Indiana's governor has just signed into effect an interior design registration law.
What struck me from the press release I read is this passage (emphasis mine):
The law establishes an electronic database of "registered interior designers" who must fill out an on-line registration form and pay a fee of $100 to the State (subject to renewal every 2 years). The primary qualification for registration is passage of either the NCIDQ or ARE exam, however prior to December 31, 2011, if you have (a) at least 2 years of interior design education and have practiced interior design for at least 10 years, or (b) practiced interior design for at least 15 years, you may be registered without passing the NCIDQ or ARE.
So the State is allowing registered architects to also register as interior designers, fine, perhaps this is a revenue stream, whatever.
But are they, the State of Indiana, allowed to take the ARE - which is NCARB administered, right? - and decide unilaterally that the no-doubt proprietary information contained within that exam can be applied to the registration of an entirely different profession? Aren't there copyright laws and such protecting the ARE exam?
BlueGoose, Bloopox, others who have more knowledge of the workings of NCARB on a federal level than me: any comment?
lb -- as I read the blurb you posted, I infer that anyone who has passed the ARE (going through the normal process for that exam) would be entitled to become a 'registered interior designer' in Indiana without meeting any further requirements other than completing the application and paying the fee.
I don't read this as suggesting that someone would be entitled to sit for the ARE unless otherwise qualified by education and/or experience. I think this is just a mechanism to allow licensed architects to become licensed interior designers.
I think NCARB will remain firmly in charge of administering the ARE.
No, I totally agree Blue Goose, that's how I read it. They're not going to start letting anyone who isn't qualified for the ARE (degree + internship+ IDP) take it.
What I'm concerned with - but not really concerned, just curious - is that passage of an exam for one profession can qualify someone to be registered in another profession, and whether NCARB has any concern about their exam - which tests architects - being used to certify someone into another profession.
I mean, suddenly I can be TWO registered professions after taking only one exam. The registration law in Philly read, IIRC, that if you were a registered architect you weren't required to ALSO be a registered interior designer - one registration precluded the other. In other words, if an architect stamped your drawings an ID didn't have to (note the Indiana law is not a stamping act).
To supplant all those lost manufacturing jobs. Indiana needs as many Interior Designers as it can get. Woohoo for a c note I can be an interior designer. Speaking of Interior Design, my vacuum cleaner just stopped its giant sucking sound.
lb -- I think this move by Indiana actually reflects a high degree of respect for the qualifications and knowledge required to pass the ARE. It says that Architects already know how to do the work of Interior Designers, at least from a life-safety standpoint.
I doubt you'll ever see any jurisdiction adopt a policy whereby passing the NCIDQ exam qualifies someone to receive an architectural license.
Florida has a similar concept. If you are a licensed architect you automatically qualify as a licensed interior designer. You just have to pay a small fee and fill out a form. Furthermore the state requires that if a particular project is only an interiors project with no structural or building envelope portion, that the firm must hold an interior designer license, not just architecture. It doesn't make sense since its automatic that you would get it if you are an architect, but that's the rule. I think it basically encourages firms to pay an extra fee to the state.
I know no one will ever become an architect by passing the NCIDQ. And I know, in many states, being a registered architect means one is also qualified to be a registered interior designer.
What I think is odd is that it seems Indiana, in deciding to begin registering interior designers, looked around at what standards they could use to determine qualifications. They decided the ARE was a valid and usable tool for qualification, even though it's legally a test for architects. What I'm questioning is whether this is allowed by NCARB, or if Indiana just decided unilaterally that the knowledge encompassed in NCARB's test is sufficient to license ID's, too.
Like if I get my Chef's license, after passing a test designed and administered by the National Chef Board, can I also call myself a licensed Cake Decorator, or is that a specialized field of knowledge WITHIN the bigger exam that I haven't really been sufficiently tested on?
No disrespect intended to IDs by comparing them to cake decorators, I'm just looking for a simple comparative example.
The basic question for me is this: does NCARB mind if states decide to use the ARE as a benchmark for entry into a field other than architecture?
lb -- I have no reason to think NCARB would have any particular objection to a state using ARE as a benchmark for entry into another field like interior design ... NCARB gives (?) individual state boards a lot of discretion in how they react to a Council Record. For example, some states impose additional requirements -- beyond holding NCARB certification -- that must be met for reciprocity. While your question is different, I suspect NCARB would defer to individual state Boards on matters of this nature.
If you really want to know their position on this, I suppose you could direct a question to NCARB directly, or to one of its Board members -- they're all listed on the NCARB website.
This thread may be dead but I am researching this topic for a presentation to IDEC. Great questions liberty bell.
My opinion is that SAFE http://www.safeinteriordesign.org/ the Indiana Interior Design legislation proponents acquiesced to the AIA to get their support for their meager title act.
The issue of ID's responsibility of protecting the health, safety and welfare of the public is a conundrum (and according to the Institute for Justice- our professional Achilles Heel) that presents a direct conflict of interest with architects and numerous other licensed building design professionals. It also is a redundant legal proposition that any smart politician will avoid. In short it just does not make sense to continue beating our collective professional heads against the wall to claim that protecting the HS & W of the public is our primary and unique responsibility. Anyway I digress
THANKS
Hi again dudek. Thanks for weighing in - I admit I enjoy the hairsplitting this topic generates!
I'm curious about your opinion on the conflict of interest presented if IDs claim responsibility/liability for HSW, as architects do.
An example that is somewhat gossip: allegedly the wife of a state official here in Indiana redecorated her husband's office, in a government building, using wall treatments and fabrics that don't meet commercial interior flame spread requirements. I don't see how an ID using the correct interior treatments would be in any way in conflict with architects?
In the day to day workings of certified ID's (not decorator posers) and Architects, many of which are amicable and synergistic relationships, it does not pose a conflict. The ID's make the right finish selections and the RA signs/seal the documents. Everybody wins-we all get paid, the client is safe and happy. Good architects realize the benefit of utilizing a qualified ID, much like any allied design professional, and certified ID's understand their position in the chain of legal responsibilities and they respect the mutual rewarding relationship.
Unfortunately in an attempt to validate the "profession" a handful of disgruntled ID's (some 35 years ago now) decided that licensure was the quickest and surest way to advance the profession. While I was not there at that particular momentous occasion I am one of the few current ID's willing to call that effort for what it is...nothing but a way to distinguish the designers from the decorators. IT HAD VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH HS&W.
The pro-legislation effort needed a valid reason to seek licensure and legal protection. Hence HS&W seemed to be the most direct model to frame that effort- who could argue with that? So without much consideration for the impact, or the end result, the ID's have been trying mightily to convince legislators that we are uniquely qualified to protect people’s lives. However, it is the claim by the ID pro-legislation side that ID is, as capable of and, responsible for the protection of HS&W as architects, engineers, code officials, licensed contractors etc. that this particular issue becomes a conflict of interest and thus the ongoing turf war. It is a monumental waste of energy, effort, resources and money. It is a failed model for professional validation. If we would just step back and think about it.....
"let's see architects and engineers already claim that responsibility....our claim is redundant and only partially correct (flameproof finishes and code furniture clearances are at the low end of the scale of life safety responsibilities...important certainly but not demonstrative of licensure) and we really cannot prove cause and effect with any legal precedents...hey maybe this is not the best way to sort out the decorators."
ID's need architects and they need us. We need to stop being an adversary in the legislative realm and we need to distinguish ourselves from the decorators through less onerous and bureaucratic methods.
Yes, very completely, thank you. I see your point: the talents of interior designers, the reasons why architects would engage them on projects, have significantly less to do with HS&W issues, but those issues seemed like the logical place for a registration movement to start. It's hard, after all, to register talent, which is why in every discussion of this topic I'm quick to say that a registered architect is not necessarily a skilled one!
In an older discussion of this topic an interior design student said that she was responsible for HS7W if she designed a tray ceiling in a dining room and it fell on the people eating. This is a pretty good example of how HS&W knowledge for IDs goes beyond flame spreads. But! one can certainly engage a structural engineer for a tray ceiling; I probably would.
For me, if there was a rigorous test that did deal with HS&W AND the bright line between the role of the ID and the architect.
The real issue, for me, is when the ID decides they are the project lead, and the Arch/ MEP, S civil is subservient to the ID.
It probably is an urban myth, but i remember a story about an ID claiming that since they have a state license, they can hire - and direct the architect and engineers in their work.
Personally, i don't think that they should be allowed to have the coordinator role in a project.
"The profession of interior design", within the meaning and intent of this Act, refers to persons qualified by education, experience, and examination, who administer contracts for fabrication, procurement, or installation in the implementation of designs, drawings, and specifications for any interior design project and offer or furnish professional services, such as consultations, studies, drawings, and specifications in connection with the location of lighting fixtures, lamps and specifications of ceiling finishes as shown in reflected ceiling plans, space planning, furnishings, or the fabrication of non‑loadbearing structural elements within and surrounding interior spaces of buildings but specifically excluding mechanical and electrical systems, except for specifications of fixtures and their location within interior spaces.
A person represents himself or herself to be a "registered interior designer" within the meaning of this Act if he or she holds himself or herself out to the public by any title incorporating the words "registered interior designer"or any title that includes the words "registered interior design". A person represents himself or herself to be a "registered residential interior designer" within the meaning of this Act if he or she holds himself or herself out to the public by any title incorporating the words "registered residential interior designer"or any title that includes the words "registered residential interior design".
(Source: P.A. 95‑1023, eff. 6‑1‑09.)
Nothing in this Act shall authorize registered interior designers or registered residential interior designers to perform services, including life safety services that they are prohibited from performing, or any practice (i) that is restricted in the Illinois Architecture Practice Act of 1989, the Professional Engineering Practice Act of 1989, or the Structural Engineering Practice Act of 1989, or (ii) that they are not authorized to perform under the Environmental Barriers Act
dsc Illinois does not have a practice act for interior designers. It is nothing but legislation that regulates who can call themselves a "registered" interior designer. Anybody with a pulse can call themselves an interior designer in the state of Illinois just not a "registered" one.
But as you pointed out in your highlight. It really does not matter.
dsc_arch
Personally, i don't think that they should be allowed to have the coordinator role in a project.
So if I landed a major interior rehab project in Chicago with a fat 6 figure fee and I needed an architect on the project team you would decline because I am not an RA?
Officially, by state law, you would be peddling architecture and /or design build services in the state of Illinois and it is illegal. The client can have you do all of the work and then fire you and demand that you return all fees paid to you and the team.
The pricipal contract should be between the Architect and the client. The clinet can hire the ID independently, but he architect can not be subservient to the ID. Ultimately the responsibility for HS&W rests with the architect. The ID does not carry that burden.
I do feel that ID's do have an important role to fill. Well trained ones, who know and respect the building code, fire code, accessibility code, energy code are great. The ones who scoff at codes (and the need for permits) are the ones I can not stand.
dsc_arch,
I did not say that I was going to be the architect of record. Simply that I have a project and I need a collaborator who would fill that role. So you would be willing to walk on a significant fee because you need to be in control of all aspects of the project including client relations (even though I have that established relationship) including pre-design, programming, conceptual design and the day to day needs of the owner?
I know the ID profession in general has not earned the respect of allied design professionals such as yourself. But trust me there are those of us our there who are just as capable of pulling off a siginificant project as anybody else...engineers, architects, planners etc.
Unfortunately the AIA and the ID professional organizations are mired in an adveserial turf battle that is hurting everybody including the end users...you know the folks with the money.
I probably would not agree to be a hired gun. We have been the hired gun in the past and it has never worked out well.
Too many times either the ID, contractor, or KES has asked us to skirt the code and put our license at stake for their "vision." Note, their vision could also be substandard materials that increase the profit of the coordinator. I like that, since I am not beholden to them, I can decide to tell them to go shove it.
I have met some great CM's, Project Reps, ID, CE, SE, Builders and interns who can perform that role and I hope that you are one of those few. Unfortunately, over the years, I have met many more scab coordinators that are not competent and are damn right dangerous.
However, this has been good for my firm since we routinely (twice this year alone) are have been brought in after the fact to bring the buildings up to code. Since the scab coordinator did not have insurance there was little recourse for the owner.
I would not say that it is a turf war. I'd say that until the ID profession as a whole becomes just as rigorous in the training of their profession AND national acceptance of their defined role they will (and should) be relegated to the consultant role.
Fair enough dcs_arch I appreciate your comments. If I had a high 6 figure fee project opportunity I probably would not have the time to be discussing this topic anyway ;-)
I guess the point of this thread is that the ID pro legislation folks have put themselves in an advesarial postion with architects when they really need them as allies. That is unfortunate for ID's and a pain in the ass for RA's who should not have to validate, or fight for, their ability/right to perform interior design service.
Aug 24, 09 9:46 am ·
·
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.
Interior Design Registration using the ARE exam?
Indiana's governor has just signed into effect an interior design registration law.
What struck me from the press release I read is this passage (emphasis mine):
The law establishes an electronic database of "registered interior designers" who must fill out an on-line registration form and pay a fee of $100 to the State (subject to renewal every 2 years). The primary qualification for registration is passage of either the NCIDQ or ARE exam, however prior to December 31, 2011, if you have (a) at least 2 years of interior design education and have practiced interior design for at least 10 years, or (b) practiced interior design for at least 15 years, you may be registered without passing the NCIDQ or ARE.
So the State is allowing registered architects to also register as interior designers, fine, perhaps this is a revenue stream, whatever.
But are they, the State of Indiana, allowed to take the ARE - which is NCARB administered, right? - and decide unilaterally that the no-doubt proprietary information contained within that exam can be applied to the registration of an entirely different profession? Aren't there copyright laws and such protecting the ARE exam?
BlueGoose, Bloopox, others who have more knowledge of the workings of NCARB on a federal level than me: any comment?
lb -- as I read the blurb you posted, I infer that anyone who has passed the ARE (going through the normal process for that exam) would be entitled to become a 'registered interior designer' in Indiana without meeting any further requirements other than completing the application and paying the fee.
I don't read this as suggesting that someone would be entitled to sit for the ARE unless otherwise qualified by education and/or experience. I think this is just a mechanism to allow licensed architects to become licensed interior designers.
I think NCARB will remain firmly in charge of administering the ARE.
No, I totally agree Blue Goose, that's how I read it. They're not going to start letting anyone who isn't qualified for the ARE (degree + internship+ IDP) take it.
What I'm concerned with - but not really concerned, just curious - is that passage of an exam for one profession can qualify someone to be registered in another profession, and whether NCARB has any concern about their exam - which tests architects - being used to certify someone into another profession.
I mean, suddenly I can be TWO registered professions after taking only one exam. The registration law in Philly read, IIRC, that if you were a registered architect you weren't required to ALSO be a registered interior designer - one registration precluded the other. In other words, if an architect stamped your drawings an ID didn't have to (note the Indiana law is not a stamping act).
To supplant all those lost manufacturing jobs. Indiana needs as many Interior Designers as it can get. Woohoo for a c note I can be an interior designer. Speaking of Interior Design, my vacuum cleaner just stopped its giant sucking sound.
lb -- I think this move by Indiana actually reflects a high degree of respect for the qualifications and knowledge required to pass the ARE. It says that Architects already know how to do the work of Interior Designers, at least from a life-safety standpoint.
I doubt you'll ever see any jurisdiction adopt a policy whereby passing the NCIDQ exam qualifies someone to receive an architectural license.
Florida has a similar concept. If you are a licensed architect you automatically qualify as a licensed interior designer. You just have to pay a small fee and fill out a form. Furthermore the state requires that if a particular project is only an interiors project with no structural or building envelope portion, that the firm must hold an interior designer license, not just architecture. It doesn't make sense since its automatic that you would get it if you are an architect, but that's the rule. I think it basically encourages firms to pay an extra fee to the state.
mmmmmm.... more credentials. Where do I sign up?
I guess I'm not getting my point across.
I know no one will ever become an architect by passing the NCIDQ. And I know, in many states, being a registered architect means one is also qualified to be a registered interior designer.
What I think is odd is that it seems Indiana, in deciding to begin registering interior designers, looked around at what standards they could use to determine qualifications. They decided the ARE was a valid and usable tool for qualification, even though it's legally a test for architects. What I'm questioning is whether this is allowed by NCARB, or if Indiana just decided unilaterally that the knowledge encompassed in NCARB's test is sufficient to license ID's, too.
Like if I get my Chef's license, after passing a test designed and administered by the National Chef Board, can I also call myself a licensed Cake Decorator, or is that a specialized field of knowledge WITHIN the bigger exam that I haven't really been sufficiently tested on?
No disrespect intended to IDs by comparing them to cake decorators, I'm just looking for a simple comparative example.
The basic question for me is this: does NCARB mind if states decide to use the ARE as a benchmark for entry into a field other than architecture?
lb -- I have no reason to think NCARB would have any particular objection to a state using ARE as a benchmark for entry into another field like interior design ... NCARB gives (?) individual state boards a lot of discretion in how they react to a Council Record. For example, some states impose additional requirements -- beyond holding NCARB certification -- that must be met for reciprocity. While your question is different, I suspect NCARB would defer to individual state Boards on matters of this nature.
If you really want to know their position on this, I suppose you could direct a question to NCARB directly, or to one of its Board members -- they're all listed on the NCARB website.
This thread may be dead but I am researching this topic for a presentation to IDEC. Great questions liberty bell.
My opinion is that SAFE http://www.safeinteriordesign.org/ the Indiana Interior Design legislation proponents acquiesced to the AIA to get their support for their meager title act.
The issue of ID's responsibility of protecting the health, safety and welfare of the public is a conundrum (and according to the Institute for Justice- our professional Achilles Heel) that presents a direct conflict of interest with architects and numerous other licensed building design professionals. It also is a redundant legal proposition that any smart politician will avoid. In short it just does not make sense to continue beating our collective professional heads against the wall to claim that protecting the HS & W of the public is our primary and unique responsibility. Anyway I digress
THANKS
Hi again dudek. Thanks for weighing in - I admit I enjoy the hairsplitting this topic generates!
I'm curious about your opinion on the conflict of interest presented if IDs claim responsibility/liability for HSW, as architects do.
An example that is somewhat gossip: allegedly the wife of a state official here in Indiana redecorated her husband's office, in a government building, using wall treatments and fabrics that don't meet commercial interior flame spread requirements. I don't see how an ID using the correct interior treatments would be in any way in conflict with architects?
In the day to day workings of certified ID's (not decorator posers) and Architects, many of which are amicable and synergistic relationships, it does not pose a conflict. The ID's make the right finish selections and the RA signs/seal the documents. Everybody wins-we all get paid, the client is safe and happy. Good architects realize the benefit of utilizing a qualified ID, much like any allied design professional, and certified ID's understand their position in the chain of legal responsibilities and they respect the mutual rewarding relationship.
Unfortunately in an attempt to validate the "profession" a handful of disgruntled ID's (some 35 years ago now) decided that licensure was the quickest and surest way to advance the profession. While I was not there at that particular momentous occasion I am one of the few current ID's willing to call that effort for what it is...nothing but a way to distinguish the designers from the decorators. IT HAD VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH HS&W.
The pro-legislation effort needed a valid reason to seek licensure and legal protection. Hence HS&W seemed to be the most direct model to frame that effort- who could argue with that? So without much consideration for the impact, or the end result, the ID's have been trying mightily to convince legislators that we are uniquely qualified to protect people’s lives. However, it is the claim by the ID pro-legislation side that ID is, as capable of and, responsible for the protection of HS&W as architects, engineers, code officials, licensed contractors etc. that this particular issue becomes a conflict of interest and thus the ongoing turf war. It is a monumental waste of energy, effort, resources and money. It is a failed model for professional validation. If we would just step back and think about it.....
"let's see architects and engineers already claim that responsibility....our claim is redundant and only partially correct (flameproof finishes and code furniture clearances are at the low end of the scale of life safety responsibilities...important certainly but not demonstrative of licensure) and we really cannot prove cause and effect with any legal precedents...hey maybe this is not the best way to sort out the decorators."
ID's need architects and they need us. We need to stop being an adversary in the legislative realm and we need to distinguish ourselves from the decorators through less onerous and bureaucratic methods.
Does that answer your question?
Yes, very completely, thank you. I see your point: the talents of interior designers, the reasons why architects would engage them on projects, have significantly less to do with HS&W issues, but those issues seemed like the logical place for a registration movement to start. It's hard, after all, to register talent, which is why in every discussion of this topic I'm quick to say that a registered architect is not necessarily a skilled one!
In an older discussion of this topic an interior design student said that she was responsible for HS7W if she designed a tray ceiling in a dining room and it fell on the people eating. This is a pretty good example of how HS&W knowledge for IDs goes beyond flame spreads. But! one can certainly engage a structural engineer for a tray ceiling; I probably would.
For me, if there was a rigorous test that did deal with HS&W AND the bright line between the role of the ID and the architect.
The real issue, for me, is when the ID decides they are the project lead, and the Arch/ MEP, S civil is subservient to the ID.
It probably is an urban myth, but i remember a story about an ID claiming that since they have a state license, they can hire - and direct the architect and engineers in their work.
Personally, i don't think that they should be allowed to have the coordinator role in a project.
Thoughts?
also a bit more back story of the bright line:
from the id practice act of Illinois.
"The profession of interior design", within the meaning and intent of this Act, refers to persons qualified by education, experience, and examination, who administer contracts for fabrication, procurement, or installation in the implementation of designs, drawings, and specifications for any interior design project and offer or furnish professional services, such as consultations, studies, drawings, and specifications in connection with the location of lighting fixtures, lamps and specifications of ceiling finishes as shown in reflected ceiling plans, space planning, furnishings, or the fabrication of non‑loadbearing structural elements within and surrounding interior spaces of buildings but specifically excluding mechanical and electrical systems, except for specifications of fixtures and their location within interior spaces.
A person represents himself or herself to be a "registered interior designer" within the meaning of this Act if he or she holds himself or herself out to the public by any title incorporating the words "registered interior designer"or any title that includes the words "registered interior design". A person represents himself or herself to be a "registered residential interior designer" within the meaning of this Act if he or she holds himself or herself out to the public by any title incorporating the words "registered residential interior designer"or any title that includes the words "registered residential interior design".
(Source: P.A. 95‑1023, eff. 6‑1‑09.)
http://ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=1341&ChapAct=225%26nbsp%3BILCS%26nbsp%3B310%2F&ChapterID=24&ChapterName=PROFESSIONS+AND+OCCUPATIONS&ActName=Interior+Design+Title+Act
one more highlight...
Nothing in this Act shall authorize registered interior designers or registered residential interior designers to perform services, including life safety services that they are prohibited from performing, or any practice (i) that is restricted in the Illinois Architecture Practice Act of 1989, the Professional Engineering Practice Act of 1989, or the Structural Engineering Practice Act of 1989, or (ii) that they are not authorized to perform under the Environmental Barriers Act
dsc Illinois does not have a practice act for interior designers. It is nothing but legislation that regulates who can call themselves a "registered" interior designer. Anybody with a pulse can call themselves an interior designer in the state of Illinois just not a "registered" one.
But as you pointed out in your highlight. It really does not matter.
dsc_arch
Personally, i don't think that they should be allowed to have the coordinator role in a project.
So if I landed a major interior rehab project in Chicago with a fat 6 figure fee and I needed an architect on the project team you would decline because I am not an RA?
YES!
Officially, by state law, you would be peddling architecture and /or design build services in the state of Illinois and it is illegal. The client can have you do all of the work and then fire you and demand that you return all fees paid to you and the team.
The pricipal contract should be between the Architect and the client. The clinet can hire the ID independently, but he architect can not be subservient to the ID. Ultimately the responsibility for HS&W rests with the architect. The ID does not carry that burden.
I do feel that ID's do have an important role to fill. Well trained ones, who know and respect the building code, fire code, accessibility code, energy code are great. The ones who scoff at codes (and the need for permits) are the ones I can not stand.
dsc_arch,
I did not say that I was going to be the architect of record. Simply that I have a project and I need a collaborator who would fill that role. So you would be willing to walk on a significant fee because you need to be in control of all aspects of the project including client relations (even though I have that established relationship) including pre-design, programming, conceptual design and the day to day needs of the owner?
I know the ID profession in general has not earned the respect of allied design professionals such as yourself. But trust me there are those of us our there who are just as capable of pulling off a siginificant project as anybody else...engineers, architects, planners etc.
Unfortunately the AIA and the ID professional organizations are mired in an adveserial turf battle that is hurting everybody including the end users...you know the folks with the money.
I probably would not agree to be a hired gun. We have been the hired gun in the past and it has never worked out well.
Too many times either the ID, contractor, or KES has asked us to skirt the code and put our license at stake for their "vision." Note, their vision could also be substandard materials that increase the profit of the coordinator. I like that, since I am not beholden to them, I can decide to tell them to go shove it.
I have met some great CM's, Project Reps, ID, CE, SE, Builders and interns who can perform that role and I hope that you are one of those few. Unfortunately, over the years, I have met many more scab coordinators that are not competent and are damn right dangerous.
However, this has been good for my firm since we routinely (twice this year alone) are have been brought in after the fact to bring the buildings up to code. Since the scab coordinator did not have insurance there was little recourse for the owner.
I would not say that it is a turf war. I'd say that until the ID profession as a whole becomes just as rigorous in the training of their profession AND national acceptance of their defined role they will (and should) be relegated to the consultant role.
Fair enough dcs_arch I appreciate your comments. If I had a high 6 figure fee project opportunity I probably would not have the time to be discussing this topic anyway ;-)
I guess the point of this thread is that the ID pro legislation folks have put themselves in an advesarial postion with architects when they really need them as allies. That is unfortunate for ID's and a pain in the ass for RA's who should not have to validate, or fight for, their ability/right to perform interior design service.
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.