With offices offering temp. contract jobs with no benefits, and meager wages, it seems that if a union doesn't form now it will easily be another 100 years before it actually happens.
With 50% of us unemployed right now, it seems the best time to make a Union happen, after all 50% includes licensed, unlicensed. Maybe I'm just a dreamer.
(sigh) - why do we keep coming back to this topic? unions would kill off what little is left of the profession. if it doesn't happen on the legal side (i mean, if we're going to jack up our fees to cover all these glorious benefits and salaries, you think someone at the state level won't push to eliminate the need for the 'expensive leeches' (a direct quote by a state senator here in pushing through a bill last year to allow int. designers the right to stamp anything but structure), it's going to happen internally - the ownership will simply walk away. last thing i need is people working solely for a paycheck.
its seems that the interior designers are slowly encroaching on the architects services, for example Gensler's president was one of the advocates for interior designers to get their own license. These interior decorators have powerful allies.
how do you think unions work? are you familiar with their pay structure? because, although i am not, outed would be correct; union architects would almost certainly guarantee an increase in fees.
here's a unique thought; get your license, own your life and quit complaining.
architecture sucks, but what sucks more are whiny little pukes that don't force AIA/NCARB and states to change about how are profession works and/or doesn't work.
you want change, how about getting dirty for a change.
don - what do you think a union would provide or negotiate for? i'm being serious - what would a union contribute to a firm? if it's selfishly tilted towards the employees, then say so, but what would they be able to guarantee in your opinion?
"unions would kill off what little is left of the profession."
gee why am i not surprised that people view unions as a threat? This only confirms that it is time to kill off the profession as we know it, and start all over again, at least within the USA. Hell even the interior designer are getting the best of Architects these days, look how far they have come, from mere cake decorators a few years ago, to an organized group on par with an Architect. Which is pathetic, its time for all of us to come together and have some serious talks about dismantling this crazy maze we call architecture.
maybe making Unions is not the entire answer. For one, we all know that 99.9 percent of architects are always at odds with each other, maybe before any change happens we all need to simply get along, even if we don't respect each other.
There already is an Architect's Union. The Union Internationale Des Architectes.
"From the 27 delegations present at the founding assembly, the UIA has grown to encompass the key professional organisations of architects in 124 countries and territories, and now represents, through these organisations, more than 1,300,000 architects worldwide."
outed: "what do you think a union would provide or negotiate for? i'm being serious - what would a union contribute to a firm? if it's selfishly tilted towards the employees, then say so, but what would they be able to guarantee in your opinion?"
Perhaps it can stomp out unfair business practices that makes competing for jobs unsustainable. Unpaid internships should be shunned, yet they give such offices advantage of lowballing their fees. Excessive unpaid overtime is also an issue of competitive disadvantage. The fees continue to fall both in good and bad times...
If you want to run an office that fairly compensates the staff and doesn't overwork them, you will have a hard time competing against firms that do such.
Yes both of these are employee protections, but would benefit the ownership in the long run. We are not running vegetable stands here. We should stop lowballing our produce so much.
Also, a union like entity could stand up for all kinds of small issues. Is Autodesk extorting the profession? Can we provide cheaper healthcare for all our members by collectively bargaining for prices? How do we raise the profile of architecture with the general public? All the things that AIA should be looking into, but has never done.
Perhaps I am not thinking of a union. I'm thinking of a post-modern freemason's guild.
None of this will ever happen, but the idea of architects having a labor organization isn't that horrible.
omg. please, please quit architecture already, please?? i think the sooner the whiny complaining shoe shiners quit, the better off the profession will be.
rusty - the small issues part of your post i'm all for. in fact, i've got a co-op set up to address most of that. email me offline if you want more info (don't have medical covered - a whole other issue).
the front end will be impossible to police in a global market. take everything you've said and transfer the firm to canada or mexico (or china, india, or brazil while we're at it). if there are any studies which actually correlate low fees to unpaid and/or overworked staff, i would (without sarcasm) love to see them posted. if not, this could be a grant subject for someone.
most of the firms that can get away without paying or overworking staff tend to be higher profile 'design' based practices, which (in my experience) it's the opposite - they're competing for higher profile and higher paying commissions. where we see lowball fees here, for example, are firms that are someone working out of an attic or in a farther out suburban office space they locked in for $5/sf and they're just fine taking home 70k a year for the principal staff. they don't tend to be very 'high' design and tend to rely on cranking out sheets of generic details and wall sections they recycle from project to project. they're very good at doing the work quickly, the way the customer wants, and they make a little money doing it. just like mcdonalds. the challenge for a firm like us is that they've been at this for 30 years - along the way, they've picked up the municipal work that everyone ignored while chasing glam work doing condos, research unis, or high budget corporate interiors. my overhead is low compared to a lot of my in-town competition, but they're just going to kill us, use sub-standard consultants, and use less of them.
outed:"a union won't fix what i've just described."
But perhaps it could.
You just described being underpriced by some practitioners, while still having lower overhead than others. You are describing a race towards the lowest fee as means of survival. Quality of work takes a backseat as a result. It wasn't always so.
In 1968, the United States Department of Justice filed suit, under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890, against the American Institute of Architects’ Chicago Chapter for restraint of trade, essentially for price-fixing via openly published fee schedules to which all members were bound. National AIA stepped in and spent the next 15 years slowly losing that case. Same happened in '78 with NSPE. Over the last 20 years same happened to architects in UK, France, Netherlands and Finland.
This is all surprisingly poorly documented on the web. AIA is not legally allowed to even mention the term "standardized fee schedule" anywhere, as part of the settlement. AIA is technically still under DOJ's watch. I'm not sure if younger architects on here are aware of significance of these rulings...
Now, I'm completely against price-fixing, and not the biggest fan of certain types of unions, but our profession is in shambles. AIA has no power. Our well being is completely at whims of the free-markets. Each architect is out there fending for themselves.
I'm very open to creative ideas. Unions set rates for their tradespeople based on skill and experience. We don't have to do the same, but doing nothing seems to be the worst possible option.
b3ta:"omg. please, please quit architecture already, please?? i think the sooner the whiny complaining shoe shiners quit, the better off the profession will be. "
I am not sure to whom that comment was directed, but way to flex your intellectual muscles by blurting out a well worn-out slogan of mouthbreathers everywhere: "if you don't like (this country, profession, city, state, office) then GTFO. Fuck you for asking for betterment".
“Here, here's American Gladiators. Watch this, shut up, go back to bed America, here is American Gladiators, here is 56 channels of it! Watch these pituitary retards bang their fucking skulls together and congratulate you on the living in the land of freedom. Here you go America - you are free to do what well tell you! You are free to do what we tell you! -Hicks
unions are not the solution. we have seen the fiasco in the automobile industry. competition is the best thing going for us right now. all the losers are out, and only those that have the skill and talent to get through the shitty times and sharpen their skills for future success should do so. NO MORE FUCKING EXCUSES!
spacefraud:"only those that have the skill and talent"
What does either skill or talent have to do with anything? I take it you have both of those? Every other egomaniac does...
"all the losers are out"
Talk dirty to me. Yeah. I like it when you get all kinky. Your bravado to call everyone who lost their job a loser is fantastic insight on the profession. Keep it up.
"we have seen the fiasco in the automobile industry."
Another home run! How do you do it? Industry collapse explained in half a sentence.
"NO MORE FUCKING EXCUSES!"
I love it when your yell and curse. So manly. Do you also do private parties?
"competition is the best thing going for us right now. all the losers are out, and only those that have the skill and talent to get through the shitty times and sharpen their skills for future success should do so. NO MORE FUCKING EXCUSES!"- spacefraud
Are you kidding me? everyone knows that offices got rid of the so called "technical guys" who actually can take a stupid napkin sketch through construction administration and project closeout. Was sara Palin standing behind you space fraud? Did you actually go to college? Why are you talking like you didn't?
So, if unions are not the solution? Then what is? you speak of future success? what are you talking about? Success in this profession can't happen if you are still thinking like a Cavemen who hunts and gathers.
We have to Unite in the truest sense of the word, because right now Architecture as a profession is in a very delicate stage, and while we (architects and non licensed arch's) are arguing our profession is being taken apart by professions that are considered our arch nemesis, namely (GC's, Engineers, Consultants, Interior Designers, developers, even from within the profession, I'm sure i missed a few more) There will not be any future for us as a profession if we keep this mentality that "this is just the way things are".
you two are the Heckel and Jeckel of the architecture profession, if that's what you are in. no one is saying that we should just roll over and take it in the ass, no one here is suggesting that we be all GGG about the situation, you numb-nuts. what most of us are saying, if you just take the dildos out of your ears, long enough to listen - you know that active part of hearing. unions are an adversarial position, against who? glad you asked. AGAINST OTHER ARCHITECTS. now, go form your union, and when you do it, remember this; i'll undercut your prices so fiercely, as to make your ivy league paper worthless. you'll be doing what you always wanted to do, get me coffee.
personally, i'd say competition is the only thing architecture DOESN'T have going for it. luck seems to have played the biggest role in which firms have survived, and luck as a determining factor is DANGEROUS. i "survived" the recession, and i don't think i am better than many of my friends who got the axe. i just happened to be in an office with more public work (which incidentally can barely be called architecture even though it was being done by a "well-known" firm.)
doctors have a union, it's just called the AMA. lawyers do too - the bar association. i think what it all comes down to is that the AIA does not do what it is USED to do. remember that price-fixing lawsuit they lost for us? remember all that money that could be in your pocket but all you got in return was a lousy magazine? sure, they have alerted me to a couple issues that I WAS ALREADY AWARE OF (like i am sure most licensed professionals were). but other than that, they seem only to excel at running a legal monoply due to their limited funds and resources. but if they can have a monopoly, and every other licensed professional can too, why can't architects? i personally think THAT is the root of the problems, not the presence or lack of a union. architects used to charge something fair. now we have cut it to the bone in order to keep the work churning, which means any ebb in the economy costs thousands of jobs/lives. can't a group of highly educated people do better than that?
instead of unionizing, i recommend reporting firms for non-compliance with tax or labor laws. these are all the firms that are improperly classifying employees as "independent contractors" who are not ics. these are the firms that are improperly classifying employees as "hourly exempt," so called "salary employees," in order to avoid paying overtime when they are in fact interns. the first is a violation of the irs tax code; the second, a violation of the fair labor standards act. the federal government does not look kindly on these offenses. if you really want to create change in this profession for the position of interns, these are the most effective tactics you have at your disposal. learn the laws and then report violations.
rusty, everything you write under "Perhaps it could" in the post above rings very true. I think a union is a bad idea because "union" has a nasty, nasty ring to it - thugs and promotion of people regardless of ability is what I think of when I hear "union". Yes, I know unions also brought about minimum wages, jobsite safety requirements, an end to child labor, etc. and those things are obviously crucial.
I like the notion of a "guild" but again: how would that work, how would it benefit people who are doing well without it, what would its goals be, and would I be forced to belong, especially if I didn't agree with those goals?
You're right that finding info on the anti-trust action against the AIA is surprisingly difficult, and it's a huge piece of our profession's history.
Speaking of which, I DO think we're in the end days of our profession's history. The whole notion of design and who can do it is changing so rapidly, and what we do is being so invaded by other professions, that I do think architecture won't be a licensed profession by the end of my lifetime (that would be about 40 years from now). So yeah, I'm not doing a lot to change that because frankly I'm busy doing my work AND I have no idea how one would change this anyway.
BTW, is there any other white collar licensed profession that's unionized?
The first three links may require that you register at the publication's website in order to view the archived article.
The last item is an AIA document providing AIA members with guidance about how to avoid antitrust complications and probably contains the most 'meat' about this particular controversy.
Any 'union' or 'guild' that would undertake activities the Justice Department construes as 'restraint of trade' likely would encounter a similar response.
By the way, I've posted this information on archinect before, but it's a little known fact that - once-up-a-time - there was in America a union for Architects, known as the Federation of Architects, Engineers, Chemists, and Technicians (FAECT). FAECT was active during the 1930s and 1940s.
FAECT was heavily populated by technical professionals with a strong leaning towards the far left. I believe a number of the technical professionals who worked on the Manhattan Project during WW2 were members of this union. Eventually, FAECT lost its way and expired during the McCarthy era. I provide a link below that gives more detail:
wow, that was a landmark decision, quiz. check out these quotes from 1990:
"It's a thing in the rules . . . that you never discuss fees," Jacobsen said matter-of-factly. "If you interview us, select us for our ability, our experience or our necktie, but never talk about fees. Don't come in and have us tell you our design philosophy and then ask us our fee.
"Of the men and women whose work I admire, we'll never do it," he said of the practice of quoting fees for a building when there is a competition for architects.
("I don't respond to a client who asks me to match a competitor's price," said Patrick J. Killen, principal of the Los Angeles firm Architrave and a director of the Cabrillo chapter of the AIA. "It comes down to a question of ego: People should be coming to me for all the right reasons--that I'm the man for the job, and not that I can shave 2% off the price."
can you imagine an architect uttering these words today?
how this pertains to "unionizing," i can't really say, but a most interesting, now historical, judgment. thanks for sharing.
historically the role of trade unions (extended from the guild systems of trained artisans) was to protect knowledge from those not in the trade and which limited competition (and innovation) the idea of a contemporary guild system for architects would first mean limiting the amount of students studying architecture and perhaps a wholesale dismantling of the architectural education system. if, for example, architecture firms used the apprentice model of those guilds, (which usually required the payment of a fee by the apprentice to the master and usually took seven years) then we would have a greatly reduced number of practitioners in the architecture world. we would see less unemployment and higher wages. the oversaturation of "architects" in the marketplace combined with the emphasis on design rather than technical expertise and the continued and outdated idea of a generalist education has eroded the profession. a return to the good old days of unpaid apprenticeships could put this profession back on the road to recovery.
"then we would have a greatly reduced number of practitioners in the architecture world. we would see less unemployment and higher wages.
IF (and it's a big one) and only if you can simultaneously hold on to the legal requirement to use an architect for every project. otherwise, if the reduction in #'s happens, and fees go up dramatically, lots of other parties are standing at the gate ready to fully exploit (and end) our near monopoly on designing buildings.
"the oversaturation of "architects" in the marketplace combined with the emphasis on design rather than technical expertise and the continued and outdated idea of a generalist education has eroded the profession. a return to the good old days of unpaid apprenticeships could put this profession back on the road to recovery."
over-saturation isn't the problem. but i totally agree with your other two observations. generalists (and a flight to the humanities instead of engineering) are killing us, both in the clients mind and in our pocketbooks.
last point i'll make: the ama and aba are not unions. not even close. in fact, there is no legal requirement to have to use a doctor if you're sick or a lawyer if you get sued. the only thing the law says is that you can't hold yourself out to be doctor or lawyer without meeting the minimum standards. we have more of a legal monopoly on our 'necessity' than they ever will. we're just too stupid to figure out how to actually use it...
yes, well to reverse the trend of obsolescence, the profession would have to take back its "master builder" position. this, of course, would mean much more science, math, engineering as well as practical business classes rather than the current educational system of fancy graphics. and who wants that?
The author clearly thinks the architects are in the wrong, and are still practicing price-fixing. Nonetheless, the collection of information is quite well researched. A must read for any architect.
b3ta: Get your own coffee and stop sounding so fat.
Can the same thing be said about Contractor Pricing...when they all fall within 5 % of one another. Seems like when this happens it is more likely the Architectect and the team of engineers have done a remarkable job to provide a design and construction documents which convey a clear signal as to the extent of the project.
"yes, well to reverse the trend of obsolescence, the profession would have to take back its "master builder" position. this, of course, would mean much more science, math, engineering as well as practical business classes rather than the current educational system of fancy graphics. and who wants that?"
Do Doctors and lawyers pulling in 250/ hour have a union?
Methinks not.
The quote above is really what is at the root of the problem. Sure there are others, but this one is it.
day laborers have a union. They make around 30/ hour.
Hey! Wait a minute! Perhaps a union isn't such a bad idea after all...architects would be lucky to consistently pull in a cool 15/ hour!
Okay...so go ahead and unionize, if this is motivation enough.
Nov 29, 10 7:47 pm ·
·
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.
Architecture Union...it's about time!!!
Architecture Union???
This blog is hilarious!
http://architectureunion.blogspot.com/
that's beautiful...i think i teared up a little bit.
With offices offering temp. contract jobs with no benefits, and meager wages, it seems that if a union doesn't form now it will easily be another 100 years before it actually happens.
With 50% of us unemployed right now, it seems the best time to make a Union happen, after all 50% includes licensed, unlicensed. Maybe I'm just a dreamer.
(sigh) - why do we keep coming back to this topic? unions would kill off what little is left of the profession. if it doesn't happen on the legal side (i mean, if we're going to jack up our fees to cover all these glorious benefits and salaries, you think someone at the state level won't push to eliminate the need for the 'expensive leeches' (a direct quote by a state senator here in pushing through a bill last year to allow int. designers the right to stamp anything but structure), it's going to happen internally - the ownership will simply walk away. last thing i need is people working solely for a paycheck.
its seems that the interior designers are slowly encroaching on the architects services, for example Gensler's president was one of the advocates for interior designers to get their own license. These interior decorators have powerful allies.
outed who said anything about jacking up fees?
how do you think unions work? are you familiar with their pay structure? because, although i am not, outed would be correct; union architects would almost certainly guarantee an increase in fees.
here's a unique thought; get your license, own your life and quit complaining.
architecture sucks, but what sucks more are whiny little pukes that don't force AIA/NCARB and states to change about how are profession works and/or doesn't work.
you want change, how about getting dirty for a change.
Amen, beta.
don - what do you think a union would provide or negotiate for? i'm being serious - what would a union contribute to a firm? if it's selfishly tilted towards the employees, then say so, but what would they be able to guarantee in your opinion?
"unions would kill off what little is left of the profession."
gee why am i not surprised that people view unions as a threat? This only confirms that it is time to kill off the profession as we know it, and start all over again, at least within the USA. Hell even the interior designer are getting the best of Architects these days, look how far they have come, from mere cake decorators a few years ago, to an organized group on par with an Architect. Which is pathetic, its time for all of us to come together and have some serious talks about dismantling this crazy maze we call architecture.
so don, again, what will a union do to remedy the situation you've described?
outed i dont mean this to be a smart ass, but if you look it up I guarantee that it will be explained to you better than this Revit monkey can.
maybe making Unions is not the entire answer. For one, we all know that 99.9 percent of architects are always at odds with each other, maybe before any change happens we all need to simply get along, even if we don't respect each other.
I think we respect each other, but getting along?!
what was i thinking!
unions are for degenerates
What?
There already is an Architect's Union. The Union Internationale Des Architectes.
"From the 27 delegations present at the founding assembly, the UIA has grown to encompass the key professional organisations of architects in 124 countries and territories, and now represents, through these organisations, more than 1,300,000 architects worldwide."
http://www.uia-architectes.org
outed: "what do you think a union would provide or negotiate for? i'm being serious - what would a union contribute to a firm? if it's selfishly tilted towards the employees, then say so, but what would they be able to guarantee in your opinion?"
Perhaps it can stomp out unfair business practices that makes competing for jobs unsustainable. Unpaid internships should be shunned, yet they give such offices advantage of lowballing their fees. Excessive unpaid overtime is also an issue of competitive disadvantage. The fees continue to fall both in good and bad times...
If you want to run an office that fairly compensates the staff and doesn't overwork them, you will have a hard time competing against firms that do such.
Yes both of these are employee protections, but would benefit the ownership in the long run. We are not running vegetable stands here. We should stop lowballing our produce so much.
Also, a union like entity could stand up for all kinds of small issues. Is Autodesk extorting the profession? Can we provide cheaper healthcare for all our members by collectively bargaining for prices? How do we raise the profile of architecture with the general public? All the things that AIA should be looking into, but has never done.
Perhaps I am not thinking of a union. I'm thinking of a post-modern freemason's guild.
None of this will ever happen, but the idea of architects having a labor organization isn't that horrible.
omg. please, please quit architecture already, please?? i think the sooner the whiny complaining shoe shiners quit, the better off the profession will be.
rusty - the small issues part of your post i'm all for. in fact, i've got a co-op set up to address most of that. email me offline if you want more info (don't have medical covered - a whole other issue).
the front end will be impossible to police in a global market. take everything you've said and transfer the firm to canada or mexico (or china, india, or brazil while we're at it). if there are any studies which actually correlate low fees to unpaid and/or overworked staff, i would (without sarcasm) love to see them posted. if not, this could be a grant subject for someone.
most of the firms that can get away without paying or overworking staff tend to be higher profile 'design' based practices, which (in my experience) it's the opposite - they're competing for higher profile and higher paying commissions. where we see lowball fees here, for example, are firms that are someone working out of an attic or in a farther out suburban office space they locked in for $5/sf and they're just fine taking home 70k a year for the principal staff. they don't tend to be very 'high' design and tend to rely on cranking out sheets of generic details and wall sections they recycle from project to project. they're very good at doing the work quickly, the way the customer wants, and they make a little money doing it. just like mcdonalds. the challenge for a firm like us is that they've been at this for 30 years - along the way, they've picked up the municipal work that everyone ignored while chasing glam work doing condos, research unis, or high budget corporate interiors. my overhead is low compared to a lot of my in-town competition, but they're just going to kill us, use sub-standard consultants, and use less of them.
a union won't fix what i've just described.
outed:"a union won't fix what i've just described."
But perhaps it could.
You just described being underpriced by some practitioners, while still having lower overhead than others. You are describing a race towards the lowest fee as means of survival. Quality of work takes a backseat as a result. It wasn't always so.
In 1968, the United States Department of Justice filed suit, under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890, against the American Institute of Architects’ Chicago Chapter for restraint of trade, essentially for price-fixing via openly published fee schedules to which all members were bound. National AIA stepped in and spent the next 15 years slowly losing that case. Same happened in '78 with NSPE. Over the last 20 years same happened to architects in UK, France, Netherlands and Finland.
This is all surprisingly poorly documented on the web. AIA is not legally allowed to even mention the term "standardized fee schedule" anywhere, as part of the settlement. AIA is technically still under DOJ's watch. I'm not sure if younger architects on here are aware of significance of these rulings...
Now, I'm completely against price-fixing, and not the biggest fan of certain types of unions, but our profession is in shambles. AIA has no power. Our well being is completely at whims of the free-markets. Each architect is out there fending for themselves.
I'm very open to creative ideas. Unions set rates for their tradespeople based on skill and experience. We don't have to do the same, but doing nothing seems to be the worst possible option.
b3ta:"omg. please, please quit architecture already, please?? i think the sooner the whiny complaining shoe shiners quit, the better off the profession will be. "
I am not sure to whom that comment was directed, but way to flex your intellectual muscles by blurting out a well worn-out slogan of mouthbreathers everywhere: "if you don't like (this country, profession, city, state, office) then GTFO. Fuck you for asking for betterment".
Cripes!
puhlease. yawn...boring. back to the bolts v. colts...
Ah, b3ta, you are one of those.
“Here, here's American Gladiators. Watch this, shut up, go back to bed America, here is American Gladiators, here is 56 channels of it! Watch these pituitary retards bang their fucking skulls together and congratulate you on the living in the land of freedom. Here you go America - you are free to do what well tell you! You are free to do what we tell you! -Hicks
unions are not the solution. we have seen the fiasco in the automobile industry. competition is the best thing going for us right now. all the losers are out, and only those that have the skill and talent to get through the shitty times and sharpen their skills for future success should do so. NO MORE FUCKING EXCUSES!
spacefraud:"only those that have the skill and talent"
What does either skill or talent have to do with anything? I take it you have both of those? Every other egomaniac does...
"all the losers are out"
Talk dirty to me. Yeah. I like it when you get all kinky. Your bravado to call everyone who lost their job a loser is fantastic insight on the profession. Keep it up.
"we have seen the fiasco in the automobile industry."
Another home run! How do you do it? Industry collapse explained in half a sentence.
"NO MORE FUCKING EXCUSES!"
I love it when your yell and curse. So manly. Do you also do private parties?
"competition is the best thing going for us right now. all the losers are out, and only those that have the skill and talent to get through the shitty times and sharpen their skills for future success should do so. NO MORE FUCKING EXCUSES!"- spacefraud
Are you kidding me? everyone knows that offices got rid of the so called "technical guys" who actually can take a stupid napkin sketch through construction administration and project closeout. Was sara Palin standing behind you space fraud? Did you actually go to college? Why are you talking like you didn't?
So, if unions are not the solution? Then what is? you speak of future success? what are you talking about? Success in this profession can't happen if you are still thinking like a Cavemen who hunts and gathers.
We have to Unite in the truest sense of the word, because right now Architecture as a profession is in a very delicate stage, and while we (architects and non licensed arch's) are arguing our profession is being taken apart by professions that are considered our arch nemesis, namely (GC's, Engineers, Consultants, Interior Designers, developers, even from within the profession, I'm sure i missed a few more) There will not be any future for us as a profession if we keep this mentality that "this is just the way things are".
you two are the Heckel and Jeckel of the architecture profession, if that's what you are in. no one is saying that we should just roll over and take it in the ass, no one here is suggesting that we be all GGG about the situation, you numb-nuts. what most of us are saying, if you just take the dildos out of your ears, long enough to listen - you know that active part of hearing. unions are an adversarial position, against who? glad you asked. AGAINST OTHER ARCHITECTS. now, go form your union, and when you do it, remember this; i'll undercut your prices so fiercely, as to make your ivy league paper worthless. you'll be doing what you always wanted to do, get me coffee.
b3ta:
"just roll over and take it in the ass"
"just take the dildos out of your ears"
Slow down. I like you, but we just met.
"unions are an adversarial position, against who? glad you asked. AGAINST OTHER ARCHITECTS."
and
"remember this; i'll undercut your prices so fiercely,"
Oh, the sweet, sweet ironing.
personally, i'd say competition is the only thing architecture DOESN'T have going for it. luck seems to have played the biggest role in which firms have survived, and luck as a determining factor is DANGEROUS. i "survived" the recession, and i don't think i am better than many of my friends who got the axe. i just happened to be in an office with more public work (which incidentally can barely be called architecture even though it was being done by a "well-known" firm.)
doctors have a union, it's just called the AMA. lawyers do too - the bar association. i think what it all comes down to is that the AIA does not do what it is USED to do. remember that price-fixing lawsuit they lost for us? remember all that money that could be in your pocket but all you got in return was a lousy magazine? sure, they have alerted me to a couple issues that I WAS ALREADY AWARE OF (like i am sure most licensed professionals were). but other than that, they seem only to excel at running a legal monoply due to their limited funds and resources. but if they can have a monopoly, and every other licensed professional can too, why can't architects? i personally think THAT is the root of the problems, not the presence or lack of a union. architects used to charge something fair. now we have cut it to the bone in order to keep the work churning, which means any ebb in the economy costs thousands of jobs/lives. can't a group of highly educated people do better than that?
instead of unionizing, i recommend reporting firms for non-compliance with tax or labor laws. these are all the firms that are improperly classifying employees as "independent contractors" who are not ics. these are the firms that are improperly classifying employees as "hourly exempt," so called "salary employees," in order to avoid paying overtime when they are in fact interns. the first is a violation of the irs tax code; the second, a violation of the fair labor standards act. the federal government does not look kindly on these offenses. if you really want to create change in this profession for the position of interns, these are the most effective tactics you have at your disposal. learn the laws and then report violations.
rusty, everything you write under "Perhaps it could" in the post above rings very true. I think a union is a bad idea because "union" has a nasty, nasty ring to it - thugs and promotion of people regardless of ability is what I think of when I hear "union". Yes, I know unions also brought about minimum wages, jobsite safety requirements, an end to child labor, etc. and those things are obviously crucial.
I like the notion of a "guild" but again: how would that work, how would it benefit people who are doing well without it, what would its goals be, and would I be forced to belong, especially if I didn't agree with those goals?
You're right that finding info on the anti-trust action against the AIA is surprisingly difficult, and it's a huge piece of our profession's history.
Speaking of which, I DO think we're in the end days of our profession's history. The whole notion of design and who can do it is changing so rapidly, and what we do is being so invaded by other professions, that I do think architecture won't be a licensed profession by the end of my lifetime (that would be about 40 years from now). So yeah, I'm not doing a lot to change that because frankly I'm busy doing my work AND I have no idea how one would change this anyway.
BTW, is there any other white collar licensed profession that's unionized?
And, this is all fun talk but i'm about to run off and spend the day at my local NAAB-certified college of architecture - donating my time.
ahh studs - feeling a bit rusty?
Links to info about the 1990 Consent Decree between the AIA and the US Department of Justice:
Justice Department Files Antitrust Suit Against Architects
American Institute of Architects Settles U.S. Suit on Pricing Policy Antitrust
Architects` Group To Drop Disputed Pricing Policy
The Sensitive Issue of Fees
The first three links may require that you register at the publication's website in order to view the archived article.
The last item is an AIA document providing AIA members with guidance about how to avoid antitrust complications and probably contains the most 'meat' about this particular controversy.
Any 'union' or 'guild' that would undertake activities the Justice Department construes as 'restraint of trade' likely would encounter a similar response.
By the way, I've posted this information on archinect before, but it's a little known fact that - once-up-a-time - there was in America a union for Architects, known as the Federation of Architects, Engineers, Chemists, and Technicians (FAECT). FAECT was active during the 1930s and 1940s.
FAECT was heavily populated by technical professionals with a strong leaning towards the far left. I believe a number of the technical professionals who worked on the Manhattan Project during WW2 were members of this union. 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
wow, that was a landmark decision, quiz. check out these quotes from 1990:
"It's a thing in the rules . . . that you never discuss fees," Jacobsen said matter-of-factly. "If you interview us, select us for our ability, our experience or our necktie, but never talk about fees. Don't come in and have us tell you our design philosophy and then ask us our fee.
"Of the men and women whose work I admire, we'll never do it," he said of the practice of quoting fees for a building when there is a competition for architects.
("I don't respond to a client who asks me to match a competitor's price," said Patrick J. Killen, principal of the Los Angeles firm Architrave and a director of the Cabrillo chapter of the AIA. "It comes down to a question of ego: People should be coming to me for all the right reasons--that I'm the man for the job, and not that I can shave 2% off the price."
can you imagine an architect uttering these words today?
how this pertains to "unionizing," i can't really say, but a most interesting, now historical, judgment. thanks for sharing.
historically the role of trade unions (extended from the guild systems of trained artisans) was to protect knowledge from those not in the trade and which limited competition (and innovation) the idea of a contemporary guild system for architects would first mean limiting the amount of students studying architecture and perhaps a wholesale dismantling of the architectural education system. if, for example, architecture firms used the apprentice model of those guilds, (which usually required the payment of a fee by the apprentice to the master and usually took seven years) then we would have a greatly reduced number of practitioners in the architecture world. we would see less unemployment and higher wages. the oversaturation of "architects" in the marketplace combined with the emphasis on design rather than technical expertise and the continued and outdated idea of a generalist education has eroded the profession. a return to the good old days of unpaid apprenticeships could put this profession back on the road to recovery.
Vado.. The Big Question is, "What would be the Role of NCARB?"
"then we would have a greatly reduced number of practitioners in the architecture world. we would see less unemployment and higher wages.
IF (and it's a big one) and only if you can simultaneously hold on to the legal requirement to use an architect for every project. otherwise, if the reduction in #'s happens, and fees go up dramatically, lots of other parties are standing at the gate ready to fully exploit (and end) our near monopoly on designing buildings.
"the oversaturation of "architects" in the marketplace combined with the emphasis on design rather than technical expertise and the continued and outdated idea of a generalist education has eroded the profession. a return to the good old days of unpaid apprenticeships could put this profession back on the road to recovery."
over-saturation isn't the problem. but i totally agree with your other two observations. generalists (and a flight to the humanities instead of engineering) are killing us, both in the clients mind and in our pocketbooks.
last point i'll make: the ama and aba are not unions. not even close. in fact, there is no legal requirement to have to use a doctor if you're sick or a lawyer if you get sued. the only thing the law says is that you can't hold yourself out to be doctor or lawyer without meeting the minimum standards. we have more of a legal monopoly on our 'necessity' than they ever will. we're just too stupid to figure out how to actually use it...
rustynails, i do like your mis-quoting of me, it reminds of a dick, cheney that is; it almost looks like i actually said what you quoted...
now, get my coffee and pick up those redlines, intern.
yes, well to reverse the trend of obsolescence, the profession would have to take back its "master builder" position. this, of course, would mean much more science, math, engineering as well as practical business classes rather than the current educational system of fancy graphics. and who wants that?
Here is a great essay on history of fee schedules in architecture, engineering, and even law.
The author clearly thinks the architects are in the wrong, and are still practicing price-fixing. Nonetheless, the collection of information is quite well researched. A must read for any architect.
b3ta: Get your own coffee and stop sounding so fat.
Can the same thing be said about Contractor Pricing...when they all fall within 5 % of one another. Seems like when this happens it is more likely the Architectect and the team of engineers have done a remarkable job to provide a design and construction documents which convey a clear signal as to the extent of the project.
that's phat, intern, now BACK TO REDLINING MY MALL OF EUROPE!
"yes, well to reverse the trend of obsolescence, the profession would have to take back its "master builder" position. this, of course, would mean much more science, math, engineering as well as practical business classes rather than the current educational system of fancy graphics. and who wants that?"
Do Doctors and lawyers pulling in 250/ hour have a union?
Methinks not.
The quote above is really what is at the root of the problem. Sure there are others, but this one is it.
day laborers have a union. They make around 30/ hour.
Hey! Wait a minute! Perhaps a union isn't such a bad idea after all...architects would be lucky to consistently pull in a cool 15/ hour!
Okay...so go ahead and unionize, if this is motivation enough.
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.