So now winy interns can claim their 1st amendment rights are violated when they label themselves as architects at cocktail parties... and receive questions from real architects.
I've always felt the word-policing of "Architect" / "Engineer" in non-professional contexts to be absurd. I agree with the ruling.
The scope of these laws should be limited to the context of offering a professional service. If I'm unlicensed and tell someone at a cocktail party that I'm an architect, I'm not misrepresenting anything or doing anyone harm. I'm simply saving everyone the annoying and condescending task of explaining the licensing process - and further explaining that "intern" has a different meaning within the field of architecture than in every other profession on earth. Unless I'm trying to get hired, no one gives a shit if I'm an "Intern" or not.
Agreed. We used to have an R&B disc jockey who called himself Doctor Daddyo. I don't remember the state medical licensing body accusing him of practicing medicine without a license.
I think this is potentially a problem as a lot of the clients I have landed were from informal social gatherings, when you are a professional you are obligated to be honest and upfront, the title acts in the various states require you to disclose weather or not you are registered/licensed before soliciting work. If you are going to parties and not soliciting work you are either at a child's birthday (although parents may be present) or you are not seeking out your own clients or clients for your firm, which can seriously slow down your career advancement if that is the case. People don't go around saying they are a lawyer unless they passed the bar, because inevitably someone will ask for legal advice, the same can and often does happen with architects.
Jan 3, 19 1:14 pm ·
·
tduds
If one of my drunken conversations leads to potential work it's zero extra effort to put the person in touch with a principal at my office or set up a meeting between the three of us (this very directly helps with my career advancement, bringing work to principals!).
I'm still not misrepresenting anything because I'm not soliciting myself. If people seem interested, I do always explain the distinction. I typically use the lawyer / bar analogy since that's a credential most laypeople are familiar with.
Jan 3, 19 1:18 pm ·
·
x-jla
Peter, the distinction is that a) you cannot work as a lawyer in any capacity without a license, and b) the term lawyer isn’t as broadly defined/used as the terms engineer and architect.
Jan 3, 19 1:19 pm ·
·
x-jla
Do we we
Jan 3, 19 1:23 pm ·
·
x-jla
*Do we really need to waste taxpayers money hassling people for nonsense like this? Wouldn’t it be better spent filling pot holes or something?
I shit you not, this is something that happened locally a handful of years ago:
A recent graduate initiated a small but public project on his own - he wasn't hired by anybody, and he self-funded and organized everything. He got some press attention, and because he was a recent M. Arch graduate, the newspaper called him an Architect in their article.
Fast forward a few days and HE gets a letter from our board, reminding him that he can't call himself an architect because he's not licensed. Nowhere in the article does he call himself one, nor does he allude to it.
Meanwhile, in the years since, he's been designing and building more important projects than many licensed architects in our jurisdiction, but he doesn't want to pursue a license, and that's great.
What a waste of everyone's time.
Jan 3, 19 1:09 pm ·
·
Non Sequitur
If I'm not mistaken, that's a case study (or one very similar) in our Association's (Ontario) Intern administration course when explaining titles.
Medical doctors are called 'medical doctors' and put MD after their name after completion of medical school and before they have even started residency (internship). Seems to work fine.
Right, but when they say they are board certified then it becomes an issue. This case seems to be clear that "engineer" alone can not be a title act bu professional engineer or registered engineer can be.
Jan 3, 19 1:48 pm ·
·
Volunteer
Is this the same as saying: "....clear that [architect] alone cannot be a title act but professional [architect] or registered [architect] can be" ?
Jan 3, 19 3:29 pm ·
·
Non Sequitur
In the context of the ruling, how does adding professional, registered, or any other prefix exclude claiming the title from one's 1st amendment right?
Jan 3, 19 3:31 pm ·
·
Volunteer
The problem is that in the world of common sense an architect is anyone who designs buildings, A registered architect is one who has jumped through all the NCARB hoops. There needs to be, in my opinion, some recognition for the people who have slogged through five years of a NAAB accredited college program but who are not yet registered. Perhaps the answer is to award a master's to anyone who completes the five year program and then they, and the people who complete the specialized programs for people who already have one degree, could put MA after their name. That would at least acknowledge their educational accomplishments.
slog is relative. school is not difficult compared to the professional world and the letters after your name as you suggest (you purchased through tuition fees) in your email signature is your reward. The real test starts after school.
I was gonna check to see if this had been picked up here, no surprise, it has. I do get sick of describing what I do without using a title, these days I just say "I design jails" or something along those lines... Yeah, I fill the role of a PA, but I don't want to be caught out by using the title of the actual job I do after completing the actual educational requirements, and several years of experience. Looks like Balkin's desire to know more is increasing...
Haha, Oregon board violates first amendment
https://www.google.com/amp/s/motherboard.vice.com/amp/en_us/article/yw798m/oregon-unconstitutionally-fined-a-man-dollar500-for-saying-i-am-an-engineer-federal-judge-rules
So now winy interns can claim their 1st amendment rights are violated when they label themselves as architects at cocktail parties... and receive questions from real architects.
looks like the aia will have to advocate for the term “registered architect” instead.
well, it's my 1st A right to call someone a winy intern if they try this approach right?
Absolutely lol.
I already trademarked registered architect.
The article is interesting. The rest is just drum banging. If you need a law to provide your professional title any teeth you've already lost.
+++++
I've always felt the word-policing of "Architect" / "Engineer" in non-professional contexts to be absurd. I agree with the ruling.
The scope of these laws should be limited to the context of offering a professional service. If I'm unlicensed and tell someone at a cocktail party that I'm an architect, I'm not misrepresenting anything or doing anyone harm. I'm simply saving everyone the annoying and condescending task of explaining the licensing process - and further explaining that "intern" has a different meaning within the field of architecture than in every other profession on earth. Unless I'm trying to get hired, no one gives a shit if I'm an "Intern" or not.
Agreed. We used to have an R&B disc jockey who called himself Doctor Daddyo. I don't remember the state medical licensing body accusing him of practicing medicine without a license.
See also Dr. Demento.
I think this is potentially a problem as a lot of the clients I have landed were from informal social gatherings, when you are a professional you are obligated to be honest and upfront, the title acts in the various states require you to disclose weather or not you are registered/licensed before soliciting work. If you are going to parties and not soliciting work you are either at a child's birthday (although parents may be present) or you are not seeking out your own clients or clients for your firm, which can seriously slow down your career advancement if that is the case. People don't go around saying they are a lawyer unless they passed the bar, because inevitably someone will ask for legal advice, the same can and often does happen with architects.
If one of my drunken conversations leads to potential work it's zero extra effort to put the person in touch with a principal at my office or set up a meeting between the three of us (this very directly helps with my career advancement, bringing work to principals!).
I'm still not misrepresenting anything because I'm not soliciting myself. If people seem interested, I do always explain the distinction. I typically use the lawyer / bar analogy since that's a credential most laypeople are familiar with.
Peter, the distinction is that a) you cannot work as a lawyer in any capacity without a license, and b) the term lawyer isn’t as broadly defined/used as the terms engineer and architect.
Do we we
*Do we really need to waste taxpayers money hassling people for nonsense like this? Wouldn’t it be better spent filling pot holes or something?
I shit you not, this is something that happened locally a handful of years ago:
A recent graduate initiated a small but public project on his own - he wasn't hired by anybody, and he self-funded and organized everything. He got some press attention, and because he was a recent M. Arch graduate, the newspaper called him an Architect in their article.
Fast forward a few days and HE gets a letter from our board, reminding him that he can't call himself an architect because he's not licensed. Nowhere in the article does he call himself one, nor does he allude to it.
Meanwhile, in the years since, he's been designing and building more important projects than many licensed architects in our jurisdiction, but he doesn't want to pursue a license, and that's great.
What a waste of everyone's time.
If I'm not mistaken, that's a case study (or one very similar) in our Association's (Ontario) Intern administration course when explaining titles.
Medical doctors are called 'medical doctors' and put MD after their name after completion of medical school and before they have even started residency (internship). Seems to work fine.
Right, but when they say they are board certified then it becomes an issue. This case seems to be clear that "engineer" alone can not be a title act bu professional engineer or registered engineer can be.
Is this the same as saying: "....clear that [architect] alone cannot be a title act but professional [architect] or registered [architect] can be" ?
In the context of the ruling, how does adding professional, registered, or any other prefix exclude claiming the title from one's 1st amendment right?
The problem is that in the world of common sense an architect is anyone who designs buildings, A registered architect is one who has jumped through all the NCARB hoops. There needs to be, in my opinion, some recognition for the people who have slogged through five years of a NAAB accredited college program but who are not yet registered. Perhaps the answer is to award a master's to anyone who completes the five year program and then they, and the people who complete the specialized programs for people who already have one degree, could put MA after their name. That would at least acknowledge their educational accomplishments.
slog is relative. school is not difficult compared to the professional world and the letters after your name as you suggest (you purchased through tuition fees) in your email signature is your reward. The real test starts after school.
Wait. He actually used the phrase "I am an engineer" in an email he sent to the State of Oregon Engineering Board?!?
Engineers have no emotional intelligence at all. Slapping my damn head.
I was gonna check to see if this had been picked up here, no surprise, it has. I do get sick of describing what I do without using a title, these days I just say "I design jails" or something along those lines... Yeah, I fill the role of a PA, but I don't want to be caught out by using the title of the actual job I do after completing the actual educational requirements, and several years of experience. Looks like Balkin's desire to know more is increasing...
.
so this is what we get for electing trump?
Is there any way to outlaw keyboards in Oregon?
Haha. I knew RB would F this thread hard.
Probably not all keyboards in Oregon, but I bet we could get Rick's taken away by his mom if we send her some of his more colorful posts.
^^ Complaining that a commenter "kind of side-tracked a little bit" is like Manson grumbling that a victim bled a little on his slacks.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.