The BRAB

No6

pseudo-tech wrote: »

thanks for that No. 6. 2 Technicians on the Advisory Board. How many others are on the panel and from where do they come from. Who puts forward the two Technicians??

Representative bodies should also be doing this on our behalf!

Here you go http://www.environ.ie/en/DevelopmentandHousing/BuildingStandards/BRAB/

Thats whos' on it, I'm not sure how they got there but they're there which I think is a very very good thing.!!!

pseudo-tech

No6 wrote: »

Here you go http://www.environ.ie/en/DevelopmentandHousing/BuildingStandards/BRAB/

Thats whos' on it, I'm not sure how they got there but they're there which I think is a very very good thing.!!!

Thanks for that. It looks on the face of it a broad group of people. However, it would be nice to know how they were chosen as specialists in their field????

No6

I've no idea Pusedo, I do know one of the fire officers on it too and I must say they were probably the one of the best fire officers I've ever dealt with.

pseudo-tech

No6 wrote: »

I've no idea Pusedo, I do know one of the fire officers on it too and I must say they were probably the one of the best fire officers I've ever dealt with.

Thanks again. It just leads to a broader question of who represents Technicians and how they managed to find themselves in the positions they are in. We have found ourselves poorly represented over the last twenty years (partly our own fault), but I would be interested to know what credentials should people who put themselves forward to represent an entire profession possess?????

Is it acceptable that they were the only one available? That they were the first out of the block?

In relation to BARB the only name I recognised was Deise GermaineMCIAT, who have done torjan work for Technicians in Ireland.

No6

Personally I couldn't think of anyone better than Denise!!

pseudo-tech

No6 wrote: »

Personally I couldn't think of anyone better than Denise!!

I agree with you. However, it would be nice to know how people get chosen for these positions. What qualities they bring to the table. How they perform when they are in those positions and how they can be removed if they are not suited to the position in question.

All the aforementioned don't relate to Denise who I believe to be one of our strongest representatives.

parka

pseudo-tech wrote: »

Thanks again. It just leads to a broader question of who represents Technicians and how they managed to find themselves in the positions they are in. We have found ourselves poorly represented over the last twenty years (partly our own fault), but I would be interested to know what credentials should people who put themselves forward to represent an entire profession possess?????

Is it acceptable that they were the only one available? That they were the first out of the block?

In relation to BARB the only name I recognised was Deise GermaineMCIAT, who have done torjan work for Technicians in Ireland.

In reality some people on that list have no construction background. That doesn't surprise me though

pseudo-tech

parka wrote: »

In reality some people on that list have no construction background. That doesn't surprise me though

They don't but they are effected by the Building regs.

No6

pseudo-tech wrote: »

I agree with you. However, it would be nice to know how people get chosen for these positions. What qualities they bring to the table. How they perform when they are in those positions and how they can be removed if they are not suited to the position in question.

All the aforementioned don't relate to Denise who I believe to be one of our strongest representatives.

Well it being a governmental advisory body god only know how anyone gets there, most likely by accident and they can't escape. The government would have to establish a taskforce with a tribunal reporting to a bloke around the corner to figure out where they left the voting machines!!! (ahem what was the question again!!!:D)

No6

And perhaps some nice Mod out there should divert this thread to a different one of its own!! as we seem to have strayed unashamadely off topic!!!:D

muffler

Posts moved from ATI thread.

This usually signals the death of this topic

pseudo-tech

No6 wrote: »

And perhaps some nice Mod out there should divert this thread to a different one of its own!! as we seem to have strayed unashamadely off topic!!!:D

Speak for yourself;). The original poster was discussing the fact that the ATI had finally made a statement about there progress (or lack thereof), depending on what side of the fence you are sitting on. I suppose i was was just wondering about how Technicians either promote themselves or find themselves in positions to represent the wider community and the importance of that position?????

archtech

pseudo-tech wrote: »

I suppose i was was just wondering about how Technicians either promote themselves or find themselves in positions to represent the wider community and the importance of that position?????

pseudo, my understanding is that CIAT (ROI) Technical Committee spent many years making (and still do make) submissions on the various draft documents (TGD's Draft amendments to Planning Acts/Regulations etc) and because of the contribution of the CIAT Technical Committee to the draft documents, Denise was appointed to BRAD.

Voluntary, hard work sometimes pays off.

So to answer your question, how to find yourself on one of those government bodies, make regular valid contributions to draft publications and eventaully you will get noticed.

pseudo-tech

archtech wrote: »

pseudo, my understanding is that CIAT (ROI) Technical Committee spent many years making (and still do make) submissions on the various draft documents (TGD's Draft amendments to Planning Acts/Regulations etc) and because of the contribution of the CIAT Technical Committee to the draft documents, Denise was appointed to BRAD.

Voluntary, hard work sometimes pays off.

So to answer your question, how to find yourself on one of those government bodies, make regular valid contributions to draft publications and eventaully you will get noticed.

Good point! I just feel we need more involvement from the wider Technician community so that we put our best foot forward. This is with all representation including the above mentioned CIAT, the RIAI etc and even ATI.

I can understand that if someone has been working as dilligently as Denise for such a long period of time, they deserve to be on the board. However, it would be nice if Technicians could chose who represents them and decide whether that person(s) are doing a good or poor job of it and replace them if necessary.

No6

Are you promoting a form of Demoracy Pusedo tech, how outdated when the entire world is moving to a new form of socialism where we the people now own the banks that are taking our houses off us!!!:D

But as archtech says serious voluntary effort can get you noticed in the end and I think that anyone who does any form of work for any of the professional bodys we have as arch techs does it for the good of all of us (even when we dont always all agree with it!!!:D)

pseudo-tech

No6 wrote: »

Are you promoting a form of Demoracy Pusedo tech, how outdated when the entire world is moving to a new form of socialism where we the people now own the banks that are taking our houses off us!!!:D

No. 6, there is always a need for democracy! It would be a step backwards if we accepted forced representation.

No6 wrote: »

But as archtech says serious voluntary effort can get you noticed in the end and I think that anyone who does any form of work for any of the professional bodys we have as arch techs does it for the good of all of us (even when we dont always all agree with it!!!:D)

I agree about the notice. However, whether it is done purely for the good of everyone else is seriously questionable. We have suffered from some narcistic representatives. However, if the narcistic representation was both creative and efficient we may benefit from stroking those narcistic tendencies! When the narcissism is centered around self-promotion, now we have a problem!

I just feel that if the selection process was open and transparent, we may actually be able to promote Technicians who perform a better job on behalf of all other Technicians.

sydthebeat

archtech wrote: »

pseudo, my understanding is that CIAT (ROI) Technical Committee spent many years making (and still do make) submissions on the various draft documents (TGD's Draft amendments to Planning Acts/Regulations etc) and because of the contribution of the CIAT Technical Committee to the draft documents, Denise was appointed to BRAD.

Voluntary, hard work sometimes pays off.

So to answer your question, how to find yourself on one of those government bodies, make regular valid contributions to draft publications and eventaully you will get noticed.

As a matter of interest, i understand that ATI are in the process of making submissions on the up-and-coming changes to planning legislation (the one regarding to statute of limitations to unauthorised development)....

i dont know, but i would be very surprised if they didnt also make submissions regard the up and coming part f renewal....

i suppose its also important to note that you dont have to be a member of the BRAB to make submissions on TGDs....

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

As a matter of interest, i understand that ATI are in the process of making submissions on the up-and-coming changes to planning legislation (the one regarding to statute of limitations to unauthorised development)....

i dont know, but i would be very surprised if they didnt also make submissions regard the up and coming part f renewal....

i suppose its also important to note that you dont have to be a member of the BRAB to make submissions on TGDs....

Good points Syd. However, we need a strong representing body with a strong voice. We cannot be dependent on the like of Denise Germaine flying the flag for Technicians in the Country.

I was unaware that ATI had received a new and updated mandate!

sydthebeat

pseudo-tech wrote: »

Good points Syd. However, we need a strong representing body with a strong voice. We cannot be dependent on the like of Denise Germaine flying the flag for Technicians in the Country.

I was unaware that ATI had received a new and updated mandate!

One of the objectives of ATI / IATGN is (always was) to "Raise the professional profile of Architectural Technologists.".....

this is not new or updated....

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

One of the objectives of ATI / IATGN is (always was) to "Raise the professional profile of Architectural Technologists.".....

this is not new or updated....

Its quite a broad remit. Not really spelled out at the start. Nice freedom to have without question!

sydthebeat

pseudo-tech wrote: »

Its quite a broad remit. Not really spelled out at the start. Nice freedom to have without question!

ah, come on PT..... :rolleyes:

muffler

Give it a rest pseudo-tech. Same shit, different day/every day.

You're walking a fine line here and dont go moaning when you cross that line.

pseudo-tech

muffler wrote: »

Give it a rest pseudo-tech. Same shit, different day/every day.

You're walking a fine line here and dont go moaning when you cross that line.

very sensitive. I'm sure I am allowed to have an opinion. I commented that IBCI had vague entrance criteria (not a problem). I commented that CIATs POP record was difficult to complete (not a problem). I say that ATI have a broad remit and its treated differently. Is there a reason why one organisation gets special treatment over that of another???????

Is there any reason to why, when valid questions are asked and they are valid, it becomes upsetting to a small group of people?

muffler

Look, you are posting the same shit here very day and Im getting a bit fed up reading it. Almost every thread is being derailed by you posting the same silly questions and criticizing one particular group.

Why dont you go and consult with these people directly rather than bore the arses of us here. Go ask them the questions and express your displeasure at your perception of their actions/inactions. Come back then and tell us how you got on.

pseudo-tech

muffler wrote: »

Look, you are posting the same shit here very day and Im getting a bit fed up reading it. Almost every thread is being derailed by you posting the same silly questions and criticizing one particular group.

Why dont you go and consult with these people directly rather than bore the arses of us here. Go ask them the questions and express your displeasure at your perception of their actions/inactions. Come back then and tell us how you got on.

Muffler. I have criticised all four groups (RIAI, CIAT, IBCi & ATI). I have also made positive comments about all four groups. If i have criticised one more than the others maybe its because there is more to criticise.

In relation to raising the comments with the group in question. I have. No answers given. I know some posters here have close relationships with some of the different groups but that should not affect the objectivity of how we post.

sydthebeat

PT, the remark you made about ATI and a 'new mandate' was a snipe. Dress it up whatever way you want, but it is what it is.

Its the language that you choose to use when commenting on ATI that i have issue with.

Whatever questions or comments you have about ATI, keep in the ATI thread, but more importantly, keep to the forum rules.

If you directly want to meet these people and put your questions to them then make it your business to go to one of the region committee meetings, or go to one of the up and coming seminars. There is one happening in dublin on the 26 march. When i find out a location ill let you all know.

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

PT, the remark you made about ATI and a 'new mandate' was a snipe. Dress it up whatever way you want, but it is what it is.

Its the language that you choose to use when commenting on ATI that i have issue with.

Whatever questions or comments you have about ATI, keep in the ATI thread, but more importantly, keep to the forum rules.

If you directly want to meet these people and put your questions to them then make it your business to go to one of the region committee meetings, or go to one of the up and coming seminars. There is one happening in dublin on the 26 march. When i find out a location ill let you all know.

Syd its not often that I don't agree with you but I don't in this instance. I questioned the expansion of their remit when it was originally raised by yourself. Snipe is sensationalising the situation. If I am not allowed to question a point raised by another poster, I was not aware of that!

Remember I was the first recently to mention and congratulate the ATI information night in Waterford. Very positive indeed. Lost for words at this stage!

sydthebeat

without getting into semantics.. this is EXACTLY what you said.

"I was unaware that ATI had received a new and updated mandate!"

followed by

"Its quite a broad remit. Not really spelled out at the start. Nice freedom to have without question!"

Now, to me that reads as a sniping remark.... if you disagree, then i suggest you alter your posting style.... to ensure the point you are making is read in the context you want it to be read in.

It can also be considered sniping to make such an issue about a group, who represent a very large proportion of ATs in Ireland, sending a submission to the DOEHLG on up-and-coming planning legislation.

If you didnt mean it as a snipe then fine. Draw two lines under this and move on.

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

without getting into semantics.. this is EXACTLY what you said.

"I was unaware that ATI had received a new and updated mandate!"

followed by

"Its quite a broad remit. Not really spelled out at the start. Nice freedom to have without question!"

Now, to me that reads as a sniping remark.... if you disagree, then i suggest you alter your posting style.... to ensure the point you are making is read in the context you want it to be read in.

It can also be considered sniping to make such an issue about a group, who represent a very large proportion of ATs in Ireland, sending a submission to the DOEHLG on up-and-coming planning legislation.

If you didnt mean it as a snipe then fine. Draw two lines under this and move on.

OK. I will give more consideration to how I question things in the future to ensure that how I question things that should be questioned do not cause offence. Thanks for the advice.

sydthebeat

pseudo-tech wrote: »

OK. I will give more consideration to how I question things in the future to ensure that how I question things that should be questioned do not cause offence. Thanks for the advice.

'questions' usually end in question marks and can be read as a question...

'remarks' usually end in exclamation marks, as yours do, and are read as remarks and not questions.