not unless they've violated your agreement.
unless they held a gun to your head, it is difficult to say you were 'forced.' seriously - why can't you get another job?

Yeah, I mean there ARE labor laws. You are technically "supposed" to get paid overtime by law. But that only applies to buisinesses with over a certain number of employees. FIND ANOTHER JOB.

majo - are you licensed?

the professional practice professor i had at penn was, alarmingly, an architect, engineer, AND an attorney. (go figure, he was also an airforce pilot. yikes.)

according to him, unless you are licensed, you are not considered by law as a "professional", and thus labor laws regarding overtime apply and have standing in court.

the downside of this as i see it is:
1) this is not how the vast majority of the industry works
2) not only might this have a negative impact with your current employer, but also the litigiousness may give an negative impression to prospective employers as well

so, the sad, sad part of it as i see it is:
1) you have rights under US law
2) most of the architecture profession vaguely knows that but both emplloyees and employers voluntarily sign up for how our industry works. it would be a difficult thing to change that would make the cost of hiring architects go up.

i agree with JohnProlly. find another job. there are plenty out there that will treat you with more respect than this.

have you bothered to ask to cut back your hours, or are you too intimidated by your boss to do so? I think before any legal action is taken, some quality face time with the dude in charge is in order. There's a chance that the office doesn't really want to be the evil dicks their being to you, and don't realize how understaffed they are (since you're telling us that you're basically doing two people's worth of work). Maybe they'll get you an intern to help out or something.

The unfortunate thing about legal action is that once it's over, you're not going to want to work there any more. The management will see you as a trouble maker and not tell you anything more than is right in front of your nose, and the first time they lose a project or two they'll use it as an excuse to lay you off. Come on- wouldn't you do the same to someone who'd sued you?

So point out how overworked you are, and let them know that you can't go on like this indefinitely, and see what they suggest to fix it.

you say you like the job...i don't think you do...i don't either, from an outsider's view.

those hours are insane. how could anybody be happy being that similar to a slave? marginally tolerable for a week or two (warrants a bonus), beyond that pure exploitation...but not slavery because you are free to quit, and i suggest you do if a talk with your boss doesn't reveal a desire to right the situation.

majo,

Firms ususally don't respect people that don't stand up for themselves.

majo, i fail to see how you are 'forced' to work these hours. i also fail to see how you like your job when you are considering bringing a law suit against your boss. that does not sound like a happy job. why not get a new job and save yourself the grief of those horrible hours and the agony of going through a trial? where will you go to work after you take your boss to trial? no firm will touch you. you will be black balled from the community. is that what you want?

Work a few 20 hr weeks in a row. That's a way to balance it out. Seriously, if you're making a contribution to this firm that would be missed, then you need to talk with the firm to adjust your compensation, reduce your hours &/or spread some of this work to other people. If they don't respond fairly, leave. If that is their attitude, they are mismanaging the company & its people. Someday, a disgruntled archt will shoot the place up because of this...& you don't wanna be around.

Now if you're pulling these hours because you won't delegate, or are afraid to give control to someone else, then you have issues that will burn you out & ruin architecture for you.

You've gotta be proactive because firms will generally let people work themselves to death.

And please...you all. Quit wishing theat we were unionized. Do you really want your 'peers' dictating what you can make & how you work?

Yeah the AIA is bad enough...

....because? the aia has what bearing on this discussion?

go watch "office space"

Please take all the suggestions given here so far, as they are all good ones, but also think about this: what makes you say you "like" the job? What is the value judgement being made here? I personally would say that if Frank Lloyd Wright came back to life right now, called me up personally, and asked me to be his only apprentice, but only if I worked 120 hours a week, I would still say no.

I became an architect because I wanted to improve my built environment......but also because I enjoy my built environment. There's hardly time for enjoying anything if you're working 120 hours a week. A week only has 168 hours!!!

why would you go from saying nothing to considering legal action? what about the intermediates. you can always just talk to your PM and say you need to reduce your hours

live to work/work to live... figure out where on the spectrum you lie

majo, you sound like you work for oma or a similar profile office. in which case "somebody has a case of a bad moonday". good luck.

I would like to know if you don't delegate tasks or if you do many things on the job that just aren't necessary, like redo things and perfect things beyond the scope the projects? Do you have poor time management skills? Do other employees at your office have similar issues?
Do not take legal action unless you have talked to someone!

I would like to say that this situation seems to be an accepted practice throughout architecture...regardless of size, fame, or experience, which is so unfortunate. I have gone through this in every office that I have been at...it seems to be written off as part of "paying one's dues". Part of it, as I can persoanlly attribute it to, is one's natural desire to produce and be successful...but it is that desire that principals and managers knowingly exploit to make up for their own personal and professional disfunctions.

The bullsh*t of all this is that we shouldn't have to quit our job or take our grievance to our bosses, whom put us into that situation to begin with. Nothing gets solved that way. There needs to be a means where, outside of having to form a union...which I think is really not the answer...there needs to be a level of accountability that is handled through the AIA. If an AIA member is abusing its employees, or more likely non-AIA employees, then it should be the AIA that should oversee conduct that is detrimental to the future of the profession...and proscribe measues to prohibit those practices.

Why is architecture such a mess? It is because we have no professional authority that looks out for the profession at large...whether you are a AIA principal, a non-AIA project architect or designer, or an intern.

Professional guidelines and accountability is sorely needed at all levels of architecture...and I think everyone realizes this. The schools try but are obviously falling short, but what is worse is that there really are no means or avenues to effectively deal with this and all the other crap on a professional level. The only option I see has be an attempt to revamp the AIA and make it into a more inclusive and more pro-active political engine that has the betterment of the entire profession in mind.

One problem seems to be the passive-aggressive nature of architects - hence a number of the posts regarding the need for a higher authority to take care of our problems.

Geesh, just raise some hell w/ your boss.

indeed mystery.

at one office i worked at, our boss at a staff meeting told us that he was making an effort to cut down on overtime especially weekend time. 2 weeks later, a number of us found ourselves on a big, fast turning project. this lead to almost 3 months of long days that included the weekend. once dd was submitted, he told the pm to tell us that we could take the next 2 days off. what? 2 days does not equal 3 months of hell.

i went to speak to my boss. spoke calmly, presented my case, and recalled what he had told us. he asked, well what would you do? i can not give the entire team all the overtime hours back. i told him that i think our weekend time would be fair since he said he was going to try to put a stop to that. he agreed and said that the team would have to stagger the time off so that the office could still function. some of us got 12 days off.

at that time, i was a year out of college. i have much respect for my boss at that time for listening to me and righting his wrong. from that time forward, he made quite an effort to limit the overtime.

confronting the issue head-on via communication is always the best first option...unless it's not.

most people are reasonable, and can be dealt with reasonably. for instance, if you are an average reasonable boss and your average reasonable subordinate comes up to you and says, "i'm burned out, i'm overworked, help!" then you--being the average reasonable boss that you are--will likely either take action or, at the very least, try to explain why things are the way they are and promise to take action and then do so.

however, mysteryman mentioned passive-aggressive syndrome and, lordy, so many architects suffer from it. if your boss is a PA -- look up the criteria online -- then your coming to your boss and complaining is a good thing for him/her, because it confirms that s/he is fulfilling their goal of controlling you and making you unhappy. the more you complain, the more you will suffer.

the whole goal is for them to "win" in the form of making you quit.

so let them win -- and quit. my advice is find a job beforehand, if you can. but just walk away. legal action is probably futile and just confirms for your boss how large they loom in your life. just walk away and don't ask for a recommendation.

oh, and if you are in IDP, get those forms signed BEFORE you quit.

I think you will will go far 'e - calm communication beats hell-raising & saying nothing.

let's face it, when you're just starting out, it can be really intimidating to raise tough issues to the boss. But do it, you'll be alot happier - I know this from not doing it when I shoulda.

Not like it's gonna happen a lot - but when you take a job, try to get a healthy hourly paying slot. Note, this seemed to be more likely back in the 'GoGo 90s'. This goes counter to what I'm always preaching when you go for work 'on-your-own', (what a hypocrite, I is)but the key is to do the best you can for yourself. There's nothing wrong w/ that.

If a firm/boss knows that he will have to pay a premium for working someone past the 40hrs/wk, then he might actually do something called 'project management' & figure out how to do a job as efficiently as possible. In theory, at least. First, you've gotta get them to swallow the bait. If they don't, then you've got to get it all done in as little time as possible. Work efficiently, set your bounds, build teamwork & make it worth going to work. If I could only practice what I preach!

test out the waters, see if communication works. if your boss has a boss, or other partners, or you work in a corporate situation: external interests may weigh upon your boss to change.

if not, negotiate well that next job. it is what i did -- i worked in a horrible environment: PA boss, crap work, crap pay, endless admonitions of "draw faster!" and "no overtime!" sole owner, no interest in any kind of change.

well, i just quit. very soon i found another job which is the best place i've ever worked. i'm paid honorably, my license is respected, and while i have worked my arse off it has been in a good cause, and i enjoy it.

bonne chance.

I agree with what has been said...communication is always the first and best way to resolve things. My point is though is that more often than not, architects and interns are overworked and overburdened...simply because the partners and PMs know that they are at the advantage in the working relationship.

When communication fails and it is a widespread and common practice...then what? Union? Lawyers? Quitting? I think the answer lies in how we are broadly organized and how we can take an accounting of and solving our own problems, as a profession.

good conversation and lots of good advice and ideas. BUT...

bryden, johnprolly, et al - AIA has nothing to with your status as a professional, only as a member of the AIA. it's a big club with voluntary membership and dues. it has no enforcement power. that is under the jurisdiction of the state boards.

the AIA has been very clear about professional responsibilities regarding compensation for time. the only threat they have is to revoke membership in the AIA, however. they have no power over your license or your ability to practice as a professional. to some principals their AIA membership is a concern and it's worth mending their ways. (i think it was eisenman, for example, who risked loss of FAIA status and reformed, at least while they were paying attention.)

also, this exploitation has nothing to do with whether the employee is AIA or not. nor whether he/she is registered. but, keep in mind, these are different things! an employee may be unregistered and non-AIA, unregistered and Associate AIA, registered and non-AIA, or registered and AIA. they are separate, but complementary.

this confusion comes up entirely too often on this site.

steven, there is something interesting about this confusion also, that is, a lot of the work force posting here, yearning for some kind of a representation about the salaries, wages, working hours and conditions. this could be a window of opportunity for AIA to capture the moment and push for legistlations regarding these issues.
easier said than done, but the need is there. the problem with AIA often lies with that, it is an organization seeded with business 'owners' and therefore it mainly caters to them. this alone gives a lot of disdain to people who are recently licenced and working in offices owned by an AIA member.
and AIA seems to like it that way. yes there is this problem.

it seems that in our desire and need to gain experience in this field, we will often take a job without really thinking about hours, pay, benefits, office dysfunction, etc. it is only after we start to feel exploited that we question the practices of our employers. hopefully, you don't have to wash your bosses bimmer.

I understand that the AIA is a voluntary entity and doesn't have the authority to broadly enforce malpractice. BUT...Isn't it time that the architecture profession have an entity that does?...Or is everyone content with the sh*t-pay, gypsy-esque work relationships that further marginalizes us to the level of line cooks (according to CNN) in terms of our professional rights?

Have a problem with your boss not paying you, overworking you, sexually harassing you, cheating on payroll taxes, etc...? Quiting or communicating may or may not solve the specific problem, but it sure doesn't mean that profound problems that are abundant and consistant across the board will ever be fixed.

Eisenman is a good and easy example...just to start. Here he teaches and speaks at elite universities around the world, is respected in certain circles, is afforded the opportunity to build high profile memorials, stadiums, and other "buildings" as well as people wanting to publish his work. Regardless of what he claims, he makes good coin and is by all means free to take advantage of the opportunities that comes his way. But if he doesn't by any stretch of the imagination compensate his very well-educated employees who does the work, offer health insurance, or provide all the other fundamental responsibilities that make up the basic labor laws...why should he be allowed to practice architecture, be allowed to be called a professional...or call himself an Architect, let alone be distinguished with an "F" in front of his AIA? His clients may or may not know about his practices, nor may they really care. The public who reads the heart warming newspaper stories about him and his magnificent projects never hears what really goes on in his office. He is an easy example because almost everyone is familiar (or knows someone) with the stories of the practices that goes on in his "office"...but it goes on because there is no accountability.

What about the other high profile offices? Everyone knows who I am talking about, right?...the usual suspects...sh*t pay, long hours, bad working conditions. Even worse, what about the not-so-high profile offices that pull the exact same crap....every day. Dare I ask in situations such as this...Where is the accountability is this "profession"?

My question is this...If the AIA isn't willing or able to act on behalf of "us"...who can? How can a legitimate professional association, that is inclusive and responsive to the broad concerns of all principals, all architects, all graduates, and all students (even interns) come about?

my first real job was 80-100 hours a week. everyone including the boss worked those hours and in fact he worked much longer. That was the culture and i had no complaints, especially as i was paid good OT wages and a large bonus twice a year. This was a small 15 person office mind, not SOM or anything; somehow they were able to maintain the fairness about the hours and pay; there is no excuse for fucking the staff.

i still think it was a good job. i got 5+ "normal" years of experience in 3, and was running big-ish projects by the end of the gig. However, on entering year four i found myself entirely burned out, and decided to quit. Best choice I ever made.

Suing for overwork is a strange choice, and underestimates your value; it only makes sense if you have no leverage at all as an employee, which i find a bit hard to believe. My office spent a lot of money and time training me, and i took that investment to another firm just about the time i was starting to make money for them. Not a good business plan for them, and even though we split amicably the resentment on their side remains. I feel no guilt about that. It was their choice to take over my every waking hour and my choice to say no. Other firms are not so greedy and still do good work.

If you have any position of authority seems your employer ain't gonna want you to leave. so talk to him. and if s/he ain't listening, then leave. easy nuf.

people will always try to get the most out of you... if you let them... if you started out going all out, and just working non-stop, then you got them used to that... it's always good to work hard, but add some laid back attitude, that way you won't be in the situation you are in.... I would go to the boss and tell him you can only work maximum 20 hours of overtime a week, and if it's more then it has to be compensated very well... ask to have a new contract signed... or that you need to take some courses or something, if they can't understand that there is such a thing as a life outside of work, then it is time to look elsewhere..good luck

p.s- you don't want to be in a union.... they only look out for the bosses interest and their political causes when it comes down to it..... they will take their dues and forget about you, until they need to renegotiate a new contract and raise the dues because of it....

I think I overstated at the top of this post. What I meant was, are there rules or laws regarding what employers can expect of employees. (i.e. are companies required by law to give employees comp days or anything? Or can they just work them until they expire?) And is there something like a Better Business Bureau that monitors these things?

I slept through my professional practice class, so I don't remember.

Sure, I'm at the job of my own free will. I suppose I could leave. But I do like the job—the work's great, the people are interesting, the pay, if I worked 40 hours a week, is good. The hours are killing me.

And the difficulty is that if I'm not there those insane hours, then some other poor schmuck will have to take up the slack. There are no deals to be made. No way to fix the problem except fixing the culture of the office.

The problem is, they have too few employees for the amount of work. And it's a fast-paced, badly managed company. Many of the problems are the result of just not planning ahead.

then you've got to push for a new hire.

The only laws I can remember are that you should get time and a half above forty hours a week, and I think double time after 60 hours. And they're required to give you eight hours between when you leave at night and you have to come in the next morning. In California anyways.

my old office was exactly the same. unrealistic schedules and not enough staff for the amount of work we had coming in. that whole management thing is hard to get on top of. maybe suggest hiring an office manager...

hmm, as i recall a few families out here sued the father/husband's company when said fellow expired from overworking. something to look forward to...?

yes, majo, it's called the Fair Labor Standards Act, and all employees in the U.S. are subject to it. That goes for Eisenmann's office just as much as the local Subway franchise.

http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/flsa/

Many owners of architecture firms commonly, consistently, and knowingly put themselves at legal risk by employing you the way they do. This comes with long-established ways of practicing as well as complacency by all parties (you are an example, as is your boss. So am I at times.) Whether you permit it, love it, or hate it doesn't affect that your firm's employment practices are not in keeping with the FLSA, thus violating federal law. Most aren't. Now, we all know that's not how it really works, and we all sign up for what we get ourselves into and it's a mutual thing. None of us are really victims here, or at least shouldn't be. Employees gain something, employers gain something, and both look the other way when a fed asks how everything's going.

The AIA or any other voluntary, non-legislative body has no legislative domain over these issues. It's why we have a Department of Labor. The AIA has lobbyists and can try to sway legislation toward a goal. But they don't make laws.

Its been four years since my pro practice class in school, so I'm not sure if I remember this correctly, but can't an Architect have his license revoked for issues of ethics and malpractice. Such as if interns file complaints with NCARB about an architects professional ethics with regard to blatantly braking labor laws, then the architect will have to answer to NCARB. Does anyone know if this is at all accurate?

Getting one's professional license suspended/revoked would be a pretty good deterrant against these types of practices.

go watch swimming with sharks. maybe it will give youa few ideas on how to present ideas to a shitty boss.