Architectural Technology - Representation

Mellor

I've started anew thread on the toic of representation and extracted relevant posts from the RIAI meeting thread

Poor Uncle Tom

Should everyone join all, CIAT, RIAI Tech, IBCI, and any other club/organisation that comes along or could we all stand up and push for our own body to best represent us, ATI through the IATGN. I know it has all been debated before but could we maybe hear from a Committee Member on the current position.

topcatcbr

sinnerboy wrote: »

IATGN - appear to break it down to 2 options - RIAI (AT ) or CIAT . Detailed handout from meeting examines pros and cons RIAI vs CIAT

We are a small country, do we need two representative bodies. Can we afford two bodies.

Divide & conquer

Mellor

topcatcbr wrote: »

We are a small country, do we need two representative bodies. Can we afford two bodies.

Divide & conquer

To play the devils advocate,
Should we put all our eggs in one basket

topcatcbr

Mellor wrote: »

To play the devils advocate,
Should we put all our eggs in one basket

I think we should put our eggs in one basket. (maybee take out insurance on it)
We should be the masters of our own fate.

sinnerboy

RIAI - I reckon . Local needs , local provider .

Sorry if it sounds sloganistic - it also seems very simple , to me

topcatcbr

I agree with the local needs local provider. However I feel there may be a conflict of interest in trying to represent both architects and ATs.

Poor Uncle Tom

The way I see it, the RIAI is specifically for Architects, who happen to tolerate AT membership to an agreed extent. Handing the reins of power equally to AT members would not be considered. It would be seen as diluting power and giving equal status to AT's, unthinkable to any hardcore member, and I would suggest not about to happen in the next 100 years.

What is needed is a seperate, specific, dedicated body, created by AT's, created for AT's, run by AT's, looking after the needs of AT's.

It was within our grasp in the ATI.

Is that still an option ?

Mellor

They might not like to share it, but they'll have to,
or else we'll stop doing the building reg compliance for them

Poor Uncle Tom

Think about that one long and hard, Mellor.

I don't think it's a trade off.

There are AT's out there, in their 100's blissfully ignorant of this debate, working away, certifying building regs, getting PAYE & PRSI paid and a lump of money each week, who will not want to jeapordise that.

They have to be looked after too by us and any body representing us.

Remember any self employed AT started out like that too and may even want to return to it also one day. Anyway the choice should be there for them if they want to.

Mellor

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Think about that one long and hard, Mellor.

I don't think it's a trade off.

There are AT's out there, in their 100's blissfully ignorant of this debate, working away, certifying building regs, getting PAYE & PRSI paid and a lump of money each week, who will not want to jeapordise that.

They have to be looked after too by us and any body representing us.

Remember any self employed AT started out like that too and may even want to return to it also one day. Anyway the choice should be there for them if they want to.

I think you should read that again, and then cinsder the possibility that I was prehaps joking. The fact that you thought I was serious about essentially stopping work is a little worrying

sinnerboy

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

The way I see it, the RIAI is specifically for Architects, who happen to tolerate AT membership to an agreed extent. Handing the reins of power equally to AT members would not be considered. It would be seen as diluting power and giving equal status to AT's, unthinkable to any hardcore member, and I would suggest not about to happen in the next 100 years.

What is needed is a seperate, specific, dedicated body, created by AT's, created for AT's, run by AT's, looking after the needs of AT's.

It was within our grasp in the ATI.

Is that still an option ?

Well for now it is . But change happens . I got a distinct sense of this from the RIAI the other night .

We need a seperate body alright - i.e. the evolved RIAI as I believe we may shape and influence to create over time.

As I said earlier "i was struck by a statistic yesterday - of all those who trained as AT's - where are they now ?. Breaks down into 4 equal groupings

1. left industry entirely
2. became architects
3. heads down "just doing it" . part of architects practices and / or AT practices
4. As above + IATGN "active" . Part of debate for change

I have been firmly ( and happily ) in group 3 for many years , but leaning towards 4 now " - if more "3s" become "4s" and join the RIAI we can then bring about change there .

We dont need to break down the door - it's open already .

Poor Uncle Tom

To Mellor:
How can you joke before 2.00 o'clock in the day? Thats like having a beer before 8.00 in the morning. Anyway, I did understand, just making my point VERY clear. Had a lot to do this morning that depended on the day being good, a little pissed off, sorry.

To Sinnerboy:
R U suggesting we join RIAI Tech en-mass, or debate a different entry route with large numbers??????Some AT's have proven their abilities through years and years of work experience, and I know some who could run rings around most "Professionally Superiors". Sorry once again, getting away from the topic.

topcatcbr

sinnerboy wrote: »

Well for now it is . But change happens . I got a distinct sense of this from the RIAI the other night .

We need a seperate body alright - i.e. the evolved RIAI as I believe we may shape and influence to create over time.

As I said earlier "i was struck by a statistic yesterday - of all those who trained as AT's - where are they now ?. Breaks down into 4 equal groupings

1. left industry entirely
2. became architects
3. heads down "just doing it" . part of architects practices and / or AT practices
4. As above + IATGN "active" . Part of debate for change

I have been firmly ( and happily ) in group 3 for many years , but leaning towards 4 now " - if more "3s" become "4s" and join the RIAI we can then bring about change there .

We dont need to break down the door - it's open already .

Why are these not in the RIAI if it is an inclusive society.


I was at the meeting and it was clear to me that this was never going to change.

If you didnt study at DIT or WIT they dont want to know.

sinnerboy

topcatcbr wrote: »

Why are these not in the RIAI if it is an inclusive society.


I was at the meeting and it was clear to me that this was never going to change.

If you didnt study at DIT or WIT they dont want to know.

In my own case , the only one I can answer for , because before IATGN I remained an apolitical busy bee . Head down , getting on with it .

I was there too .

DIT / WIT + 2 years experience is one route

There is also the 10 year experience route . ( Can't recall term for it - don't have hand out here )

.

Poor Uncle Tom

Grandfather Rule??

Question:
Does it become great-grandfather rule when u have 20 years self-employed experience, or can you gain entry postumously?

sinnerboy

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Grandfather Rule??

Question:
Does it become great-grandfather rule when u have 20 years self-employed experience, or can you gain entry postumously?

:D:D:D:D

Mellor

topcatcbr wrote: »

If you didnt study at DIT or WIT they dont want to know.

I really don't think thats the case.
The RIAI didnt exclude the others, they did that them selves. And can be re-accredited.
If somebody did study in the interim period, then they can get it, it just takes longer. It is possible that college time can be counted, so thats a plus

topcatcbr

Mellor wrote: »

I really don't think thats the case.
The RIAI didnt exclude the others, they did that them selves. And can be re-accredited.
If somebody did study in the interim period, then they can get it, it just takes longer. It is possible that college time can be counted, so thats a plus

I qualify under the 10 year rule next year. However I am seriously considering other less restrictive options. I want to be in an org which can represent the majority of Arch Techs and it is clear to me that with the inception of Arch Tech Courses country wide (good or bad) It (the RIAI)will be in the minority before very long as i think many of these graduates will seek membership to a professional org before they have 10 years professional practice.

What other profession has a 10 year apprenticeship and even then has so little recognition. Not even full membership.

If you can pass the membership exam after 2 or 5 years whats the problem.

No6

Now I'm sorry I wasn't able to make it to dublin, sounds like it was an interesting evening, for my own two cents worth, while I think we do need an active and strong voice within the RIAI I don't think it will ever be the answer (& I am an RIAI Tech), The ATI is some way off still, we're only a year into the 5 year plan (a bit stalinist perhaps??) and there appears to be hostility in some quarters to CIAT because they're english so what do we do??? stick our head in the sand and hope it all goes away!! ( thats the no3's up there!!) get active and get involved in any or all on the above organisations on the basis that any gain for at's achieved by any organisation is a gain for all at's, thats the no4's!!

As for the situation in regards to Level 8 qualifications and the commercial energy rating I think I saw somewhere recently that MRIAI is considered a level 8 qualification in its own right (it was in relation to acedemic posts I think) sooo if some of us were to become MRIAI under the Technical assessment process does that also allow us to become assessors for commercial buildings?? energy saver is right the future is in carbon neutral, low energy buildings I think someone should seriously lobby the SEI to allow at's do the commercial buildings, RIAI CIAT, IATGN doesn't matter

sinnerboy

No6 wrote: »

I think someone should seriously lobby the SEI to allow at's do the commercial buildings, RIAI CIAT, IATGN doesn't matter

I have . IATGN have . My boss has ...... feel free to add to this list

No6

Excuse the multiple posts I looked away for a day or two and you all post like lunatics anyway in relation to our name, is the term Technical Architect not used in the computer industry!! (completely unregulated unregistered by the RIAI!!) I am an Architectural Technician and proud of it but I dont mind being a Technologist, I find however the the general public dont know the difference, I am frequently refered to as a clients engineer (possibly even worse than being called an Architect!!) the point being it dosnt matter to anyone except us what we are called it matters to our clients that we can do the job they commission us to do from start to finish including signing certs of compliance that are accecpted by the Law Society and drawdown certs that are accecpted by all the banks!!! To any of the AT's who are currently in employment this does effect you as at the rate things are going you may soon be self employed too!!! :eek:

No6

and no joy I presume

sinnerboy

Steady on . SEI made announcement on BER non domestic on Thursday .
Lobbying started next day . Give them a chance to get in to work on Monday

topcatcbr

This situation is not going to go away we have to get our qualifications up to oe exceeding Bsc hons and acreddited or we are going to be left out in the cold.

We need to lobby the ITs to introduce Part time Upskilling courses for us.

We also need to join a professional body to effect change.

I am not a member of CIAT or RIAI but i will be very soon. I was happy to trundle along until now.

Mellor

topcatcbr wrote: »

We need to lobby the ITs to introduce Part time Upskilling courses for us.

Hmm, i'm not sure on that one.
If you mean a hons degree in AT, then I do think it is needed. But I agree with the way cormac is approaching it, slow and steady. Save energy menioned previous that we need any old course, SB disagreed and so do I. Without being disrespetful, they is an hons course available, even two I believe. But they were just internally designed and added on to get up and running. And they provide no professional advantage.
DIT are laying out the course with input rom the RIAI, CIAT, and importantly the Law Society. Surely this is the right route from professionalism p.o.v.

If however you mean add ons in skill areas, to bump the degree up to level 8, then I think this is a bad approach. Red tape for the sake of red tape.
I really hate generalisations, and I feel we suffer alot as ATs.
Here's why;
The CIAT level 8 restriction.....red tape. Its widely accepted that the irish level 7s degrees are equal to the UK level 8s. Both courses are 3 years, jut in ireland almost all level 8 are 4 years (another red tape generalisation)

The SEIs level 8 and org restriction, again, level 8 is a generalisation, and maybe fair in general, but this excludes most ATs (very few are permitted at the moment), and ATs are likely to be in the best position to complete it.
And red tape generalisations.
I think we should lobby both the SEI and the RIAI to get the RIAI(tech) membership included (as it stands, F, M and A are each included)

The natinal frame work system, .....red tape.
While it is needed in principal, it shoud not be a benchmark system.
All level 7s are not equal,
Nor are all level 8s



So, I don't like those systems, and I don't like to play into them. I think if we were to do poxy add-ons for the sake of bumping up to level 8, and to say become a nD BER assessor, its a solution, but it makes it worse imo. Just like all the best medication, should attack the soucre of the problem, not the symptoms.
An exampe,
John has a degree in AT, level 7 and wants to become a nD BER assessor. He can't yet.
He completes a level 8 H Dip in conservation. He now is permitted into the course,
But is he any more quailifed than before.

Supertech wrote: »

I was at the meeting in DIT on Thursday. The one thing that struck me was the comment about the IT's not providing accredited courses. What we should be doing is lobbying them not only to provide these courses but to have them

Another generalisation I don't like is "The ITs". It's damaging imo.
The above proves it, there are two accredited courses, they are DIT and WIT. Some of the unacredited courses (probably most of them) are not ITs

No6

Mellor perhaps CIAT could be included in lobbying SEI, they did alright with AIB. I have no difficulty in a level 7 or 8 or 9 standard being set for various things my problem is that a lot of us are stuck on level 7 qualifications with no possibility of upskilling to level 8 unless we do something full time of live in Dublin where there is access to some part time courses

Mellor

But the thing is, level 7 and 8 aren't "standards". They are an education framework.
If they were standards then they would be equal, but similar courses can differ greatly.


Also, I left out CIAT as curently they aren't included/recognaised by SEI in their list of organisations. To make it clear for anyone not sure of the SEI position,

An AT with a level 8 degree can't become an SEI assessor unless he is a non-Tech member of RIAI

Mellor

I would imagine thats its a pro-rata situaion to members in an area. Im have the member numbers here somewhere.

topcatcbr

Mellor wrote: »

But the thing is, level 7 and 8 aren't "standards". They are an education framework.
If they were standards then they would be equal, but similar courses can differ greatly.


Also, I left out CIAT as curently they aren't included/recognaised by SEI in their list of organisations. To make it clear for anyone not sure of the SEI position,

An AT with a level 8 degree can't become an SEI assessor unless he is a non-Tech member of RIAI

He could if he was a member of CIOB

Supertech

Another generalisation I don't like is "The ITs". It's damaging imo.
The above proves it, there are two accredited courses, they are DIT and WIT. Some of the unacredited courses (probably most of them) are not ITs

There are several other Institutes of Technology offering unaccredited degree level programs in Archiotectural Technology Mellor which is all I'm talking about. I know there are other educational bodies providing Level 6 and below, but it's the Ordinary and Honours Level Degree courses I'm talking about not these others.

I think all the Institutes of Technology offering Level 7 or above should be looking for accreditation from the professional bodies, and I think it's up to those who would be looking to enrol on any add on honours degree to be lobbying for these to be accrediited aswell. As the speaker in DIT said the other day, it's not something you consider when you're 17 or 18 and leaving school. It's only when your out in industry that these issues actually come to light.

Mellor

Supertech wrote: »

There are several other Institutes of Technology offering unaccredited degree level programs in Archiotectural Technology Mellor which is all I'm talking about. I know there are other educational bodies providing Level 6 and below, but it's the Ordinary and Honours Level Degree courses I'm talking about not these others.

I knew what you were talking about.
You said the ITs were uncredited, thats not true, the only accredited courses are both ITs.

I think all the Institutes of Technology offering Level 7 or above should be looking for accreditation from the professional bodies, and I think it's up to those who would be looking to enrol on any add on honours degree to be lobbying for these to be accrediited aswell.

As was said the other night, they were 4 courses accredited at one stage. Its completely at their control.

topcatcbr

If an arch Tech has an hons degree Level 8 and wants to become a sei assessor for non domestic they could do so by joining the CIOB as this is on the list.

No6

Topcatcbr where is this list?, I suppose CIAT dosn't need to be on it as MCIAT are able to join CIOB as Incorporated members however at the rate thing are going around here we'll all be in about 10 different institutes / bodies with more letters after our names the a dsylexic dwarf with a really long name has and we still wouldn't be able to do all the things we obviously feel we should around here. ( No offence to Dwarfs intended I'm a bit on the small side myself!) There's so many glass ceilings around here we should get into double glazing.:D

Mellor

topcatcbr wrote: »

He could if he was a member of CIOB

topcatcbr wrote: »

If an arch Tech has an hons degree Level 8 and wants to become a sei assessor for non domestic they could do so by joining the CIOB as this is on the list.

Not sure why you posted that twice.
You're probably right, but I don't see CIOB on the list. Are you refering to admission via being a grade 4 UK assessor. That may be an option, but that said, I think I still proves a point in principal.
Tech members of RIAI can't be BER assessors, unless they join CIOB, more poxy red tape. The exclusion of tech members of RIAI is pointless, it just makes it awkward toget in, but rules out nobody.

topcatcbr

Mellor wrote: »

Not sure why you posted that twice.
You're probably right, but I don't see CIOB on the list. Are you refering to admission via being a grade 4 UK assessor. That may be an option, but that said, I think I still proves a point in principal.
Tech members of RIAI can't be BER assessors, unless they join CIOB, more poxy red tape. The exclusion of tech members of RIAI is pointless, it just makes it awkward toget in, but rules out nobody.

To clarify what i was trying to say

I recieved an email from one of the course providers and the CIOB was listed i have deleted it now so i cant post it.

sinnerboy

CIOB is on "the list " . I cut and pasted this on Thursday last ( 19 June ) from an e mail i received that day

To become registered as a BER Assessor for Non Domestic Buildings Energy

The criteria will include:

· Membership of a professional institution (e.g. Engineers Ireland, RIAI, SCS, CIOB etc)

· Level 8 (honours degree) qualification in a construction or engineering related discipline

· Pass a National SEI examination for Non Domestic Buildings

SEI has confirmed that the exam will follow the BRE SBEM examination format which fits into the UK Competent Persons Scheme framework with Irish variants

Pre Requisites: Participants will be required to have computer skills to at least an ECDL level and be familiar with operating engineering related software applications. To register with SEI as an assessor for non domestic buildings, students must have at least a level 8 degree in an engineering related discipline and be a member of a professional association.

I think this will blow over . SEI have flipped from being very lax about who trained for BER so far , to too onerous in who they are restricting for BER non Dom .

Prediction - take up will be slow . At's will be accepted .

Would help speed up ( the inevitable i think ) if we lobbied them

No6

OK so I found a list on SEI's website, firstly CIOB is not on it CISE (of some engineering body like that is) RIAI (excluding techs) and a few more engineers or Level 4 qualified under the english system will be allowed register as interm BER assessors for Non Domestic buildings, provided you pass the exam, training courses are optional, please note the interm bit, dare I suggest that we all get on to all of our various representative bodies tomorrow morning first thing and get them all to lobby SEI on our behalf. As the interm registration only lasts (supposedly) untill the end of the year I personally don't see a huge need to get registered in the short term but I would like to be able to do it when the final scheme comes into being.

archtech

topcatcbr wrote: »

I wonder would the CIOB a sister org to CIAT be open to shareing an office.

It would be a misrepresentation to describe CIOB as a sister organisation of CIAT, however there is a partnering agreement, allowing both work closely together,on CPDs etc and allowing some exceptions in membership of the other organisation with reduced membership fees for members of both organisations. Unfortunately, from what I can gather the relationship in Ireland between the two institutes, hasn't been the best as I understand it in the past, for one reason or another. So the willingness to share an office may be an issue, however I don't think it should be ruled out for what happened in the past.

Mellor

That may have been a misprint in the email.
The list I have was the printed one on the website.
It includes, RIAI, EI, CIBSE and RICS
And there are minimum membership levels needed,

http://www.sei.ie/index.asp?locID=1637&docID=-1

topcatcbr

sinnerboy wrote: »

CIOB is on "the list " . I cut and pasted this on Thursday last ( 19 June ) from an e mail i received that day

To become registered as a BER Assessor for Non Domestic Buildings Energy

The criteria will include:

· Membership of a professional institution (e.g. Engineers Ireland, RIAI, SCS, CIOB etc)

· Level 8 (honours degree) qualification in a construction or engineering related discipline

· Pass a National SEI examination for Non Domestic Buildings

SEI has confirmed that the exam will follow the BRE SBEM examination format which fits into the UK Competent Persons Scheme framework with Irish variants

Pre Requisites: Participants will be required to have computer skills to at least an ECDL level and be familiar with operating engineering related software applications. To register with SEI as an assessor for non domestic buildings, students must have at least a level 8 degree in an engineering related discipline and be a member of a professional association.

I think this will blow over . SEI have flipped from being very lax about who trained for BER so far , to too onerous in who they are restricting for BER non Dom .

Prediction - take up will be slow . At's will be accepted .

Would help speed up ( the inevitable i think ) if we lobbied them

This is the same email as i got

I have seen the SEI website list and the CIOB is not on it but i would be surprised if they were excluded. a mistake on the SEI web list maybe.

topcatcbr

A Building Energy Rating (BER) and Advisory Report will be required for new Non Domestic buildings for which planning permission is applied on or after 1 July 2008. BERs will be carried out only by assessors registered by Sustainable Energy Ireland (SEI). This is an interim registration for Non Domestic BER Assessors.

The Registered Non Domestic Energy Assessor Scheme will supersede this interim registration, which is expected to be in place before the end of 2008


Note this is an interim registration. therefore not finalised.

Watch this space

My prediction would be full membership of CIAT will be acceptable.

RKQ

I agree fully with Archtech. I wouldn't call CIAT and CIOB "sister" organisations, as this suggests some close links or the started from the same seed.

The are totally separate organisations, with separate memberships and separate needs and aspirations.

They have a "mutual" respect for each other and therefore allow certain discounts to those who may wish to join both organisations.

I would never expect two separate organisations to share an office!
Why would they?

There is great prestige associated with an "overseas" office. Why share the prestige or the organisations respect for its own members?
The CIOB set up an office - well done to them, its great for their members.

I'm sure the CIAT will follow suit in time. They already have an office in Hong Kong.

Mellor

They will need more members though. Last year they had about 200 irish members, probably the same now, the riai has about 350 tech members,
We need to get close to the 1k mark to start making a push for our wants and needs

No6

IF everybody who registered with the IATGN (1600) joined CIAT as per the IATGN's report reccomendations then I'm sure CIAT would be able to open an office in Ireland. However I think the vast majority of the 1600 will stop short of putting their hands in their pockets for membership fees, for those in employment see if the boss will pay (some do, its no harm to ask!!) and for those who are self employed if you're not a member of some body whats wrong with you!!:D

RKQ

Considering the cost of the BER course's, the cost of Health and Safety Courses and the cost of Air-tightness courses, EPA soil suitability course etc etc.

Are we the mark / target for money making courses?

Why are they so expensive?
Why do they have long waiting lists?

Is our lack of a professional organisation allowing us to be targeted / abused. Compare the cost of Air-tightness course in Ireland with Switzerland - over €1500 in the difference!

How can that be justified?

Mellor

If CIOB and/or CIAT are acceptable, its still not a solution to the problem, just the symptoms. The exclusion of tech members of RIAI needs to be addressed, as does the level 8 status.


Also if CIOB and/or CIAT are acceptable, how many of thier irish members have level 8 degrees. The level 8 graduates are only in practise in the last few years, may 4 or 5 grad classes. And not many of these will have had the time to become involved with a professional org.
Are any of our posters permitted under current guidelines?

No6

Mellor wrote: »

If CIOB and/or CIAT are acceptable, its still not a solution to the problem, just the symptoms. The exclusion of tech members of RIAI needs to be addressed, as does the level 8 status.

Also if CIOB and/or CIAT are acceptable, how many of thier irish members have level 8 degrees. The level 8 graduates are only in practise in the last few years, may 4 or 5 grad classes. And not many of these will have had the time to become involved with a professional org.
Are any of our posters permitted under current guidelines?

I agree Mellor, I have asked CIAT to consider looking at this for MCIAT members (which I'm not yet!! but working on it!!) I'm not worried about the interm registration its only for a few months I want to be able to be included in the final registration.

As per the cost of courses RKQ, I don't know if the course in switzerland will train you to do airtighness testing, its more about airtightness detailing and what to look for as far as I can see. Chevron have a training course for testing at about 1700 euros, but is it accredited, I don't know, I know Reg farrell engineering have a free course (you just have to buy the Fan!! @ 5000).

Some course providers are agressively marketing the Existing Domestic Building assesment courses (around 600) and will probaly do the same with the Non Domestic Course too (around 1000) I suspect that take up of a lot of these course will be a lot slower than the new build courses as very few people are making money on BER's yet so the price may fall.

The RIAI H&S course is 2000 (400 for the designing for safety & 1600 for the PSDP course) ooowwww

Some good value courses are around however, CIAT ran a 2 day H&S course Management of The Construction Design Process for 500 and there is a Sustainable Architecture Now Conference in Dublin in July for only 50!!

archtech

Mellor wrote: »

They will need more members though. Last year they had about 200 irish members, probably the same now, the riai has about 350 tech members,
We need to get close to the 1k mark to start making a push for our wants and needs

CIAT has approximately 275 members at present in the ROI, which would be up 25-30 on last year.

sinnerboy

I contacted SEI by e mailing here

info@ber.sei.ie

I politely asked if SEI were intentionally excluding AT's by requiring level 8 qualification

No response yet - but I only sent the e mail on Friday .

Perhaps other's can do likewise ?

topcatcbr

archtech wrote: »

CIAT has approximately 275 members at present in the ROI, which would be up 25-30 on last year.

They will have 1 more soon