babs, there is a middle ground. Of course an employer cannot keep people on the payroll forever with nothing to do, but if you have a 'slush fund' of money you set aside, you can have those people producing marketing material, getting LEED training, REVIT training, brushing up on the latest in lighting, researching what ever type of architecture you do, setting up the library, whatever. It can be productive, just not billable. The idea is that if you have someone you value and want to keep on staff for when the work comes back (and it will, eventually), you make an investment in them. Hopefully, they will stick by you when the economy turns around and not run off to another firm with all their new found skills demand a higher wage, which unfortunately sometimes happens, ruining it for everyone else the next time around!
I don't think a firm that does not build up a 'bad economy fund" is 'not ethical'. It has to do more with planning than ethics. It is never a bad thing to have money set aside. You can choose to keep an employee you really value, or you can get rid of them. You then have a choice versus being forced into letting someone go who you would like to keep on staff.
Most firms have no qualms about getting rid of the 'first round' of layoffs- those that are marginal, don't produce, complain all the time, show up late, talk with their mouth full, whatever.
It is the second (and third and fourth) round of cuts that can cripple a firm, when you start to really cut into your biggest asset- your people. What is an architecture firm anyway except a bunch of architects? Your furniture, your computer, your client list, your portfolio, OK, they count for something, but is that really where the heart of your firm lives? It is the people in the firm that make it great or make it stink. Personally, I wanted to plan to be able to keep staff on board. Granted, you can only do that for so long, but so far we have made it through as a team.
babs - I was commenting in archie's sensitivity and forward thinking of planning ahead, putting extra money aside to continue paying his employees when the workload takes a downturn. That, to me, is an ethical way of doing business. If that's not for you, fine.
So, I'm guessing you would do the layoff thing (in an employer situation)? That is certainly a way to downsize, and it's not necessarily unethical - things happen - however, it's not what I was alluding to.
The ethical 'part' is how one handles their situation - and why I commented archie's approach was a humane, ethical way of running his office and handling his employees. It's certainly not the only way, of course.
If anyone has spent time reading this site knows that many firms have treated employees and candidates not very well - from $10 hr. salaries, no benes, all that. I don't blame so much the firms, than the way the whole system is set up - we're all competing for jobs, and clients dictate (supply and demand) how our industry operates. Anyone who tries to anticipate this system, to me, is ethical.
I'm not sure why you jump to conclusions about someone's student debt somehow dictating what they think is an ethical act. I never said, nor suggested, that any employer should pay their employees when no work is there. I find it very 'ethical' when someone can try and anticipate downturns and, instead of taking all the profits and spending it, put it away for that 'rainy day.'
model - I agree that's a problem for recent grads - but let me ask - do you really expect a firm to continue paying your salary if there's no work (or revenue) associated with your job?
Babs - Did someone say "unethical?" I don't think so. I think what was suggested was that it would be in the best interest of offices to think a little down the road and try to have some amount of savings 'just in case' which I don't think is really unreasonable. Regardless of the recession, work levels in an office have peaks and valleys on a month to month basis and I doubt many offices want to deal with changing staff that often. It has absolutely nothing to do with student loans (and frankly if I hear one more damn rant on this website about how "irresponsible" student loans are and how education is a waste of time I am going to lose it) and everything to do with simple good business practices.
Honestly I think many offices did plan somewhat ahead but clearly this recession has lasted longer than many of us hoped and I imagine most offices dried up their reserves sometime ago. Unfortunately it has turned the industry against itself and have left offices in the position of undercutting bids to get jobs that barley break even to provide negligible compensation to the few staff that remain.
archie: you make some good points and that's certainly a plausible way to go. We've chosen a different approach. In years when we've been profitable, we've made major contributions to the bonus pool and generally handled the year-end by pre-paying everything possible for the following year. We try to carry as much cash into the following year as we can without paying too much corporate income tax.
When things slow down, we do two things to preserve employment - a) we tap in to our line of credit, and b) the partners put cash back into the firm. Except for the timing, this is essentially the same as what you do.
We won't bankrupt the firm or ourselves by going too far with this. But it does give us breathing room with our staff while we figure out the depth of the problem and how we need to respond.
I think the point to having reserves to be used to hold onto talent is something that does happen and it may not be a bad idea, If you invested lots of non billable hours training someone in Revit letting them go is not wise and may end up helping your competitors. People are assets too and some firms can or believe that they can attract quality people no matter what, other firms may not have the type of projects or the geographic location to attract quality people and so they may decide that it is best to have a plan to retain staff. Everyone seems to want to work in a major city Like New York, Chicago, LA and do cutting edge museums and tall skyscrapers, those firms can pick up people relatively quickly if needed, folks in Kansas city, Omaha, Jackson Mississippi, Tulsa, or any other small town or city cannot, or at least when the economy is good.
Let’s not overlook the importance of selling in the layoff decision making process.
I think one big element in formal training and IDP that is missing is selling. If firms are smart they have an effective plan or strategy to sell design services and everyone from the partners to the person cleaning the toilets needs to know how to promote and sell the services of the firm. There is the problem of people taking initiative, I think to sit around and watch the ship sink is not wise but sometimes you are not given a choice especially in larger firms. I would dare to speculate that the interns and staff who bring in a client or two are the last to go all other things being equal. I worked for a small firm and did marketing along with CA CD and such and it was an eye opening experience. It takes a lot of skill to convince someone to let you spend their money on a building, or an interior renovation. This is not taught in school and it is often not a part of Intern’s learning experience. Sell design and keep your job, it is that simple, if you cannot sell design then you are not in control of your career and you have little to no say in what happens to you.
For those of you who work at a firm of over a dozen people do you even know who is marketing, or who is trying to land a client?
And to ponder another angle if you found a client then went looking for a job how do you think that would affect your chances of getting that job? This may not be easy but many people out there are out of work but have the credentials to practice, if those folks can land a client small or big they might be more attractive than the potential employee who has no clientele following them. You bring in a client and the firm provides you with the resources to finish the project. The trick is to keep delivering clients once you land a job.
absolutely all sound business decisions, quizzical. I have a line of credit too, but hate paying interest so we self- fund by leaving profit in the business. Probably not the smartest move from an investment strategy (although it looked pretty good when the market tanked!), but no debt makes me sleep easier at night.
You are right about not taking it too far: it is like a life boat- if you load it up too much (with debt) the whole thing sinks and everyone drowns. That is probably one of the hardest decisions to make though- who is a keeper and who do you let go? Some employees make it easy, practically begging to be fired through their actions ( or inaction), but then it gets tough.
One thing the 'employees' here can learn from this- you can't have everything all ways. At the same time on this site, people are complaining about being laid off, not getting a raise, having to take a pay cut, having to work harder, not being able to find work.... You can't expect to be overpaid, underworked, and given job security, at least not in architecture. The math just does not work in this economy. Fees are being slashed, and you cannot BELIEVE how much time and money it takes to actually get a job under contract these days- that all is overhead that eats into what can be paid to employees, let alone the idea of profit. The firms making a profit right now are few and far between. There are many out there running in a deficit, just seeing how long they can take it before they collapse.
Cherith: you'll stop hearing employers rant about student loans when candidates and employees stop using student loans as the main reason they need to be paid a lot more money.
archie: we figure that what we save on corporate income tax more than makes up for the interest charges on our LOC. For example, to move $100,000 of profit into retained earnings exposes the corporation to about $34,000 in federal income taxes (plus state taxes) ... and leaves only $66,000 actually available for retained earnings.
However, if the firm borrows $100,000 against our LOC, we can pay interest at 6.0% on that amount for 5.7 years and still break even. We've never been deeply into our line of credit for more than about 3 years.
Of course, in our approach the partners have to be able to talk about money among themselves openly and honestly. We expect each of our 5 partners to keep a certain minimum amount of money invested in a liquid manner so it can be available to the firm when the need arises.
babs - No, I don't expect much of anything these days. In fact I've gone to work every day for the last year and a half expecting each day to be my last. Your post implies that those of us who are in dire financial straits are there because we either failed to put away some of our hard-earned money or that we didn't earn any money because we weren't contributing to the firm's financial success. My firm isn't particularly financially successful these days, and it's mostly because of things beyond my control such as multiple clients simultaneously bailing on multiple projects after their financing options dried up when the bottom dropped out of the market. There hasn't been any money to put away after reductions in hours, and my reward for the very hard work I put in is that I wasn't one of the 70% of my office that was let go. I'm incredibly grateful to my employer who has been bending over backwards to keep things going. I'm not deluded into thinking that my employer is not acting in his own self-interest (he wants to keep a good team together), but the potential to reduce staff further and financial pressure to do so seems overbearing. The fact that I'm still employed suggests that there is more to it than money - as archie states.
Quizzical, We are set up as a limited partnership with a corporation as the general partner. So we end up paying no corporate taxes ever- the money shifts to the limited partners, and can be retained without paying any corporate taxes. Only the partners pay taxes, without the double taxation of the corporation, but we still are a corporation for liability purposes. Our accountant figures that saves us about $35,000 a year (an intern!).
"you can have those people producing marketing material, getting LEED training, REVIT training, brushing up on the latest in lighting, researching what ever type of architecture you do, setting up the library, whatever."
I know I rode you hard in the other thread. And I apologize.
But... yes, yes, YES! Times a million!
When I use to be a boss man at my publishing company... I use to force people to do things at work... other than 'actual' work. Technically.... reading a book about your job, while not even 'on the clock,' is considered by the Department of Labor as work.
I feel you should either be doing work or learning how to do your work better! This was a strategy I often employed was forcing people away from their regular work to do other tasks (like marketing, ad creation et cetera). Sometimes, I would get people to even do dummy work, competitions et cetera.
If I was a manager or a boss, I'd even consider up until a certain point Archinect to be valuable work 'experience.'
And, the comparison of architecture to other freelance arts is hard to make. The reason is that architecture takes too much time and is too involved. I can make a flyer or a poster that I could feasibly make some money on in less than 3 hours. I could lay out an entire book in less than 10 hours. I've put together entire 96-page full broadsheet newspapers by myself in less than 20 hours.
The issue with architecture (and landscape architecture, urban planning and urban design) is timeliness and speed. Combine that with the overall amount of work architects generally do... architecture for architecture's sake, exquisite corpses and little look-what-i-can-do type projects just don't get done.
So, in a sense, you don't often see the kind of work or output from architecture that you often see in the other freelance circles. It really doesn't exist now. It could happen... but usually only happens in the form of competitions where money is present.
Thanks, ----0----, babs needs a chill pill. No one here is suggesting it's easy for anyone right now - employees and employers. Thank you archie and quizzical for your 'employer' side of the conversation. A lot of us 'employees' understand the amazing amount of pressure just to keep your ships afloat. If this recession has done anything it's showcased just how vulnerable we all are, practicing this architecture 'thing.' And as such, this period will develop ideas on what we all can do to help protect ourselves from devestating downturns.
Anyway, archie ,I was going to ask if you were an LLP - but, one of your 'partners' is a corporation? Interesting. What benefit does that give all the other partners? Are the LLP partners also part of the general corporation/partner?
Roobqt: one of the partners (me) owns 100% of the general partner corporation. It is a way to have to protection of a corporation, but not have to pay any corporate taxes, since the general partner corporation passes all income back to the other partners in the LP. Of course, we still pay loads of taxes, but just personal, not corporate and then personal.
Ahh... so, fees are first paid to the 'general partner' corporation (you), then that corporation pays the LLC partners - thus the 'general partner corporation' pays no taxes on that income, only the partners in the LLC pay taxes on their share of these funds, passed to them from the 'general partner.'
SO, the 'general partner corp' pays all the overhead and running of the business, I assume, to offset income tax, and the LP partnership is there, mostly, to protect the other partners and for them to pay a less tax rate (among other things)...
I'm asking because I'm trying to figure out how to set up a new practice, in the best way to take advantage of tax breaks and liability avoidance. I don't have partners (yet), but I would like to start setting up the framework when jobs start coming in.
Good news... I got a job offer in DC! And it wasn't a lowball amount- it was exactly what I wanted (and stated in the interview when they asked me)! I'm so happy I could shout!
Good luck to everyone out there!
Ever since I joined, we have been extremely busy. We have been very fortunate here with our contracts with the government. A lot of it isn't glamorous work but it's WORK that makes everyone billable and consequently happy!
We have not downsized. We had a very limited layoff last summer and this was primarily dead weight that had been lugged around for far too long. There were 5 people let go in total And I hate to say it but there were personality/performance issues of every scale with some of these people.
This was out of a staff of about 250. We have been growning in size with primarily experienced project managers and senior project architects joining every month since November. We have absolutely no internal vacancies...which is a unique problem to have these days.
The work continues to come in and many of us feel completely overwhelmed! Just today I was asked if I could help several other teams and I keep having to ward them off! I've already got a backlog of work and am extremely behind. We really need more people especially for production! Howver we have NO physical room for anyone. I average about 60 hours a week and can very rarely even go out for lunch! Again I am not complaining because I know what it's like out there and we are very blessed to be in this position. Howver, many here in this office have described our situation as a "full-on staffing crisis."
We are a global AE/EA firm that has mushroomed in size recently because of multiple mergers and acquisitions. Other offices of ours have not been so lucky and have contracted significantly within the last 18 months. We also farm out some of our work to them and have staff from less-busy offices come here to help out.
Not Sorg. I did interview there. And I get the impression there isn't actually a position there- they are just seeing what kind of resumes they can get and then meet people and eventually when there is a position they'll call you. Could be wrong...
I don't want to sound like an ass, or mouth trasher but I wouldn't work at that place even if I was unemployed. I would rather flip big macs than work at that place. It has a very bad reputation in DC. Especially the lady who is running that place.
So when I said "impression" I mean that is what I was told by the person who interviewed me back in February. They have had a continuously running ad on the AIA Jobs Board for quite some time. I guess in anticipation of high turnover? I'm not sure.
Loco - so funny. I've heard the same exact things from people coming out of Sorg.
A senior project manager who worked there many years ago told me he had to take an entire year off after resigning from there. He almost completely lost his mind working there for about 6 years.
I don't know of any firms that are hiring in DC openly. A few have started to bring back employees that they have laid off in the past year, mostly on contract basis. Other firms (such as Smithgroup) are still conducting layoffs as projects reach an end. With commercial real estate in the dumps, state and county coffers drying up (and thus money for education and other public works projects) and difficult lending conditions for even project types in demand (such as multi-family housing), the architecture market is still very bleak. And I write this knowing that DC is one of the least-bad markets in the country at the moment.
I still think Architecture will trend towards freelancers who are specialist in various things from production of drawings to acoustics or zoning litigation. No firm can afford to keep all the diverse people and talents needed to finish a project in house, but most projects demand a wide range of specialist. Mega firms are not going to be too much of a threat if they get too big they will lose efficiency and market share as they get too expensive. No single firm truly has control of any single market and with a few exceptions almost any firm could break in to a market by strategically recruiting the right staff. The practice is changing and I am still trying to figure out where to try and land as we reach the bottom of our freefall but eventually demand will come about someone will need a new building soon.
"Mega firms are not going to be too much of a threat if they get too big they will lose efficiency and market share as they get too expensive."
I disagree - properly managed mega-firms will be very efficient, very profitable and will dominate the marketplace for as far into the future as I can see.
Well my thoughts were with the ones that are slow to adapt, or depart from the top heavy "old Ways" I just Don't see firms growing larger than HOK or SOM two years ago. if they get bigger they begin to have more overhead cost.
Layoffs....layoffs......
How the f#*k are we supposed to accumulate any rainy day funds when it starts raining the second we graduate?
babs, there is a middle ground. Of course an employer cannot keep people on the payroll forever with nothing to do, but if you have a 'slush fund' of money you set aside, you can have those people producing marketing material, getting LEED training, REVIT training, brushing up on the latest in lighting, researching what ever type of architecture you do, setting up the library, whatever. It can be productive, just not billable. The idea is that if you have someone you value and want to keep on staff for when the work comes back (and it will, eventually), you make an investment in them. Hopefully, they will stick by you when the economy turns around and not run off to another firm with all their new found skills demand a higher wage, which unfortunately sometimes happens, ruining it for everyone else the next time around!
I don't think a firm that does not build up a 'bad economy fund" is 'not ethical'. It has to do more with planning than ethics. It is never a bad thing to have money set aside. You can choose to keep an employee you really value, or you can get rid of them. You then have a choice versus being forced into letting someone go who you would like to keep on staff.
Most firms have no qualms about getting rid of the 'first round' of layoffs- those that are marginal, don't produce, complain all the time, show up late, talk with their mouth full, whatever.
It is the second (and third and fourth) round of cuts that can cripple a firm, when you start to really cut into your biggest asset- your people. What is an architecture firm anyway except a bunch of architects? Your furniture, your computer, your client list, your portfolio, OK, they count for something, but is that really where the heart of your firm lives? It is the people in the firm that make it great or make it stink. Personally, I wanted to plan to be able to keep staff on board. Granted, you can only do that for so long, but so far we have made it through as a team.
babs - I was commenting in archie's sensitivity and forward thinking of planning ahead, putting extra money aside to continue paying his employees when the workload takes a downturn. That, to me, is an ethical way of doing business. If that's not for you, fine.
So, I'm guessing you would do the layoff thing (in an employer situation)? That is certainly a way to downsize, and it's not necessarily unethical - things happen - however, it's not what I was alluding to.
The ethical 'part' is how one handles their situation - and why I commented archie's approach was a humane, ethical way of running his office and handling his employees. It's certainly not the only way, of course.
If anyone has spent time reading this site knows that many firms have treated employees and candidates not very well - from $10 hr. salaries, no benes, all that. I don't blame so much the firms, than the way the whole system is set up - we're all competing for jobs, and clients dictate (supply and demand) how our industry operates. Anyone who tries to anticipate this system, to me, is ethical.
I'm not sure why you jump to conclusions about someone's student debt somehow dictating what they think is an ethical act. I never said, nor suggested, that any employer should pay their employees when no work is there. I find it very 'ethical' when someone can try and anticipate downturns and, instead of taking all the profits and spending it, put it away for that 'rainy day.'
model - I agree that's a problem for recent grads - but let me ask - do you really expect a firm to continue paying your salary if there's no work (or revenue) associated with your job?
Babs - Did someone say "unethical?" I don't think so. I think what was suggested was that it would be in the best interest of offices to think a little down the road and try to have some amount of savings 'just in case' which I don't think is really unreasonable. Regardless of the recession, work levels in an office have peaks and valleys on a month to month basis and I doubt many offices want to deal with changing staff that often. It has absolutely nothing to do with student loans (and frankly if I hear one more damn rant on this website about how "irresponsible" student loans are and how education is a waste of time I am going to lose it) and everything to do with simple good business practices.
Honestly I think many offices did plan somewhat ahead but clearly this recession has lasted longer than many of us hoped and I imagine most offices dried up their reserves sometime ago. Unfortunately it has turned the industry against itself and have left offices in the position of undercutting bids to get jobs that barley break even to provide negligible compensation to the few staff that remain.
archie: you make some good points and that's certainly a plausible way to go. We've chosen a different approach. In years when we've been profitable, we've made major contributions to the bonus pool and generally handled the year-end by pre-paying everything possible for the following year. We try to carry as much cash into the following year as we can without paying too much corporate income tax.
When things slow down, we do two things to preserve employment - a) we tap in to our line of credit, and b) the partners put cash back into the firm. Except for the timing, this is essentially the same as what you do.
We won't bankrupt the firm or ourselves by going too far with this. But it does give us breathing room with our staff while we figure out the depth of the problem and how we need to respond.
Yes, how DARE someone not be able to afford a college education and have to resort to taking out - God forbid - loans!
Rolls eyes...
I think the point to having reserves to be used to hold onto talent is something that does happen and it may not be a bad idea, If you invested lots of non billable hours training someone in Revit letting them go is not wise and may end up helping your competitors. People are assets too and some firms can or believe that they can attract quality people no matter what, other firms may not have the type of projects or the geographic location to attract quality people and so they may decide that it is best to have a plan to retain staff. Everyone seems to want to work in a major city Like New York, Chicago, LA and do cutting edge museums and tall skyscrapers, those firms can pick up people relatively quickly if needed, folks in Kansas city, Omaha, Jackson Mississippi, Tulsa, or any other small town or city cannot, or at least when the economy is good.
Let’s not overlook the importance of selling in the layoff decision making process.
I think one big element in formal training and IDP that is missing is selling. If firms are smart they have an effective plan or strategy to sell design services and everyone from the partners to the person cleaning the toilets needs to know how to promote and sell the services of the firm. There is the problem of people taking initiative, I think to sit around and watch the ship sink is not wise but sometimes you are not given a choice especially in larger firms. I would dare to speculate that the interns and staff who bring in a client or two are the last to go all other things being equal. I worked for a small firm and did marketing along with CA CD and such and it was an eye opening experience. It takes a lot of skill to convince someone to let you spend their money on a building, or an interior renovation. This is not taught in school and it is often not a part of Intern’s learning experience. Sell design and keep your job, it is that simple, if you cannot sell design then you are not in control of your career and you have little to no say in what happens to you.
For those of you who work at a firm of over a dozen people do you even know who is marketing, or who is trying to land a client?
And to ponder another angle if you found a client then went looking for a job how do you think that would affect your chances of getting that job? This may not be easy but many people out there are out of work but have the credentials to practice, if those folks can land a client small or big they might be more attractive than the potential employee who has no clientele following them. You bring in a client and the firm provides you with the resources to finish the project. The trick is to keep delivering clients once you land a job.
absolutely all sound business decisions, quizzical. I have a line of credit too, but hate paying interest so we self- fund by leaving profit in the business. Probably not the smartest move from an investment strategy (although it looked pretty good when the market tanked!), but no debt makes me sleep easier at night.
You are right about not taking it too far: it is like a life boat- if you load it up too much (with debt) the whole thing sinks and everyone drowns. That is probably one of the hardest decisions to make though- who is a keeper and who do you let go? Some employees make it easy, practically begging to be fired through their actions ( or inaction), but then it gets tough.
One thing the 'employees' here can learn from this- you can't have everything all ways. At the same time on this site, people are complaining about being laid off, not getting a raise, having to take a pay cut, having to work harder, not being able to find work.... You can't expect to be overpaid, underworked, and given job security, at least not in architecture. The math just does not work in this economy. Fees are being slashed, and you cannot BELIEVE how much time and money it takes to actually get a job under contract these days- that all is overhead that eats into what can be paid to employees, let alone the idea of profit. The firms making a profit right now are few and far between. There are many out there running in a deficit, just seeing how long they can take it before they collapse.
Cherith: you'll stop hearing employers rant about student loans when candidates and employees stop using student loans as the main reason they need to be paid a lot more money.
Well I am worth more. Pay up cheapskate.
archie: we figure that what we save on corporate income tax more than makes up for the interest charges on our LOC. For example, to move $100,000 of profit into retained earnings exposes the corporation to about $34,000 in federal income taxes (plus state taxes) ... and leaves only $66,000 actually available for retained earnings.
However, if the firm borrows $100,000 against our LOC, we can pay interest at 6.0% on that amount for 5.7 years and still break even. We've never been deeply into our line of credit for more than about 3 years.
Of course, in our approach the partners have to be able to talk about money among themselves openly and honestly. We expect each of our 5 partners to keep a certain minimum amount of money invested in a liquid manner so it can be available to the firm when the need arises.
babs - No, I don't expect much of anything these days. In fact I've gone to work every day for the last year and a half expecting each day to be my last. Your post implies that those of us who are in dire financial straits are there because we either failed to put away some of our hard-earned money or that we didn't earn any money because we weren't contributing to the firm's financial success. My firm isn't particularly financially successful these days, and it's mostly because of things beyond my control such as multiple clients simultaneously bailing on multiple projects after their financing options dried up when the bottom dropped out of the market. There hasn't been any money to put away after reductions in hours, and my reward for the very hard work I put in is that I wasn't one of the 70% of my office that was let go. I'm incredibly grateful to my employer who has been bending over backwards to keep things going. I'm not deluded into thinking that my employer is not acting in his own self-interest (he wants to keep a good team together), but the potential to reduce staff further and financial pressure to do so seems overbearing. The fact that I'm still employed suggests that there is more to it than money - as archie states.
Quizzical, We are set up as a limited partnership with a corporation as the general partner. So we end up paying no corporate taxes ever- the money shifts to the limited partners, and can be retained without paying any corporate taxes. Only the partners pay taxes, without the double taxation of the corporation, but we still are a corporation for liability purposes. Our accountant figures that saves us about $35,000 a year (an intern!).
Change your tampon babs, you take a good story and ruin it with your lame attitude
"you can have those people producing marketing material, getting LEED training, REVIT training, brushing up on the latest in lighting, researching what ever type of architecture you do, setting up the library, whatever."
I know I rode you hard in the other thread. And I apologize.
But... yes, yes, YES! Times a million!
When I use to be a boss man at my publishing company... I use to force people to do things at work... other than 'actual' work. Technically.... reading a book about your job, while not even 'on the clock,' is considered by the Department of Labor as work.
I feel you should either be doing work or learning how to do your work better! This was a strategy I often employed was forcing people away from their regular work to do other tasks (like marketing, ad creation et cetera). Sometimes, I would get people to even do dummy work, competitions et cetera.
If I was a manager or a boss, I'd even consider up until a certain point Archinect to be valuable work 'experience.'
And, the comparison of architecture to other freelance arts is hard to make. The reason is that architecture takes too much time and is too involved. I can make a flyer or a poster that I could feasibly make some money on in less than 3 hours. I could lay out an entire book in less than 10 hours. I've put together entire 96-page full broadsheet newspapers by myself in less than 20 hours.
The issue with architecture (and landscape architecture, urban planning and urban design) is timeliness and speed. Combine that with the overall amount of work architects generally do... architecture for architecture's sake, exquisite corpses and little look-what-i-can-do type projects just don't get done.
So, in a sense, you don't often see the kind of work or output from architecture that you often see in the other freelance circles. It really doesn't exist now. It could happen... but usually only happens in the form of competitions where money is present.
Thanks, ----0----, babs needs a chill pill. No one here is suggesting it's easy for anyone right now - employees and employers. Thank you archie and quizzical for your 'employer' side of the conversation. A lot of us 'employees' understand the amazing amount of pressure just to keep your ships afloat. If this recession has done anything it's showcased just how vulnerable we all are, practicing this architecture 'thing.' And as such, this period will develop ideas on what we all can do to help protect ourselves from devestating downturns.
Anyway, archie ,I was going to ask if you were an LLP - but, one of your 'partners' is a corporation? Interesting. What benefit does that give all the other partners? Are the LLP partners also part of the general corporation/partner?
Roobqt: one of the partners (me) owns 100% of the general partner corporation. It is a way to have to protection of a corporation, but not have to pay any corporate taxes, since the general partner corporation passes all income back to the other partners in the LP. Of course, we still pay loads of taxes, but just personal, not corporate and then personal.
Ahh... so, fees are first paid to the 'general partner' corporation (you), then that corporation pays the LLC partners - thus the 'general partner corporation' pays no taxes on that income, only the partners in the LLC pay taxes on their share of these funds, passed to them from the 'general partner.'
SO, the 'general partner corp' pays all the overhead and running of the business, I assume, to offset income tax, and the LP partnership is there, mostly, to protect the other partners and for them to pay a less tax rate (among other things)...
Am I within the ballpark?
you got it. the fees technically are still collected by the LP, but all the employees are employed by the corporation .
I'm asking because I'm trying to figure out how to set up a new practice, in the best way to take advantage of tax breaks and liability avoidance. I don't have partners (yet), but I would like to start setting up the framework when jobs start coming in.
Good news... I got a job offer in DC! And it wasn't a lowball amount- it was exactly what I wanted (and stated in the interview when they asked me)! I'm so happy I could shout!
Good luck to everyone out there!
Congrats, plus eye. Is this in a government type office?
+i, great news! Comgratulations! :D
One of the well-known firms in DC?
Big, medium, small?
We have been EXTREMELY busy here.
med, are you extremely busy cause you've downsized a lot, or has there been an uptick in business? What sector?
Roob, I joined my current firm in late 2008.
Ever since I joined, we have been extremely busy. We have been very fortunate here with our contracts with the government. A lot of it isn't glamorous work but it's WORK that makes everyone billable and consequently happy!
We have not downsized. We had a very limited layoff last summer and this was primarily dead weight that had been lugged around for far too long. There were 5 people let go in total And I hate to say it but there were personality/performance issues of every scale with some of these people.
This was out of a staff of about 250. We have been growning in size with primarily experienced project managers and senior project architects joining every month since November. We have absolutely no internal vacancies...which is a unique problem to have these days.
The work continues to come in and many of us feel completely overwhelmed! Just today I was asked if I could help several other teams and I keep having to ward them off! I've already got a backlog of work and am extremely behind. We really need more people especially for production! Howver we have NO physical room for anyone. I average about 60 hours a week and can very rarely even go out for lunch! Again I am not complaining because I know what it's like out there and we are very blessed to be in this position. Howver, many here in this office have described our situation as a "full-on staffing crisis."
We are a global AE/EA firm that has mushroomed in size recently because of multiple mergers and acquisitions. Other offices of ours have not been so lucky and have contracted significantly within the last 18 months. We also farm out some of our work to them and have staff from less-busy offices come here to help out.
Where do I sign up, med? :)
Me too! Except for the 60 hour work week. I draw the line at 50. I live for other things besides architecture and my career.
@ med-
very small architecture firm. all local work- community centers, libraries, etc. not government work.
+i
I have a feeling the company is Sorg.
Perhaps I am wrong.
Still congratulations.
Dr. Loco77
Loco, can't be Sorg.
They do government work and are involved in the Dept of State IDIQ program.
I work with a lot of former Sorgies. That place is apparently quite a revolving door!
Not Sorg. I did interview there. And I get the impression there isn't actually a position there- they are just seeing what kind of resumes they can get and then meet people and eventually when there is a position they'll call you. Could be wrong...
+i - There is an open position at Sorg, or at least there should be. I work with someone who just left there voluntarily a few weeks ago.
Let the flood of applications begin!
I don't want to sound like an ass, or mouth trasher but I wouldn't work at that place even if I was unemployed. I would rather flip big macs than work at that place. It has a very bad reputation in DC. Especially the lady who is running that place.
Dr. Loco77
So when I said "impression" I mean that is what I was told by the person who interviewed me back in February. They have had a continuously running ad on the AIA Jobs Board for quite some time. I guess in anticipation of high turnover? I'm not sure.
Loco - so funny. I've heard the same exact things from people coming out of Sorg.
A senior project manager who worked there many years ago told me he had to take an entire year off after resigning from there. He almost completely lost his mind working there for about 6 years.
BTW, are you working in DC?
Great posts, I look forward to reading more.
SEO Firms, SEO Agencies, SEO Experts
SEO Services, Web Design California
Med.
Yes I work in dc, but that place is really something. Is one of those places one needs to avoid at all costs, for one's own sanity.
Loco - It's the insanity of this place that makes it so interesting and entertaining!
yes laid off again..
Antisthenes- where are you located? when were you laid off last?
Does anybody know if anyone is hiring in dc?
Besides Sorg of course!
I don't know of any firms that are hiring in DC openly. A few have started to bring back employees that they have laid off in the past year, mostly on contract basis. Other firms (such as Smithgroup) are still conducting layoffs as projects reach an end. With commercial real estate in the dumps, state and county coffers drying up (and thus money for education and other public works projects) and difficult lending conditions for even project types in demand (such as multi-family housing), the architecture market is still very bleak. And I write this knowing that DC is one of the least-bad markets in the country at the moment.
I still think Architecture will trend towards freelancers who are specialist in various things from production of drawings to acoustics or zoning litigation. No firm can afford to keep all the diverse people and talents needed to finish a project in house, but most projects demand a wide range of specialist. Mega firms are not going to be too much of a threat if they get too big they will lose efficiency and market share as they get too expensive. No single firm truly has control of any single market and with a few exceptions almost any firm could break in to a market by strategically recruiting the right staff. The practice is changing and I am still trying to figure out where to try and land as we reach the bottom of our freefall but eventually demand will come about someone will need a new building soon.
I disagree - properly managed mega-firms will be very efficient, very profitable and will dominate the marketplace for as far into the future as I can see.
Well my thoughts were with the ones that are slow to adapt, or depart from the top heavy "old Ways" I just Don't see firms growing larger than HOK or SOM two years ago. if they get bigger they begin to have more overhead cost.
oy. plus one.
on to bigger and better things.
Holz,
What happened?
Are you alright?
ouch... sorry to hear holz...
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.