my studio professor in the fall had. he didn't like it at all.

they are one of those firms on the west side that thinks they are so important that they don't have to pay.....truth is they are not. the pay is bad and I also heard the work enviroment is pretty shitty

nixie?

two of my roommates worked there recently. the pay is actually quite good, better than what many of the rest of us had been getting paid at our summer internships. thats all i can really say... maybe they will chime in here.

Waiting for mine to chime as well. He'd say less than good things...

the pro-social and environmental aspirations of p+s are laudable, however, their conscience does not extend to the handling of their employees. one can certainly expect long hours with un- (or severely under) compensated overtime and low pay. i have heard tales of difficulties in making payroll, and the layoff of long-term employees for financial reasons. while i am not personally qualified to comment on the veracity of these claims, my own experience (of being paid significantly less than it was indicated i would receive) suggests borderline unethical hiring/payment practices. i know they have indulged in unpaid labor in the past, which is a fat black mark in my book.

that said, i think P+S is a good design office, certainly one of the more interesting in LA. my impression of larry is that he is essentially a reasonable guy, albeit the sort that some personalities might be unsuited to handle as a boss.

E.S. 3.1 Members should provide their associates and employees with a suitable working environment, compensate them fairly, and facilitate their professional development.

Huh. Does that Code of Ethics clause apply to Architecture firms?

I've worked with a couple of P & S alumni, and I would characterize their attitude towards their former firm as a mix of contempt and pity. But these are ex-employees, so you can imagine their reactions trend more to the negative than current employees.

It takes two to make the deals. If people didn't agree to work for free, there wouldn't be free labor to complain about (or to be had for that matter). No one is forcing anyone. E.S.3.1 and the rest of the AIA is a hack - they are the poorest group of lobbyists and professionalizing mediocre souls to befall this profession on the american side. Make choices based on what you believe, stick to them, if you don't like it get out - as opposed to a stupid manual.

b.

oh, yes. pugh and scarpa's work generally sucks. there's occasionally a good millimoment or so.

b.

no. there work doesn't generally suck. it just straight up sucks.

have you seen their new book? total ass.

i've admired the little bit of their work that i've seen published. will someone please elaborate on 'sucks' or 'total ass', please?

I second Steven. I think they produce some really nice work. Their 'Colorado Court' project is setting standards and they have some very unique single family homes.

I think it's fair - my only complaint about their work is that they expose all their services, but then don't really coordinate them. Spaghetti conduit and whatnot.

They have a couple of good projects, and they're trying to do good architecture at least.

The whole 'I'm overworked and underpayed' tune at any noted design firm is bullshit. Every boutique firm treats their interns the same way. Its part of the deal for being a part of Architecture with a 'A' (or at least an attempt of it). Its not even their fault because as soon as an office is published they get portfolios from students all over the world offering to work for free.

If you don't like it, go work for a hack firm, make good money and work 9 to 5.

I respectfully disagree... just because everyone else is doing it doesn't make it right. Of course interns bear some responsibility, but there is nothing stopping any firm that claims social responsibility from taking the moral high ground and practicing what they preach.

And not every boutique firm behaves badly - just most. One doesn't have to decide whether they are going to be exploited or work for a hack.

I also disagree. While the rule of thumb at boutique (or just small) firms may be for longer hours and lower pay than larger middle-of-the-road offices, there is far from being a universal law of exploitation to which all these firms adhere (I've worked at several and have intimate knowledge of a few others). Treatment and compensation is more closely linked to the principles' egos and managerial style than to the type of work and profitability of the office.

And yes, it is there fault. Simply being presented with a slew of willing applicants does not foist low ethical standards onto an employer, although coupled with similar behavior by their peers makes it easier for them to excuse. However, I agree that those willing to work for free, or next to it- certainly contribute to the problem.

wow thats too bad, the hero of our school works there....lol

Put it this way. You go to any store. You see something work $50. Then you see something worth $25 that is twice as good. Which one do you take? It's a commodity market people. If you are out there just out of school, about to get out of school or competing in a capitalist, commodity-driven market - get used to it. You are like a bale of hay or a pork belly.

The only saving grace IS the work - after all it's the reason why everybody is there. It's only after 4-5 years on the job, doing very well that you might move out of a commodity phase. So stick it out if you love the work. If you choose to get angry over an immature and undercooked version of wholesale socialism it will be your loss - unless you can channel it into a firm of your own - but to make this work you have to have a big trust fund or (lo and behold) be lucky, super-talented, connected, hard-working, patient, willing to live on a loaf of bread for two weeks, etc. etc.

You don't have the upper hand all the time.

Oh, and the reason why P+S scarpa's work sucks is because it's a revival-modernisms throwback by and large. Methodologically they offer nothing new either. It's true that they are trying to do good work - but it's the results that count. Colorado Courts has been complimented on the sustainability component and its integration into the aesthethic-formal system. It's common if you ask me. So if your benchmark is mini-mall architecture P+S are great. If Chartres or Pessac is your benchmark, it most certainly sucks.