Time to start snitchin.

Mr. Ginsberg,

I think you've been a little heavy-handed with the edits.
Howl was fine the way it was.
Perhaps you should give it another read.

right on brother! ... but I don't think this will happen because optimistic and talented students might not yet have the real world experience to know the difference, have only been exposed to academics early in their career, and simply take a teacher's word as gold

Here is my pledge:

I have never/will never work for free - dot

Since that's out of the way, I will say that it seems there is a new thread like this every few months where people rant about the situation. Therefore, I propose this system...I've seen a few high-profile firms do this, that is,

1. hire interns that are either in school, or within one year out of school for a set term, e.g. 6 months, paying them a reasonable stipend in the ballpark of minimum wage.

2. put the intern under the direct supervision of one full-time staffer as a mentor.

3. The intern is of the understanding that there is no chance to negotiate a fully salaried position at the end of the internship term, just so there is no revolving-door/star-fucking going on. The intern is however, allowed to submit a separate application for full time position (if they meet the requirements) where their credentials are put against a competitive pool of candidates.

Even in a recession, there really is no excuse for a firm not to pay minimum wage for 40hr/wk. that's a base-wage of about $1500 or less. If the intern wants to work overtime unpaid, that's up to them.

A famous US firm that I once worked for would do two things to keep their salary overhead low:

1. Hire foreigners at very low salaries, mostly from Europe, who would be basically tethered to the job because they wanted their VISAs renewed, and if they quit they risked being sent home.

2. Hire foreigners and interns whose countries/school/company actually PAID the firm for them to work there.

The rest of the staff were salaried, though at a fairly low level.

I know this isn't an example of no salary. But it's similar.

can we form an Architect Union?

Legally yes, we can form a union. However, architects are too pussy to actually do it.

Better yet, lets blacklist all the firms that DO NOT PAY THEIR EMPLOYEES.

I'll start:

Petey Eisenman (NYC)

lol "Petey"

So how does one go about and establish a union?... i feel we have regulated and standardized all the steps to become an architect but we haven't standardized minimal working conditions and compensation.

I have seen some comments on here before regarding the "all nighter" mentality in schools and how that is not conducive to a healthy and balanced lifestyle. But regarding a union, is it a petition? Is it done locally?

What's the first step?

I guess we can start with a local chapter. Draw up regulations and min. salary requirements. Doctrine our own rules and ideology. Charge membership fees, but the AIA may have something to say about it. It would also depend on how we set up a hierarchy.....licensed, non-licensed, const. managers, interns, etc.

By law, you cant fire or threaten anyone who forms a union. Supposedly, this was the whole purpose of the AIA when it was formed, the contract documents haven't been updated since 1997, which is the most widely used document for architects now. You'd think that with all the information advances that have occured in the last decade, these documents would reflect issues such as intellectual property, massive copyrights, etc. Lately the only advantage of being a member is a 10% discount at their bookstore and free Calatrava lectures (but you can always find those on youtube).

I will step off my soapbox now.

Btw, when did-{John Doe, Design} become a moniker for unlicensed architect?

I can for one say I never pulled an all-nighter in school. F that.

Back on topic, yea forget firms who don't wann pay money. That's a joke.

The job listings that make me go apeshit are the ones where they don't offer compensation for your hours of work (not even lunch money), but they still demand that you submit samples of your best work along with other credentials (I saw this when I-Beam Design in NYC posted in archinect a few months back). Submitting credentials dont bother me, its your intellectual work that becomes vulnerable when you send it someplace and you dont know where it may ultimately end up.

To me, that's like being homeless, going to soup kitchen, and then demanding that they serve you Foie Gras along with Chicken Corden Bleu.

I, for one, support a more thuggish union. nothing instills more fear in the hearts of autocratic starchitects than a bunch of waifish, black-clad, and bespectacled interns descending upon their vacation homes bearing T-squares and electric erasers.

I can see petey shaking in his sensible old-man shoes.

also, i think our union should consist entirely of photoshopped entourage to make it appear as if we are more active than we really are.

i'm with toasteroven... if a project was done in a union area, by non-union architects, the project gets a well deserved 'cocktail' in the wee hours of a saturday morning lol

lmao. I bet with some mattresses and cardboard, we can build our own firm on the sidewalk outside our employer. With your laptop, stolen software and an extension cord, you could offer to work for food. You might not take big clients, but it would prevent clients from walking in the door. You might also get some work out of it too, but the cardboard shack would have to be really well designed for anyone to approach you.

Why form a union, when you can just start your own firm on the sidewalk of your current firm?

I've been toying with this.

Not so much of an actual union but more of a paper union-- especially in larger cities with more visibility this would work out much better! A paper union essentially being a non-for-profit marketing agency that operates on representing employees rather than employers.

Remember, you just can't attack firms... you also have to attack clients too!

Those babies glues all over the street in front of their building would definitely make 'em squirm.

That's a very good start ;) !

I'm against firms that don't compensate too, but come on!

Slavery?!? Where people were forced into service, whipped, trapped, etc? This is nothing like slavery.

Maybe stupidity on the part of people who take the unpaid jobs. But they have a choice -- no one is forcing them to be there.

u old chaps might have something here

It is fascinating that people still see slavery in the image of Kunta Kinte and turn blind eye to new forms of what it is in contemporary sense.

Post the names of the firms that dont pay!

Send them a message!

This shit will not be tolerated!

Really? Blind to how someone with free will in a market economy would choose to work as an unpaid intern, then call it slavery when later complaining about it--forgetting that they had chosen to interview and then taken the job understanding that it didn't pay?

Explain to me how this is in any way slavery.

There are pros and cons to forming a union, wages go up, employers have to pay more, economists, and republicans say unions hurt the economy.

In case of architects, because the AIA is not a Union, it may be time to form one, is this the right time to do it? during this great architecture depression, I don't know.

Lets not get hung up on the word slavery, but farwest you must admit that it is not fair to ask someone to work for you wage free, or turn around walk out the door. You must not have beefed up on your humanities and social sciences courses if you think there is free will.

Think about the Pullman Strikes when people had to pay the same rent, or mortgage, while getting pay cuts,or being fired, Pullman had himself buried under concrete, with a Corinthian column on top to prevent anyone from getting to his corpse.

I don't see things changing any time soon though.

my vote is for grey-goose martinis, extra dirty.

wait - what are we talking about?

oh yeah, a relentless cocktail review, where we all stand in front of the building one by one critiquing it until our constant vitriol makes it fall down from aesthetic shame.

Heres an example of my mates at an architecture practice doing something nice for their staff:

An Auckland firm is seizing the initiative in boosting public holidays for its workers, and is urging other businesses to follow suit.

About 40 staff at Peddle Thorp Architects will enjoy a long weekend from this Friday as the business provides a paid day off to break up the long haul between Queen's Birthday and Labour Weekend.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/employment/news/article.cfm?c_id=11&objectid=10661710

Thats very nice of them to do that Diabase. Here in Chicago most people working dont need a day off because they get payed to watch ESPN during work, not to mention beer celebrations for any slight excuse imaginable.

No true architect would watch sport. Drinking beer is fine.

Slavery is a complicated umbrella term for many unsavory employment practices.

In this capacity (as in the post-modern contemporary first world sense), the practice of slavery is carried out through economic coercion.

In terms of politics, many groups -- Guess who? -- believe economic coercion doesn't exist ouright because free will is an inherent natural right available to everyone. However, they still agree -- even if agreeing to disagree on an exact definition -- that coercion exists and it is a damaging form of economic control.

Here's how coercion works out:

Firms coerce each other into this practices by lowering their fees and taking advantage of more and more free labor.

Firms coerce interns by having ridiculously high barriers to employment requiring many years of experience.

Interns can, of course, coerce other interns by willing to work for less or nothing at higher profile terms.

If no paid internships are available in a given market, you're effectively sentencing someone to a drastic life altering choice.

If any action you incite through practice, regulation or declaration poses such a risk to health and free will... then you are, in fact, practicing a form of slavery.

higher profile firms

diabase quote-"No true architect would watch sport. Drinking beer is fine."

You said it diabase, not me.

i don't watch sports either, maybe professional wrestling here and there - but some say it's not a sport :P

good job explaining that to these degenerates Unicorn.

In my expansive free time, I've been writing many letters to get people to bring back employment testing.

Although it was widely abandoned because of legal issues, I feel that in technical or technically-oriented professions... it provides a sense of legitimacy in hiring.

When I worked in graphic design, nearly every place I worked at practiced testing of some sorts. Basically, the test consisted of "Here's a folder of files, make something pretty with it in 2 hours or less."

Which is a lot easier than architecture or urban planning when looking at time or technical constraints.

Still though, I think if you can pass two or three sections of the ARE fresh out of school (or if you're from a completely unrelated field), you should be able to get an entry-level job.

But I think there's some room to breathe here if the test was something like:

A) Here's a generic site and topographical information. The site is 3 acres. Show us how you would develop the site with considerations (drainage, transportation) and place 80,000 square feet of developed space.

B) Draw a park bench. Show us the bench in situ, basic assembly and two rendered views.

C) Develop a functional program for a bar that is 18' wide by 65' long.

as i always say, you get what you pay for

Read this and think about it in terms of salaries you've accepted at architecture firms:

The Anchoring Effect

How often has your perception of what you should ask been based on some friend who told you their salary, or random externalities, or your perception of where the market is?

Maybe this is why lawyers starting out tend to make two or three times what architects make.

toaster, the cocktail critique as social action idea is brilliant!

I'm late to this thread, but I'll echo dot: I've never worked for free, and never will. And as a firm owner, I'll never ever allow anyone to work for me without compensation.

Further, I think firms that don't pay should be hauled through the justice system. It's appalling practice, completely unacceptable, and I strongly, strongly urge recent grads and students to say no to any firm - even ZaRemdeMuerZumEisenIG - that asks you to work for free.

I think the only way to do something about this problem is to pressure the professional lobbies/associations (AIA etc) to pressure the schools to graduate fewer people, like the AMA does, or some ABA chapters do. Too many architecture graduates and no economic growth to speak of, means an increase in the number of architects relative to the number of new buildings - which means architects willing to work for free.

instead of graduating fewer people - accepting fewer people would be nice.

They weed themselves out though, quite possibly to greener pastures early on.

We started out with the 200+ our first year then graduated 5th year at about 40

I'd rather not have a bunch of frustrated academics behaving as if they are the profession's guardians - that's not their job - their job is to EDUCATE.

I'm still pushing the issue that clients be dragged through the mud on this one.

A similar circumstance is sweatshops and the fashion industry.

Many people will buy clothing that they know it is far too cheap for the buy, complexity or material of the object. It wasn't until people started outing both fashion labels ... and the people who wore said fashion labels.

I'm pretty sure most architectural clients wouldn't be happy about be likened to a slavemonger.

my head is hurting from trying to follow the logic threads here. so many people, with so little experience actually owning and running a firm.

a union? seriously? haven't we beaten this one to death? the problem isn't that some firms will take on 'free' labor, it's that we're (the business owners) are busy slashing each other's throats on fees to try and stave off the banks from calling in our maxed out lines of credit and push our firms under. it's that there simply isn't enough work to go around, period. anywhere. in. the. world. there's so much supply (in terms of people) vs. demand, that a race to the bottom is inevitable.

if we're so hell bent on telling the schools to graduate/admit less students, tell me this: who gets to decide what number is 'appropriate'? who gets to decide which schools are soooo much better that they can take on a higher load, while podunk u. gets to shut their program down? who the hell even has that authority??

and while we're at it - if we all form this grand 'union', what the hell do you think it will do to firms? allow them to turn around and 'demand' more money from their clients in turn? that'll last 10 seconds before every firm owner decides to hire only non-union employees or decides to screw architecture all together.

finally - if you think weeding out people will only increase our ability to generate more fees (that supply/demand thing again), i'd submit that, if pushed hard enough, the opposite will happen - state legislatures will begin to 'relax' licensure laws, making more of our current turf open to greater competition. it's already happened here in ga. - right now, you can (theoretically since it hasn't been challenged formally in court) hire a structural engineer and an interior designer to do any building type, since the i.d. lobby got a change written into the law that says they can do anything - ANYTHING - that is non-structural in scope, including life safety, mep, etc.

so, please, let's focus on the big pictures threatening the profession here and quit wasting time on unions, slavery and the like.

Fashion and Architecture? - hmmm I wonder if 'ROSS' is willing to branch out and provide bargain architectural services

answer your "why" before your "how"

Is there a solution? As long as there are parties willing to sudsidize that employment, nothing will change.

Good post, outed. I feel your frustration, because I know it's all happening now already.

Architecture is a dying profession. Sadly, I wouldn't encourage anyone to go into it, in its current state, right now.

That's my biggest fear of what would happen if there were an Architect's union. Unfortunately our profession is "under attack" from many corners. Not the least of which is clients taking advantage of the economy to supress fees to unsustainable levels.

I shudder saying it, but if I had a choice in the matter I'd push the large firm I work for to merge with an AECOM type entity. At least high profit engineering could then support money losing Architecture endeavors.

-

Regarding unions, I think a lot of the arguments against are a red herring. If wages and working environments were fair, especially at entry level, nobody be screaming union.

Labor unions got us good things like the 40 hour work week, vacation & sick pay, etc. While some have over stepped their mandate in modern times (auto unions, cough cough) their original causes are not realized in a lot of Architecture firms. How many interns really get paid time and a half for OT? What about the intimidation and unwritten rules about not taking time-off, etc? This stuff happens in the profession and it's a problem.

Additionally there are "professional" that are represented by unions. Look at airline pilots. There is precedent for unions in professions where the workers are highly trained and college educated.

Now what would be the affect if there were an Architect's union where a minimum wage, OT pay and PTO was all mandated by contract? I don't know and my fear is highlight up top.

All that said, I have worked for employers that 1. pushed for me to work ridiculous amounts of overtime, 2. refused to pay decent wages (always promising "it will come" someday, bonus, etc....but never appeared) and 3. intimidated me out of taking holidays off, PTO, sick time, etc. In those cases I made my vote by walking, in today's economy that isn't so simple. Maybe the time for a union is upon us after all.

i agree with aquapura

I've been waiting for an appropriate opportunity to share this information here. This looks like a good time and place.

It's a little known fact, but once-up-a-time there was in America a union for Architects -- known as the Federation of Architects, Engineers, Chemists, and Technicians (FAECT).

It was heavily populated by professionals leaning strong towards the far left -- I believe a number of individuals working on the Manhattan Project during WW2 participated. I learned of FAECT while reading a biography of Robert Oppenheimer. Eventually, FAECT lost its way and expired during the McCarthy era. I provide a link below that gives more detail:

The Role of Technical/Professional Workers in Progressive Social Change