I’m wondering what the background on this is. I haven’t heard of licensure for architects being threatened to be deregulated ... anyone know more and can help enlighten me? Apparently there are a lot of states attempting to delicense architecture:
Wilma Buttfit
Jan 26, 18 5:11 am
If deregulated, would there be a refund for all the time and costs incurred to get a license that with a stroke of legislation has been rendered useless? Or is that just life.
Wilma Buttfit
Jan 26, 18 5:32 am
Meanwhile, states are enacting legislation to license interior designers. Discuss.
Donna Sink
Jan 26, 18 6:56 am
We went through this in Indiana a few years ago. it was a waste of money, time, and effort but it allowed politicians to crow about "deregulation" and being "business-friendly".
Colorado talked about it back in the '80s, but it never went anywhere. As you say, it's just posturing by our "leaders".
Non Sequitur
Jan 26, 18 7:22 am
Inferior designers are currently wedging themselves under our architects act in order to establish protected title. Don’t know how they plan to justify since you can’t carve out colour and furniture shopping as protected scope of work but The int des in my office are rather excited thinking they will be able to practice like architects now. I don’t think it’ll be that easy.
geezertect
Jan 26, 18 7:49 am
The int des in my office are rather excited thinking they will be able to practice like architects now.
A modest aspiration if ever I heard one.
Non Sequitur
Jan 26, 18 8:07 am
Geezer, it all depends on the scope of work they intend to protect for themselves. Granted they can’t reasonably expect to take away scope form architects, we do have an alternative path c/w building code examinations that grant them the freedom to “stamp” for permit within a prescribed size and occupancy. The problem is these exams far exceed the current int des process... and this is not even touching liability insurance.
geezertect
Jan 26, 18 8:51 am
I was just making a snarky observation that architecture is not exactly an economic model that is worth aspiring to very much. We have greater scope, but greater liability, and I wonder if we don't also wind up with less compensation at the end of the day.
Wilma Buttfit
Jan 26, 18 9:15 am
Interior designers think they are going to get all the renovation work and fit-out work, basically stuff with no envelope or site work. Renovations and fit-outs are a substantial portion of the industry and that portion will only grow in market share. They also want to be project leads and have architects be one of their consultants. Where did they get that idea from but architects having structural consultants. I don't blame them because that could be very lucrative, to have that approach.
Non Sequitur
Jan 26, 18 11:52 am
Tintt, one of the first real building projects I worked on many many years ago was given to us because the int des the client hired was so incompetent. We went from simple consultant to prime and tossed the int des out of their own project.
Wilma Buttfit
Jan 26, 18 11:59 am
I know that happens but I also know several good competent interior designers.
Everyday Architect
Jan 26, 18 8:48 am
I do recall Donna’s discussion of Indiana, but it seems like that was far enough in the past that most have either forgotten about it or moved on. I’ve not heard of a single current effort which makes me wonder why the AIA would make a statement like this and call attention to it. If I’m a libertarian in one of those states that isn’t red in the diagram, I would feel more empowered to get some type of legislation or executive action on the books now than I would have a week ago. After all, look at all the other states doing it.
Wilma Buttfit
Jan 26, 18 9:26 am
I think all architects should automatically get a realtors license. If you design a building and are responsible for its construction you should also be able to process the paper work to transact it. Some custom home builders do this so you don't need a separate realtor to buy the product. Sounds like a no brainier to me. And it wouldn't require legislative action, just make it an optional 7th test as part of the ARE.
shellarchitect
Jan 26, 18 10:37 am
Real estate agents are prime targets for unnecessary licensing. In Michigan a 40 hour class and exam is required, purely anti-competitive in my mind.
Wilma Buttfit
Jan 26, 18 10:51 am
Indeed.
archinine
Jan 26, 18 11:23 am
So someone off handedly mentioned this interior design 'license' that allows 'stamping'/permitting in certain jurisdictions. I searched around and couldn't find any particular state which allowed this. Does anyone have any concrete links to this or is this something that is still in the lobbying process and has not occcured yet?
I agree letting them cut into that fit out work is 1. A huge liability concern and 2. Would be a blow to what little fees architects can still demand.
If they really want to be architects, then put in the time money schooling test taking etc.
Wilma Buttfit
Jan 26, 18 11:32 am
Sorry, that was misleading. To clarify... they have been enacting legislation for the word. ID's are gunning for the stamp though too - not sure there are any states that are actually giving it to them yet.
Non Sequitur
Jan 26, 18 11:50 am
interior designer is not a recognized, or protected, title in Ontario (canada)... It's a private act, not a law, so no one is forced to recognize it like they do with architects or p.eng.
Wilma Buttfit
Jan 26, 18 11:35 am
From my state's licensing board... Interior Designers may prepare and file interior design documents for the purpose of obtaining approval for a building permit for nonstructural interior construction, materials, finishes, space planning, furnishings, fixtures, equipment, lighting, and reflected ceiling plans.
Marc Miller
Jan 26, 18 11:38 am
Landscape Architecture in Arizona was under scrutiny in 2016, and both Architecture and Landscape were under scrutiny in Florida in 2012. If I recall correctly engineering was on the table for consideration in Donna's example.
This is part of a long standing dilemma about the role of architecture and the minor professions, a description that architecture has had to actively (re)address since professionalism became an important thing in the 50's/60's.
Donna Sink
Jan 26, 18 3:07 pm
You're correct, engineering was on the table for de-regulation in Indiana. The logic was that they do so many calculations and are so highly educated in such a specific science that they will self-regulate, anyway.
Marc Miller
Jan 26, 18 6:14 pm
Aka, the stuff you do will be replaced by ai’s anyway, so tighten those belts and sharpen those pencils.
x-jla
Jan 26, 18 12:59 pm
If you look up recent news about occupational licensing you will find much bipartisan support for deregulation of many professions, and an effort to curtail trade groups and cartels from enacting new protectionist legislation. This is because it is very clear that occupational licensing causes financial harm to the most disenfranchised groups and offers little to no benefit to the public. The effort to deregulate occupational licensing began with Obama’s administration, and is widely supported by many legal groups and the general public. Occupational licensing, in many cases is unconstitutional. Arizona recently passed the Right to Earn a Living Act, which is fantastic in my opinion. Architecture likely will not be deregulated, but many others will. Moving in the right direction at least. Get rid of these useless vampires who use legislation and government to gain market advantages and suck money from people who just want to work.
x-jla
Jan 26, 18 1:13 pm
The AIA statement is idiotic, hyperbolic, and really utter bullshit. They see any trend towards occupational licensing reform as a threat, and would rather see the groups they pretend to care about suffer from these abuses of power. Of course fake concern for the disenfranchised is the trend these days, and acknowledging govt overreach of any kind is a big no no.
x-jla
Jan 26, 18 1:14 pm
In quasi liberal circles.
x-jla
Jan 26, 18 1:32 pm
EA, basically, the AIA is pointing out states with occupational licensing reforming legislation on the books. Architecture is not necessarily being targeted. So far my state has deregulated a handful of professions including yoga instructors, citrus packers, geologists, horse massages (seriously), and hair braiders I believe. You still need a license to apply temporary make-up though, but you can freely tattoo permanent make-up without any license (to highlight how irrational some of these licensing laws are...)
x-jla
Jan 26, 18 1:36 pm
States are reviewing each occupation and making boards present a case as to why that license is needed to protect hsw. This is a good thing, and unless you feel your hsw argument is bs and cannot be backed by evidence then you shouldn’t have any thing to worry about. If you are in a profession that finds itself worried that it will lose its sanctioned monopoly, then most likely it’s because that profession knows their hsw argument is bs.
Everyday Architect
Jan 26, 18 7:26 pm
So the AIA may not even be responding to threatened deregulation of architects, but rather threatened deregulation of licensed occupations in general?
x-jla
Jan 27, 18 9:21 pm
Yeah. I know for a fact my state does not have anything on the books about deregulation of architecture specifically. They seem to see everything as a slippery slope towards not being able to exploit interns.
x-jla
Jan 27, 18 9:23 pm
There is a service called statescape that tracks all new legislation across the country. You can narrow to certain topics and get emails when there a
re updates.
Peter Normand
Jan 26, 18 1:44 pm
Licensure is important for our profession as a form of a contract between us and the public. Same as when we license Drivers, they have demonstrated minimum competency to do what their licence permits them to do with the expectation that under a reasonable standard of care they will not harm others. If we allow licensure to be weakened by removing requirements for internship or allowing more of our work to be done without the supervision of a licensed professional our profession loses credibility and the safety of the public is put at risk from the actions of incompetent actors.
Barriers to licensure such as education, exams and internships exist to keep out people who are not minimally competent.
AIA is just doing what it is meant to do in this case and advocating for our profession's licensure and credibility. Not everyone has the skills and abilities to become an architect.
Over and OUT
Peter N
williamlyons
May 31, 19 1:51 pm
Way to justify this blatant bullshit.
joseffischer
Jan 26, 18 5:07 pm
Yeah, when having to go through a permit process, I'd have to think it would be easy to prove licensing a boon to the public. There are too many examples where something got permitted by someone without a stamp, and somehow squeaked by without the permit office noticing, and then the most basic elements of construction are not followed because the contract documents don't require it, and bad things happen.
The counter-argument, I suppose, would be look at the slew of buildings permitted with architectural professionals stamping "CD" sets that are barely more coordinated or defined than a DD set, and bad things happen. But I like to think those are fewer, less egregious, and the standard basics are covered more thoroughly.
Imagine if you could get your antibiotics without that $100 co-fee, that'd be nice : P
x-jla
Jan 26, 18 6:03 pm
Hypothetically, what if Autodesk came out with some super program in 20-30 years that ran simulations and automatically tested for code compliance, safety, etc. Kinda like those fire simulations...Say it was proven to work with greater accuracy than a human, and could stamp the plans under the company name/insurance . Would we then be able to get rid of licensing?
Marc Miller
Jan 26, 18 6:15 pm
You mean the project google is already working on
joseffischer
Jan 29, 18 9:03 am
Google designs all their data centers like this in-house with programmers as project managers and a couple architects on the payroll for their stamp. It's interesting.
Marc Miller
Jan 29, 18 12:15 pm
I was referring to their research in automated code compliance as a
urbanism
archanonymous
Jun 1, 19 7:06 am
Who cares, I'll be retired by then.
Volunteer
Jan 26, 18 8:26 pm
"Finally, AIA member architects are required to continue their education even after being licensed, to make sure they stay up to date on the latest techniques in design and the production of construction documents."
All architects have continuing education requirements, AIA member or not. Who writes this self-serving crap?
quizzical
Jan 26, 18 10:05 pm
Volunteer -- you are correct that most states require CE for licensed architects, but -- to be fair -- most state requirements are lower than what AIA requires of its members.
For example, AIA requires 18 CE hours per year, while my state's requirement is only 12 CE hours.
Quizzical - To be fair, when was the last time any of those CE credits actually required an Architect to stay up-to-date. I'd say any program would need to require a minimum of 52+1 hours to get over the fact that lunch-n-learns are typically scheduled weekly, and consists of veiled sales pitches that rarely teach you anything, all counting towards your CE hours.
curtkram
Jun 1, 19 1:30 pm
I think those sales pitches do a good job of explaining how's and why's for the product they're selling, they introduce you to people that can go into more technical details if you spec their product on your project, help you write specs for their product, introduce you to new product as well as trends, etc. If you were architecting in your mom's basement because license restrictions were relaxed, you would likely be far behind the rest of us.
archinine
Jan 26, 18 9:17 pm
Tinbeary / tintt- that sounds like the same story I had heard before. Thanks for the additional info.
If you don't mind which state was this in?
This sort of thing is something I'd like to keep track of, I think anyone who's spent all the money/time on the licensing process would have a vested interest in doing so. Trying to figure out how to properly direct this search.
Something tells me that once one state allows for it IDs creeping in or the whole thing being 'deregulated', it's only a matter of time before our licenses are worthless...sunk cost fallacy or other logic, it's still disheartening to say the least.
AIA statement here: https://www.aia.org/resources/174971-where-we-stand-professional-licensure-?editing=true
I’m wondering what the background on this is. I haven’t heard of licensure for architects being threatened to be deregulated ... anyone know more and can help enlighten me? Apparently there are a lot of states attempting to delicense architecture:
If deregulated, would there be a refund for all the time and costs incurred to get a license that with a stroke of legislation has been rendered useless? Or is that just life.
Meanwhile, states are enacting legislation to license interior designers. Discuss.
We went through this in Indiana a few years ago. it was a waste of money, time, and effort but it allowed politicians to crow about "deregulation" and being "business-friendly".
https://archinect.com/news/art...
Colorado talked about it back in the '80s, but it never went anywhere. As you say, it's just posturing by our "leaders".
Inferior designers are currently wedging themselves under our architects act in order to establish protected title. Don’t know how they plan to justify since you can’t carve out colour and furniture shopping as protected scope of work but The int des in my office are rather excited thinking they will be able to practice like architects now. I don’t think it’ll be that easy.
The int des in my office are rather excited thinking they will be able to practice like architects now.
A modest aspiration if ever I heard one.
Geezer, it all depends on the scope of work they intend to protect for themselves. Granted they can’t reasonably expect to take away scope form architects, we do have an alternative path c/w building code examinations that grant them the freedom to “stamp” for permit within a prescribed size and occupancy. The problem is these exams far exceed the current int des process... and this is not even touching liability insurance.
I was just making a snarky observation that architecture is not exactly an economic model that is worth aspiring to very much. We have greater scope, but greater liability, and I wonder if we don't also wind up with less compensation at the end of the day.
Interior designers think they are going to get all the renovation work and fit-out work, basically stuff with no envelope or site work. Renovations and fit-outs are a substantial portion of the industry and that portion will only grow in market share. They also want to be project leads and have architects be one of their consultants. Where did they get that idea from but architects having structural consultants. I don't blame them because that could be very lucrative, to have that approach.
Tintt, one of the first real building projects I worked on many many years ago was given to us because the int des the client hired was so incompetent. We went from simple consultant to prime and tossed the int des out of their own project.
I know that happens but I also know several good competent interior designers.
I do recall Donna’s discussion of Indiana, but it seems like that was far enough in the past that most have either forgotten about it or moved on. I’ve not heard of a single current effort which makes me wonder why the AIA would make a statement like this and call attention to it. If I’m a libertarian in one of those states that isn’t red in the diagram, I would feel more empowered to get some type of legislation or executive action on the books now than I would have a week ago. After all, look at all the other states doing it.
I think all architects should automatically get a realtors license. If you design a building and are responsible for its construction you should also be able to process the paper work to transact it. Some custom home builders do this so you don't need a separate realtor to buy the product. Sounds like a no brainier to me. And it wouldn't require legislative action, just make it an optional 7th test as part of the ARE.
Real estate agents are prime targets for unnecessary licensing. In Michigan a 40 hour class and exam is required, purely anti-competitive in my mind.
Indeed.
So someone off handedly mentioned this interior design 'license' that allows 'stamping'/permitting in certain jurisdictions. I searched around and couldn't find any particular state which allowed this. Does anyone have any concrete links to this or is this something that is still in the lobbying process and has not occcured yet?
I agree letting them cut into that fit out work is 1. A huge liability concern and 2. Would be a blow to what little fees architects can still demand.
If they really want to be architects, then put in the time money schooling test taking etc.
Sorry, that was misleading. To clarify... they have been enacting legislation for the word. ID's are gunning for the stamp though too - not sure there are any states that are actually giving it to them yet.
interior designer is not a recognized, or protected, title in Ontario (canada)... It's a private act, not a law, so no one is forced to recognize it like they do with architects or p.eng.
From my state's licensing board... Interior Designers may prepare and file interior design documents for the purpose of obtaining approval for a building permit for nonstructural interior construction, materials, finishes, space planning, furnishings, fixtures, equipment, lighting, and reflected ceiling plans.
Landscape Architecture in Arizona was under scrutiny in 2016, and both Architecture and Landscape were under scrutiny in Florida in 2012. If I recall correctly engineering was on the table for consideration in Donna's example.
This is part of a long standing dilemma about the role of architecture and the minor professions, a description that architecture has had to actively (re)address since professionalism became an important thing in the 50's/60's.
You're correct, engineering was on the table for de-regulation in Indiana. The logic was that they do so many calculations and are so highly educated in such a specific science that they will self-regulate, anyway.
Aka, the stuff you do will be replaced by ai’s anyway, so tighten those belts and sharpen those pencils.
If you look up recent news about occupational licensing you will find much bipartisan support for deregulation of many professions, and an effort to curtail trade groups and cartels from enacting new protectionist legislation. This is because it is very clear that occupational licensing causes financial harm to the most disenfranchised groups and offers little to no benefit to the public. The effort to deregulate occupational licensing began with Obama’s administration, and is widely supported by many legal groups and the general public. Occupational licensing, in many cases is unconstitutional. Arizona recently passed the Right to Earn a Living Act, which is fantastic in my opinion. Architecture likely will not be deregulated, but many others will. Moving in the right direction at least. Get rid of these useless vampires who use legislation and government to gain market advantages and suck money from people who just want to work.
The AIA statement is idiotic, hyperbolic, and really utter bullshit. They see any trend towards occupational licensing reform as a threat, and would rather see the groups they pretend to care about suffer from these abuses of power. Of course fake concern for the disenfranchised is the trend these days, and acknowledging govt overreach of any kind is a big no no.
In quasi liberal circles.
EA, basically, the AIA is pointing out states with occupational licensing reforming legislation on the books. Architecture is not necessarily being targeted. So far my state has deregulated a handful of professions including yoga instructors, citrus packers, geologists, horse massages (seriously), and hair braiders I believe. You still need a license to apply temporary make-up though, but you can freely tattoo permanent make-up without any license (to highlight how irrational some of these licensing laws are...)
States are reviewing each occupation and making boards present a case as to why that license is needed to protect hsw. This is a good thing, and unless you feel your hsw argument is bs and cannot be backed by evidence then you shouldn’t have any thing to worry about. If you are in a profession that finds itself worried that it will lose its sanctioned monopoly, then most likely it’s because that profession knows their hsw argument is bs.
So the AIA may not even be responding to threatened deregulation of architects, but rather threatened deregulation of licensed occupations in general?
Yeah. I know for a fact my state does not have anything on the books about deregulation of architecture specifically. They seem to see everything as a slippery slope towards not being able to exploit interns.
There is a service called statescape that tracks all new legislation across the country. You can narrow to certain topics and get emails when there a
re updates.
Licensure is important for our profession as a form of a contract between us and the public. Same as when we license Drivers, they have demonstrated minimum competency to do what their licence permits them to do with the expectation that under a reasonable standard of care they will not harm others. If we allow licensure to be weakened by removing requirements for internship or allowing more of our work to be done without the supervision of a licensed professional our profession loses credibility and the safety of the public is put at risk from the actions of incompetent actors.
Barriers to licensure such as education, exams and internships exist to keep out people who are not minimally competent.
AIA is just doing what it is meant to do in this case and advocating for our profession's licensure and credibility. Not everyone has the skills and abilities to become an architect.
Over and OUT
Peter N
Way to justify this blatant bullshit.
Yeah, when having to go through a permit process, I'd have to think it would be easy to prove licensing a boon to the public. There are too many examples where something got permitted by someone without a stamp, and somehow squeaked by without the permit office noticing, and then the most basic elements of construction are not followed because the contract documents don't require it, and bad things happen.
The counter-argument, I suppose, would be look at the slew of buildings permitted with architectural professionals stamping "CD" sets that are barely more coordinated or defined than a DD set, and bad things happen. But I like to think those are fewer, less egregious, and the standard basics are covered more thoroughly.
Imagine if you could get your antibiotics without that $100 co-fee, that'd be nice : P
Hypothetically, what if Autodesk came out with some super program in 20-30 years that ran simulations and automatically tested for code compliance, safety, etc. Kinda like those fire simulations...Say it was proven to work with greater accuracy than a human, and could stamp the plans under the company name/insurance . Would we then be able to get rid of licensing?
You mean the project google is already working on
Google designs all their data centers like this in-house with programmers as project managers and a couple architects on the payroll for their stamp. It's interesting.
I was referring to their research in automated code compliance as a urbanism
Who cares, I'll be retired by then.
"Finally, AIA member architects are required to continue their education even after being licensed, to make sure they stay up to date on the latest techniques in design and the production of construction documents."
All architects have continuing education requirements, AIA member or not. Who writes this self-serving crap?
Volunteer -- you are correct that most states require CE for licensed architects, but -- to be fair -- most state requirements are lower than what AIA requires of its members.
For example, AIA requires 18 CE hours per year, while my state's requirement is only 12 CE hours.
This link shows what each state requires: https://www.architectstraining... (note: some state's have a biennial requirement)
Note: the link I provide immediately above may not be completely up to date -- here's another one for comparison purposes: https://www.ceacademyinc.com/requirements.html
Quizzical - To be fair, when was the last time any of those CE credits actually required an Architect to stay up-to-date. I'd say any program would need to require a minimum of 52+1 hours to get over the fact that lunch-n-learns are typically scheduled weekly, and consists of veiled sales pitches that rarely teach you anything, all counting towards your CE hours.
I think those sales pitches do a good job of explaining how's and why's for the product they're selling, they introduce you to people that can go into more technical details if you spec their product on your project, help you write specs for their product, introduce you to new product as well as trends, etc. If you were architecting in your mom's basement because license restrictions were relaxed, you would likely be far behind the rest of us.
Tinbeary / tintt- that sounds like the same story I had heard before. Thanks for the additional info.
If you don't mind which state was this in?
This sort of thing is something I'd like to keep track of, I think anyone who's spent all the money/time on the licensing process would have a vested interest in doing so. Trying to figure out how to properly direct this search.
Something tells me that once one state allows for it IDs creeping in or the whole thing being 'deregulated', it's only a matter of time before our licenses are worthless...sunk cost fallacy or other logic, it's still disheartening to say the least.