What reality does she live in?

Niall Keane

THE TÁNAISTE has warned a number of professions that the Government will not back down in its drive to increase competition and get better value as it tackles the economic crisis.

Specifying “engineers, architects, the legal profession, dentists and others”, Mary Coughlan told the MacGill Summer School at Glenties, Co Donegal, last night she would be submitting a report to Government on the issue before the end of the year.

Observing that there were sectors which had yet to feel the “chill winds of economic reality”, the Tánaiste said “certain professions” had yet to reveal how they intended to reduce fees and charges and she went on to accuse them of “economic conceit”.

Irish times - July 21st

The RIAI has admitted to more than 45% of its members being unemployed. Out of a class of 55 graduating in UCD 5 years ago, I am the only one working fulltime. Architect's are probably the most effected sector in this recession, if the Tanaiste's comments reflects government thinking we are all doomed.

No1BER

As an engineer, I totally agree. Approx 50% of other engineers/Architects/QS have lost jobs or bearly working a 3 day week. She is grasping at straws with this one.

sparklepants

Niall Keane wrote: »

The RIAI has admitted to more than 45% of its members being unemployed. Out of a class of 55 graduating in UCD 5 years ago, I am the only one working fulltime. Architect's are probably the most effected sector in this recession, if the Tanaiste's comments reflects government thinking we are all doomed.

The thrust of this article is that many of the architects (and other professionals) that are still in business are charging the same rates to customers that they did two years ago. Do you think it's wrong for the government to request that professionals reduce their fees in the current environment?

How can the high unemployment rate that you refer to justify these high fees?

jpfahy

That incompetent Coughlan has a right cheek asking people to 'do the right thing' while she remains the highest paid deputy prime minister in Europe. What a joke.

eamonnm79

sparklepants wrote: »

The thrust of this article is that many of the architects (and other professionals) that are still in business are charging the same rates to customers that they did two years ago. Do you think it's wrong for the government to request that professionals reduce their fees in the current environment?

How can the high unemployment rate that you refer to justify these high fees?

I have to agree.
Even though professions related to the construction boom are experiencing massive reductions in demand there seems to be an artificial price floor for the labour of these professionals.
In most likelyhood the lack of willingness to engage in price competition in many of the industries are making things far worse than they need be.

Clinging on to high salaries even though it means they have to reduce their staff by half just seems both typical and self defeating.

The reaction of the vintners and the solicitors is both stupid and unsurprising and shows publicly what is happening behind closed doors in other professions.

Faced with a massive reduction in demand they are
a) suggesting their members become as competitive as possible and remove fat or
b) Taking out expensive advertisememnts telling punters that they really should use their services more.

Thats right they are going for option b)

Can someone tell me how this helps with the competitiveness problem?
Professional bodies need to be scrutinised much more to ensure that not only are they not acting as the head of a cartel but should be made encourage competition in their industries.
If the Tainiste wanted to do something usefull she could implement legistlation for this purpose.

ei.sdraob

so the big question is

how much does she earn herself?

Niall Keane

The thrust of this article is that many of the architects (and other professionals) that are still in business are charging the same rates to customers that they did two years ago.

That's a fallacy. On what do you base this statement? Most Architects base their fees of a percentage of construction costs. From working in the field I can tell you that construction costs have dropped by 30% and so therefore have fees, many architects have dropped their percentage ask by 25% on top of this. So say they charged 4% on a job, now it would be 3%. Also an 8% cut in public job fees was enforced, after contract, or you were given 1 month to quit. Please get your facts straight.

Here's a copy of the RIAI response:

Madam

The Tánaiste shows a worrying disconnect with reality when she referred to “architects” as being a sector which had yet to feel the “chill winds of economic reality”. As has been widely reported over 40% of architects have been made redundant. The RIAI has a significant number of members on Job Seekers Allowance or paying reduced charges because of financial hardship. Many architects in employment have experienced pay cuts and three day weeks. How chilly does it have to get to reach the Tánaiste’s attention?

For Public Sector projects the Tánaiste should be aware that architectural services are procured on a competitive basis in accordance with EU and Department of Finance procedures. She must also be aware that architects don’t have recommended, mandatory or minimum fee scales. On the Competition Authority Report, I would expect the Tánaiste or her Officials to have read the Report or at least the Executive Summary before making a public statement because the Report was very clear: “the Competition Authority has only a small number of concerns about how the architectural profession operates in Ireland. Unlike some other professions reviewed by the Competition Authority architects are not restricted by layers of unjustified or disproportionate restrictions or competition. Competition seems to be working well for consumers of architectural services and the economy as a whole”.

The Tánaiste might be better employed in examining the wide spread evasion by some Government Departments and State bodies generally of Prompt Payment Legislation and why her recent announcement of a fifteen days payment period by Government term was greeted by incredulity among architects.

If the Tánaiste’s address is indicative of the level of research and evidence based policy in her Department on matters of public record, as we face an unprecedented economic crisis, then it won’t just be architects who are made redundant but the entire Country.

Regards,

John Graby
Director
RIAI
8 Merrion Square
Dublin 2