DC doesn't have landscape architecture licensing. Maine, Illinois, Massachusetts, and a few other dangerscapes lack practice acts. I want to visit, but I'm afraid that the dangerous landscapes will kill or maim me. I mean, without licensure, public HSW should be compromised according to the lobbyists at asla. Please let me know if I should be worried before planning my trip. thx.
Marc Miller
Dec 2, 17 11:18 am
What are you talking about? The practice environment?
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 11:25 am
just being sarcastic. The asla annoys me. All states should do away with their useless practice acts.
Marc Miller
Dec 2, 17 11:28 am
But that's not the ASLA...
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 11:36 am
Yes, they are the lobbyists who pushed this shit. The vampires at the state are just fee whores. "Licensing = taking away some some right to do something and then selling it back to them"
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 11:36 am
*someones
Marc Miller
Dec 2, 17 12:03 pm
Fine- market creep goes to the architect first. Or DC which is a great example- no market creep but those who are licensed still get the bulk of the work.
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 11:46 am
in many states you can literally buy armor piercing bullets and semi auto rifles with nothing more than an id....but to design non-residential gardens you need to spend years jumping through hoops...This imbalance of logic only comes to happen through persistent lobbying...and lobbying only happens when its members have something financial to gain. Cronyism at its finest. Fortunately, the ills of occupational licensing has been on the bipartisan radar lately.
Marc Miller
Dec 2, 17 12:07 pm
Still waiting for some to explain to me how the federal bill required that will strike down licensure across the United States all at once will work.
Then waiting for the repercussions of work experience vs breadth of work and experience to have unanticipated impacts of shrinking market opportunities. Large firms like AECOM and Stantec just waiting in the wings...
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 1:17 pm
Obama actually initiated this. It's a bipartisan thing. Actually surprised trumps labor sec supports it being that they usually oppose
anything Obama did
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 1:19 pm
Marc, the Govt has no place protecting professions from competition. If the public hsw argument cannot be proven licensure should be scrapped
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 1:24 pm
And, No Marc it's probably not feasible that a federal bill will do this. It may however require states to evaluate whether or not their laws violate economic liberties vs their necessity to hsw. My state gov already signed an executive order mandating that all boards need to justify their existing laws and prove a hsw benefit or scrap them. He also froze the boards power to create new regs unless
a hsw case can be proven. (Not sure if to a court or if they are forming a panel to hear cases)
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 1:30 pm
Some states even revoke people occupational licenses for defaulting on student loans. Logical. Take away their ability to make money because they are back on payments. Freedom lol.
Obama ignited licensure in the design professions...
I thought that was the AIA in 1800's
And to my point (that I've made before)- if you can't erase licensure at once, you'll create unstable voids of competition where people w/o will suffer. It's already a concern in Arizona. So here's an idea. Let's stop wishing and watch the repercussions for a bit.
And to be clear you are advocating for deregulating just landscape architecture or Eng, Arch, AND Landscape
Obama did attempt to tackle occupational licensing. I don't know what you mean by unstable voids of competition? If you are referring to unlicensed states inability to gain reciprocity, or losing work to other states, that can easily be solved by keeping title acts and doing away with practice acts indefinitely, or until all states catch up.
Marc Miller
Dec 2, 17 2:13 pm
Oh... it’s not his fault, it’s just a report that was released. It’s a moot point- states review professions regularly. When wold equity matter when too many people worry about market share and control?
He did what he could do. Point is, he acknowledged the problem and started the conversation at the higher levels of govt.
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 2:50 pm
Only way the fed could overturn licensing nationally would probably be through a Supreme Court ruling. State courts have ruled interior design licensing unconstitutional (I believe in Alabama and TX?)
x-jla
Dec 4, 17 10:28 am
Actually, they have ruled on cases. One makes it clear that any board comprised of majority members
x-jla
Dec 4, 17 10:34 am
Of a profession who make decisions or oversee that profession are guilty of antitrust...and their authority is automatically null. It's also been made law recently that anyone can bring a cause of action against a board that blocks them from their profession of choice if regulations are believed to be unnecessary for restraint of trade. It puts burden of proof on the state to prove the regulation is needed to protect the public health. That's a huge one in this case as states w/o such regs can be used as proof of their
unnecessary nature.
Marc Miller
Dec 2, 17 2:17 pm
here’s another serious question.
If you eliminate licensure, you remove the basic implied basic standard of care. What does that do to professional liability? Will insurance companies manage liscensure by de facto based on rates and willingness to cover practitioners?
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 2:32 pm
Anyone can get Insurance.
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 2:33 pm
why do designers seem to love liability?
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 2:38 pm
it always comes to this argument of liability....they pretend to loath it, but really feel it gives them importance. As a business owner, this is the most ridiculous concept to grasp. Limiting liability should be the goal of anyone with half a brain for business. Dump it on the contractor. It's like shit rolls down hill and at the bottom the design professional are gobbling it up to feel important.
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 2:52 pm
Yes, and if more liability was on the contractor and less on the designer maybe they would be more inspired to not fuck things up.
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 2:53 pm
I see you already made that point above...
Marc Miller
Dec 2, 17 3:38 pm
I think you’re kidding the point. But a few more points-
1- move to Arizona and try this out, or dc. I think it’s being entertained in Florida too.
2- if you don’t want to move, I hope to read about you advocating for deregulation in front of your state professional review board. If you feel this strongly, you should not fear clarb and just make the compelling case.
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 4:30 pm
What do u mean kidding the point? Also, AZ and Florida have licensure. DC hasn't ever had licensure. I may in fact make the time and do that.
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 4:33 pm
Two questions.
What is the benefit of licensure in your opinion?
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 4:34 pm
And...If evidense were to show that no hsw benefit existed between places with license and without would you support scraping it?
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 4:36 pm
And a third, do you believe that in the absence of a hsw benefit the state should play a part in elevating and economically protecting a profession?
Marc Miller
Dec 2, 17 5:16 pm
Arizona is deregulating.
Marc Miller
Dec 2, 17 5:25 pm
In response - 1. For me, it's not a matter of HSW. You'd need to demonstrate that deregulation in that particular state would not place an undue hardship on those individuals who were practicing w/o a license.
2- See one. Further to the point Standard of Care is a critical element of self-regulation. Otherwise, it will be up to others to make those determinations for you, especially given the matter of HSW. This is why I was speculating about insurance. Licensure
helps to make this possible and reasonable. BUT w/o that self-regulation in place, risk (liability) is regulated by an external market even more. So sure, anyone can get insurance, but that may not be as accessible if an external agent perceives too much risk to
3- States already do that. That's the role of the professional review boards.
Marc Miller
Dec 2, 17 5:27 pm
And you have yet to respond to my earlier question. Are you advocating for deregulation of all the "allied professions" or just raiding landscape architecture because you perceive it to be the weakest sheep in the pack.
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 6:07 pm
I'm picking landscape because that is my area and main passion. I'm advocating for all design professions to be deregulated. Engineering is a different animal and not really a design profession. Not sure. Landscape specifically poses very little hsw threat.
x-jla
Dec 2, 17 6:32 pm
I love AZ
kjdt
Dec 3, 17 2:51 pm
USPS outsources all or very nearly all of its architectural work to private architecture firms via "house doctor" contracts that grant all work within a particular territory to that firm for a period of years (pretty much exactly the way that fast food or retail companies procure architectural services.) The AOR is required to be licensed in the applicable state(s)/territory(ies). The last firm I worked in had the USPS contract for our region - it isn't glamorous or very interesting work, or particularly profitable.
Volunteer
Dec 3, 17 3:57 pm
Some landscape architecture situations can get sticky in a hurry. Around Asheville, North Carolina, a developer bought a lot of mountain-acreage and started putting in uber-expensive homes and even an airstrip. After the first few landslides it was determined that the whole development was sliding down the mountain about 4 inches a year. Don't know if they needed a better landscape architect or a civil engineer (or both) but they sure needed someone who knew what they were doing.
x-jla
Dec 3, 17 7:41 pm
That's a civil engineering issue.
geezertect
Dec 4, 17 7:07 am
It was a soils engineer issue as well. Now it's a lawyer issue.
DC doesn't have landscape architecture licensing. Maine, Illinois, Massachusetts, and a few other dangerscapes lack practice acts. I want to visit, but I'm afraid that the dangerous landscapes will kill or maim me. I mean, without licensure, public HSW should be compromised according to the lobbyists at asla. Please let me know if I should be worried before planning my trip. thx.
What are you talking about? The practice environment?
just being sarcastic. The asla annoys me. All states should do away with their useless practice acts.
But that's not the ASLA...
Yes, they are the lobbyists who pushed this shit. The vampires at the state are just fee whores. "Licensing = taking away some some right to do something and then selling it back to them"
*someones
Fine- market creep goes to the architect first. Or DC which is a great example- no market creep but those who are licensed still get the bulk of the work.
in many states you can literally buy armor piercing bullets and semi auto rifles with nothing more than an id....but to design non-residential gardens you need to spend years jumping through hoops...This imbalance of logic only comes to happen through persistent lobbying...and lobbying only happens when its members have something financial to gain. Cronyism at its finest. Fortunately, the ills of occupational licensing has been on the bipartisan radar lately.
Still waiting for some to explain to me how the federal bill required that will strike down licensure across the United States all at once will work.
Then waiting for the repercussions of work experience vs breadth of work and experience to have unanticipated impacts of shrinking market opportunities. Large firms like AECOM and Stantec just waiting in the wings...
Obama actually initiated this. It's a bipartisan thing. Actually surprised trumps labor sec supports it being that they usually oppose
anything Obama did
Marc, the Govt has no place protecting professions from competition. If the public hsw argument cannot be proven licensure should be scrapped
And, No Marc it's probably not feasible that a federal bill will do this. It may however require states to evaluate whether or not their laws violate economic liberties vs their necessity to hsw. My state gov already signed an executive order mandating that all boards need to justify their existing laws and prove a hsw benefit or scrap them. He also froze the boards power to create new regs unless
a hsw case can be proven. (Not sure if to a court or if they are forming a panel to hear cases)
Some states even revoke people occupational licenses for defaulting on student loans. Logical. Take away their ability to make money because they are back on payments. Freedom lol.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/18/business/student-loans-licenses.html?referer=http://reason.com/blog/2017/11/29/some-states-revoke-occupational-licenses
Obama ignited licensure in the design professions...
I thought that was the AIA in 1800's
And to my point (that I've made before)- if you can't erase licensure at once, you'll create unstable voids of competition where people w/o will suffer. It's already a concern in Arizona. So here's an idea. Let's stop wishing and watch the repercussions for a bit.
And to be clear you are advocating for deregulating just landscape architecture or Eng, Arch, AND Landscape
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/06/17/fact-sheet-new-steps-reduce-unnecessary-occupation-licenses-are-limiting
Obama did attempt to tackle occupational licensing. I don't know what you mean by unstable voids of competition? If you are referring to unlicensed states inability to gain reciprocity, or losing work to other states, that can easily be solved by keeping title acts and doing away with practice acts indefinitely, or until all states catch up.
Oh... it’s not his fault, it’s just a report that was released. It’s a moot point- states review professions regularly. When wold equity matter when too many people worry about market share and control?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2015/1/29/7946143/obama-reform-occupational-licensure
He did what he could do. Point is, he acknowledged the problem and started the conversation at the higher levels of govt.
Only way the fed could overturn licensing nationally would probably be through a Supreme Court ruling. State courts have ruled interior design licensing unconstitutional (I believe in Alabama and TX?)
Actually, they have ruled on cases. One makes it clear that any board comprised of majority members
Of a profession who make decisions or oversee that profession are guilty of antitrust...and their authority is automatically null. It's also been made law recently that anyone can bring a cause of action against a board that blocks them from their profession of choice if regulations are believed to be unnecessary for restraint of trade. It puts burden of proof on the state to prove the regulation is needed to protect the public health. That's a huge one in this case as states w/o such regs can be used as proof of their
unnecessary nature.
here’s another serious question.
If you eliminate licensure, you remove the basic implied basic standard of care. What does that do to professional liability? Will insurance companies manage liscensure by de facto based on rates and willingness to cover practitioners?
Anyone can get Insurance.
why do designers seem to love liability?
it always comes to this argument of liability....they pretend to loath it, but really feel it gives them importance. As a business owner, this is the most ridiculous concept to grasp. Limiting liability should be the goal of anyone with half a brain for business. Dump it on the contractor. It's like shit rolls down hill and at the bottom the design professional are gobbling it up to feel important.
Yes, and if more liability was on the contractor and less on the designer maybe they would be more inspired to not fuck things up.
I see you already made that point above...
I think you’re kidding the point. But a few more points-
1- move to Arizona and try this out, or dc. I think it’s being entertained in Florida too.
2- if you don’t want to move, I hope to read about you advocating for deregulation in front of your state professional review board. If you feel this strongly, you should not fear clarb and just make the compelling case.
What do u mean kidding the point? Also, AZ and Florida have licensure. DC hasn't ever had licensure. I may in fact make the time and do that.
Two questions.
What is the benefit of licensure in your opinion?
And...If evidense were to show that no hsw benefit existed between places with license and without would you support scraping it?
And a third, do you believe that in the absence of a hsw benefit the state should play a part in elevating and economically protecting a profession?
Arizona is deregulating.
In response - 1. For me, it's not a matter of HSW. You'd need to demonstrate that deregulation in that particular state would not place an undue hardship on those individuals who were practicing w/o a license.
2- See one. Further to the point Standard of Care is a critical element of self-regulation. Otherwise, it will be up to others to make those determinations for you, especially given the matter of HSW. This is why I was speculating about insurance. Licensure helps to make this possible and reasonable. BUT w/o that self-regulation in place, risk (liability) is regulated by an external market even more. So sure, anyone can get insurance, but that may not be as accessible if an external agent perceives too much risk to
3- States already do that. That's the role of the professional review boards.
And you have yet to respond to my earlier question. Are you advocating for deregulation of all the "allied professions" or just raiding landscape architecture because you perceive it to be the weakest sheep in the pack.
I'm picking landscape because that is my area and main passion. I'm advocating for all design professions to be deregulated. Engineering is a different animal and not really a design profession. Not sure. Landscape specifically poses very little hsw threat.
I love AZ
USPS outsources all or very nearly all of its architectural work to private architecture firms via "house doctor" contracts that grant all work within a particular territory to that firm for a period of years (pretty much exactly the way that fast food or retail companies procure architectural services.) The AOR is required to be licensed in the applicable state(s)/territory(ies). The last firm I worked in had the USPS contract for our region - it isn't glamorous or very interesting work, or particularly profitable.
Some landscape architecture situations can get sticky in a hurry. Around Asheville, North Carolina, a developer bought a lot of mountain-acreage and started putting in uber-expensive homes and even an airstrip. After the first few landslides it was determined that the whole development was sliding down the mountain about 4 inches a year. Don't know if they needed a better landscape architect or a civil engineer (or both) but they sure needed someone who knew what they were doing.
That's a civil engineering issue.
It was a soils engineer issue as well. Now it's a lawyer issue.