need to familiar with the Health and Safety Regulations, not only as a Designer under the Health Safety and Welfare at Work (Construction) Regulations, but also under the general regulations, to prepare you for dealing with the range of briefs uses and building types an architect practising in Ireland may reasonably be expected to encounter.

With respect to every architect who has pursued a career in residential design, only doing private houses may not be enough to satisfy this requirement. You will probably need to show competence in relation to a commercial development, although several large apartment blocks or a complex or small to medium office buildings may be deemed sufficient, given the limited palette of work available here.

With particular regard to your recent posts CK, pointing the finger at Members of the RIAI and saying the older ones aren't up to scratch is a fallacious argument in terms of establishing your competence. Merely saying "I'm not as bad as him" doesn't mean you yourself have reached the required standard. You will be expected to prove you have reached the required standard before the Registration Board or a Court of Law should you be taken there as a consequence of continuing to practise as an architect without being Registered.

The issue you most clearly fail to win on is the issue of Continuous Professional Development, which must be followed by every professional, precisely to keep up to date with current requirements. Go to the RIAI website this evening or whenever and take a look at the various CPD courses they are currently running for Members.



ONQ.


What makes you believe that I do not? I have a long list of MRIAI design work in breach of the Building Regulations... I enjoy checking and correcting their work as it comfort me in my belief that my skills are as good as theirs (let stay modest)... I have many exemples, such as 10 houses in Lucan, Co. Dublin, which do not comply with part K of the Building Regulations... An extension in Co. Meath which was issued with an opinion for exemption from planning permssion when it should not... I have a long list you know... How is it that you do not?...

There is this RIAI protectionism pretending that their members are the only one competents... But this is not the truth...

Whatever you pretend I am producing quality services... As I already said, I believe that my clients have more options with my services than with the services of a MRIAI... I am also producing design work that suit them first... Many MRIAI see the glory of their design before the wishes of their clients... How many people told me about some MRIAI, who were completely out of touch with their brief... Young Architects who are willing to create an exceptional building that will be talked about when the clients just wanted a conventional extension in harmony with the existing dwelling...


You want me to believe that because some MRIAI passed an exam 20 years ago they are still today up to the task of the new regulations and professional standards?

Why do you question my skills? Why shouldn't I be allowed to specialize in residential development like many MRIAI do?

90% of my projects are residential... Some of my projects are small creches, small offices and small commercial buildings... Can you tell why would my clients be more satisfied if I learn by heart public contracts that I will never use? Why would they be safer if I am aware of Health & Safety Regulations for high rise buildings?

If I have a client willing to use my services for the creation of a small stadium tomorrow, I will gather all the relevant documentation for planning, fire safety, building regs and so on... But I never design a stadium before, and I admit that I would need to work days and nights for the challenge... However, I know where to find the relevant documents and I have been successful with similar challeges before...

The fact is that I keep up to date with regulations and standards relevant to the work that I produce... I wish that all MRIAI would do the same...
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 » Mon Feb 08, 2010 10:51 am

onq wrote:CK,


The issue you most clearly fail to win on is the issue of Continuous Professional Development, which must be followed by every professional, precisely to keep up to date with current requirements. Go to the RIAI website this evening or whenever and take a look at the various CPD courses they are currently running for Members.


ONQ.


Please do not make me laugh... Despite not being a member, in 2008 I was invited by the RIAI to some of their CPD (it cost me 2,000 Euros by the way)... I was amazed by the content of the lecture... I learn much more reading appropritate litterature and it cost me much less...

Those CPD do not even include an exam... The tea and the biscuits are good so...
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 markstephens » Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:41 pm

CK wrote:
The monstruous fees requested to pass the exam represent a financial selection that is unjustified. I took contact with institutes around the world and also institutes of other professions. None are asking for such fees to apply for membership through experience.

Nobody is realy checking how is the RIAI implementing the registration procedure and that is a problem... I think that this is not only my opinion...



I can only speak of the UK procedure, they do not offer the same technical assessment based on experience as Ireland now does. The only exception is if you are a distinguished overseas 'architect'.

I think €10,000 is pretty cheap considering the amount of non paid education it takes to qualify.

Mark Stephens RIBA MRIAI
markstephens
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:01 am
Location: Foxford, Co. Mayo, Ireland

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

Postby CK » Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:59 pm

markstephens wrote:I can only speak of the UK procedure, they do not offer the same technical assessment based on experience as Ireland now does. The only exception is if you are a distinguished overseas 'architect'.

I think €10,000 is pretty cheap considering the amount of non paid education it takes to qualify.

Mark Stephens RIBA MRIAI


Hi Mark,

The Institute of Engineers in Ireland are charging 50 euro to assess the applicant eligibility for the examination... The ARAE charges 2,000 Euro...

I contacted the ARB in Ireland... I chalanged their procedure for registration because no application form was available for registration through experience as stated in Section 4)1)b) of the Architects Act 1997...

I was told that the procedure for registration was not fully completed and that for this reason the route for registration as per Section 4)1)b) of the Architects Act 1997 was not yet published on the ARB website... I knew that Institues are sometimes slow to react, but this was last year, about 12 years after the enforcement of the Act...

I was then asked to prepare a portfolio and an essai to defend my position... I have not done so because I am resident in Ireland working only localy within the Leinster area...

With regard to your position about 10,000 euro being cheap for an exam compared to university fees... First the total amount (non including lectures) is 11,500 euro not 10,000 euro... Second I think that education should be free and not in anyway related to your financial situation...
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 markstephens » Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:42 pm

CK wrote:
The monstruous fees requested to pass the exam represent a financial selection that is unjustified. I took contact with institutes around the world and also institutes of other professions. None are asking for such fees to apply for membership through experience.

...


Hi - here's my two penneth worth:

The UK does not have a 'membership through experience' technical assessment. You would need to have exemption from Part 1 and 2 (education in a predominantly architectural course) before you would be allowed to take the Part 3 exam. This would then allow you to register (after passing the part 3 exam) with the ARB. The only exceptions to this would be overseas 'distinguished' 'architects'.

The fee the RIAI charges for the technical assessment is fair and if anything too cheap bearing in mind the loss of wages that being in 3rd level education for 5 years would entail.

Mark Stephens RIBA MRIAI
markstephens
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:01 am
Location: Foxford, Co. Mayo, Ireland

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

Postby Solo » Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:06 pm

markstephens wrote:Hi - here's my two penneth worth:

The fee the RIAI charges for the technical assessment is fair and if anything too cheap bearing in mind the loss of wages that being in 3rd level education for 5 years would entail.

Mark Stephens RIBA MRIAI


Hi Mark,

Not everyone has the opportunity of attending full time education. Lets not delve into the particular circumstances but can we agree that there are some who for a variety of reasons cannot, so why is there no part time course. So it will take 9 years not 5 and if they are working in the field as well is that not the best of both worlds.

Architecture and the Architectural profession of which I class myself a member are an elitist group of individuals generally, although there are a few exceptions. Like Solicitors and Barristers, Architects have no difficulty justifying huge fees for often mediocre work.

So I am not surprised to see you attempt to justify the extortionate fee being charged by your club for non-members to become registered Architects. The R.I.A.I. should never have been made the statutory body, this was a mistake of gargantuan proportions and may yet be the undoing of the R.I.A.I. the law suits that will surely flow from this decision will embroil your club in costly litigation as well as the Minister who made the decision.

I have long known that the R.I.A.I. have wanted to have complete control of the Architectural Profession and regardless of what you say the actions of your club clearly show that they consider only their members as competent. I know a number of their members who not only could they not design a dog house they could not see it build either but as long as their fee was paid they would issue the cert of compliance.

Naughty naughty.
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 » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:30 pm

CK wrote:And so have you...


I am in a similar enough position to yours in that I too am required to Register and I will have a difficulty in assembling the information to do so because of the combination of the length of time I have been practising post-graduate [20 years next June] and the practices people have adopted in destroying documents.

These have arisen due to (i) the onerous data retrieval requirements of Data Protection Act (ii) the 6-year statute of limitations general offences and (iii) the 12 year limitation of liability in work certified under seal. If its more than 12 years old, you'll be lucky to find anything outside your own file records.

I am taking a pro-active attitude towards the problems I face because there is nothing to gain by complaining. My wife will find that particularly ironic :)

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 » Mon Feb 08, 2010 10:06 pm

Solo wrote:(smip)
I know a number of their members who not only could they not design a dog house they could not see it build either but as long as their fee was paid they would issue the cert of compliance.


Solo,

I know of MRIAI's like that too, but any inference that they are representative of the profession isn't a fair one. If you specialise in dealing with compliance work you will run into more of the dregs, just as if you become a policeman you will meet a lot of criminals. Perpetrators only make up about 10% of any population.

If you really want to see rogue architects, MRIAI's or otherwise, being held to account then you should support the Registration process fully. A real threat of becoming de-registered and/or prosecuted is the only thing likely to motivate them to improve their game. After all the promises of consumer protection the RIAI have made there will be no bolt-holes available for transgressors whether they are RIAI Members or not.

This can only lead to an improvement of the profession over time. And we can all improve.

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 » Mon Feb 08, 2010 10:43 pm

CK wrote:What makes you believe that I do not?

I didn't say I believed you do not.
I suggested you should be up to speed because you were suggesting older archtiects might not be and we were commenting on the assessment process.
I have a long list of MRIAI design work in breach of the Building Regulations...
I enjoy checking and correcting their work as it comfort me in my belief that my skills are as good as theirs (let stay modest)... I have many exemples, such as 10 houses in Lucan, Co. Dublin, which do not comply with part K of the Building Regulations... An extension in Co. Meath which was issued with an opinion for exemption from planning permssion when it should not... I have a long list you know... How is it that you do not?...

I do. But if the assessment is about me, merely pointing the finger at Members of RIAI who don't match my level of competence doesn't make my level of competence any better.
There is this RIAI protectionism pretending that their members are the only one competents... But this is not the truth...

There is a thing you have to remember about people with existing positions - you have to honour them.
Whatever you pretend

I'm not pretending anything - I have been as frank with you asanyone else I have exchanged views with online.
I am producing quality services... As I already said, I believe that my clients have more options with my services than with the services of a MRIAI... I am also producing design work that suit them first... Many MRIAI see the glory of their design before the wishes of their clients... How many people told me about some MRIAI, who were completely out of touch with their brief... Young Architects who are willing to create an exceptional building that will be talked about when the clients just wanted a conventional extension in harmony with the existing dwelling...

Must be something to do with this weird notion that archtiects can design... :D
Look, CK, some projects you have a chance to realise something amazing and you are inspired to go for it, others put food on the table. Its human nature. Often its the planners that are the greatest restriction but that's changing thankfully. And most clients on whom I have put a bit of pressure on to do something different have been delighted in the end.
You want me to believe that because some MRIAI passed an exam 20 years ago they are still today up to the task of the new regulations and professional standards?

Here you go again with this old canard. I graduated in June 1990 and I am up to date - well as of last week anyway - the legislature might have stuck something in over the weekend. Case in point. I did a Fire Cert last summer and the F.O. rang me to discuss a standard I had include that he wasn't familiar with - it had been updated three weeks previously. He had known it was being reviewed but hadn't known it was in yet...
Why do you question my skills? Why shouldn't I be allowed to specialize in residential development like many MRIAI do?

Two different questions CK. Anyone can question anyone else's skills. I'm saying that you need a good overview of issues that a competent professional may have to deal with but you keep shooting yourself in the footwith comments like:
"Why should I learn about contract for public works if I do not intend to carry out public design? I understand that it is important for an academic who has not yet found his way to know any type of contracts because the person needs to keep all doors open…"
That's not specialization, CK. Specialization is knowing enough about the GCCC contracts to advise your client on their use, but using the RIAI Forms for most of your work.
90% of my projects are residential... Some of my projects are small creches, small offices and small commercial buildings... Can you tell why would my clients be more satisfied if I learn by heart public contracts that I will never use? Why would they be safer if I am aware of Health & Safety Regulations for high rise buildings?

You're making excuses for your lack of knowledge on something a competent architect should know just as previously he should have been familiar with the GDLA Form even if he never got to use it. You should also know enough about design build contracts to comment on them too, as well as other forms of contract. And if you want to be taken seriously in Britain, you better know the Joint Contract's Tribunal Forms well.
If I have a client willing to use my services for the creation of a small stadium tomorrow, I will gather all the relevant documentation for planning, fire safety, building regs and so on... But I never design a stadium before, and I admit that I would need to work days and nights for the challenge... However, I know where to find the relevant documents and I have been successful with similar challeges before...

I accept your comment in principle and indeed I watched a competent MRIAI do just as you described when dealing with the Neilstown Stadium back in the 1990's, but you're not asked to know specialist building types such as hospitals. You're asked to have experience of complex, multi-disciplinary projects. This is why, even within an RIAI-registered practice you may not get all the experience you need to pass the Part III exam unless you ask to monitor projects AND they have such large projects on.
The fact is that I keep up to date with regulations and standards relevant to the work that I produce... I wish that all MRIAI would do the same...

You need to push your envelope and gain a wider range of experience. This won't be the last time you hear this CK - here or elsewhere, I'm afraid.

:(

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 Solo » Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:36 am

onq wrote:Solo,

If you really want to see rogue architects, MRIAI's or otherwise, being held to account then you should support the Registration process fully. A real threat of becoming de-registered and/or prosecuted is the only thing likely to motivate them to improve their game. After all the promises of consumer protection the RIAI have made there will be no bolt-holes available for transgressors whether they are RIAI Members or not.

ONQ.


Hi,
Thank you for your comment. I accept your position but unfortunately find that I do not agree with it. Pre-registration there were a number of existing checks and balances in place. The competition authority were in the main happy with the architectural profession and how it was run.. They did however express reservations with regard to the registration process and they believed as do I that the RIAI should not be the statutory body but a completely independent body (self funding) set up.

The RIAI have started to operate the register at a time when they do not have any facilities in place to register all who qualify for registration. They also embarked upon a campaign of advertising to make the public aware of the new register knowing full well that only their own members could be registered.

Is this the face of our new unbiased administrative body. Wake up and smell the coffee. The RIAI have and only ever had the interests of their own members at heart. They believe that only qualifications accepted by them ie 5 years full time education as acceptable. What is wrong with a 9 year part time course which incidentally does not exist in Ireland.

I have never had a desire to join their (RIAI) ranks and still do not. Registration if it will improve the quality of practitioner and give greater assurances to the public may yet prove to be a good thing. I cannot accept that the RIAI are to be the statutory body the obvious conflicts of interest are just too great to be overcome properly.

There are I accept avenues for Architects not presently accepted by the RIAI to be accepted however; the practicalities of administering the Technical Assessment Process will eventually lead to a High Court challenge and then I believe the baby will end up being thrown out with the bathwater.

As some of my previous post may have indicated I have an interest in the law and how it works. It never ceases to amaze me just how our government and their army of advisers and legions of civil servants can cock up the drafting of legislation. They remind me of some of my developer clients who just always had to complicate a simple situation.

The drafting of this Act in regard to the registration of Title is a wreck waiting to happen and if our illustrious Minister and the Mandarins at the RIAI took a step back and look at the actual situation unfolding and with an ounce of backbone they would step up and correct this situation before it gets out of hand, because it will.

The really sad thing is that reflects on us all and we will all look bad, the RIAI in particular. I am not for registering yet, the register and all those on it will very soon be tainted by the actions of the RIAI and it's membership. I do not wish to be associated with that I have standards to keep up.
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 Solo » Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:42 am

sorry hit post button twice.
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 CK » Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:30 am

onq wrote:Solo,


If you really want to see rogue architects, MRIAI's or otherwise, being held to account then you should support the Registration process fully. A real threat of becoming de-registered and/or prosecuted is the only thing likely to motivate them to improve their game. After all the promises of consumer protection the RIAI have made there will be no bolt-holes available for transgressors whether they are RIAI Members or not.

ONQ.


onq,

It is probably your will to register that is motivating your argument...

however your opinion above is realy biased... 2 registration bodies would have been much more efficient to insure fair competition and better standards...

The RIAI claims that most of the complaints that they receive from the public are against non-registered... But I had a few complaints against some of their members; one was about a breach of employment contract and another one about a certificate of exemption from planning permission that should not have been delivered... In both cases the RIAI failled to take action against their members, in the contrary it seems that they were protecting them...
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 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:39 am

onq wrote:-


Here you go again with this old canard. I graduated in June 1990 and I am up to date - well as of last week anyway - the legislature might have stuck something in over the weekend. Case in point. I did a Fire Cert last summer and the F.O. rang me to discuss a standard I had include that he wasn't familiar with - it had been updated three weeks previously. He had known it was being reviewed but hadn't known it was in yet...


ONQ.



onq, the fact is that the RIAI pretends that only registered architects have the skills... They advertise this way, they influence the public this way... I am just saying that it is not true... That many of their members are not up to the task... Some of their staff are...
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland