10 10 110 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/89d8c78c51182c032dada2c8b4a4ce3b.pdf f4e8f6a6c003e82eece100136eaf41c7 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Representation of Unattached Architects, 1979/80 Description An account of the resource Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom ESTABLISHED UNCER THE ARCHITECTS IMEGIBTRATION) ACTS #8! TO 1838 73 Hallam Street London W1N 6EE Tel; 01-580 5861 Registrar: Kenneth J. Forder M.A. REPRESENTATION OF 'UNATTACHED' ARCHITECTS John Duncan Murray 500 Robert Maltz Thomas Adrian Woolley 489 Ian James Tod 478 John Stewart Allan 433 David Greensett Robson 391 Peter John Cutmore 356 Susan Mary Jackson 343 Marion Elizabeth Ruth Roberts 338 Edward Walker 337 Maxwell John Buckingham Jackson 333 tb Hugh Philip Massey Ian Peter Cooper The 35 disallowed were as follows: 16 unsigned envelopes 6 wrong signatures 3 spoiled papers 10 had no inner envelopes 315 299 492 rie H M Smith James Keeble We, the undersigned scrutineers, report that the votes cast in this election were as follows: 772 voting papers were received, of which 737 were counted. Election of Members of the Council under sub-paragraph (vii) of paragraph 1 of the First Schedule to the principal Act for the year 1979/80 9 February 1979 Scrutineers Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARCUK Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Feb. 1979 Subject The topic of the resource Representation of Unattached Architects, 1979/80 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/c31abd23455bb0664bdd313bde83f5c2.pdf e25ad5cfa1c255f4fae451ef903df79a Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Letter to John Allan from A. Leggatt re. ARCUK Council Meetings Description An account of the resource ®& 14th December 1979 Cur reference: M12/AJL/HC John F. Allan Esq. Shepheard Epstein & Hunter 60 Kingley Street -Regent Street London W1R 6EY Dear Mr. Allan, A.R.C.U.K. ae Nice (bA afer Cur Aon F arr:O NACHSHEN CROFTS& EGGATT ; Consulting Engineers 192-198 VAUXHALL BRIDGE ROAD LONDON SW1V 1DXx J ECROFTIS MC FICE FGS MSIC(France) MConst AJ LEGGATT BSc FICE FiStructE FIArh MSIC(France) MConst G E BRATCHELL BSc FICE FIStructE MIWES MConsé 0WSWAINBScOMNICE Private LCJOMNScDEICMSiStroctE Teli01-8341575 ameserrryre Telex 917502 JGACH FIStructé GMPINBScFDICOFILCEFDiStuctt ae we [Rarbof Lyre Bs ths SORE sets) ae By way of brief introduction, I am a more or less permanent member of A.R.C.U.K council, representing structural engineers. I am not an architect - attached nor unattached. I can thus afford to be neutral and objective in my dealings with A.R.C.U.K. but nevertheless I am very keen that the objects of A.R.C.U.K., which are to administer certain acts of Parliament, are properly and fairly achieved. It occurs to me now that I might possibly be of some help to A.R.C.U.K. in respect of the position of the unattached council members vis-a-vis the chairman and officers. For the last few years the unattached architects on council @ have provided an interesting, and at times - welcome, intrusion into the otherwise monolithic conduct of the meetings. For the general health of A.R.C.U.K., I think this is good but I am now becoming worried that too much antagonism is building up between the unattached members and the "establishment". The December 12th meeting was about the worst I have attended and was most depressing. Although I think the Chairman tried hard to maintain the order and the dignity of the proceedings, there were times when matters proceeded ina thoroughly bad way. Certainly a great deal of time was wasted and meetings such as that can only bring eventual discredit of A.R.C.U.K. as a whole. Responsibility for this poor state of affairs, in my view, lies more or less equally in all directions but that aspect does not particularly concern me. What does concern me very deeply is that A.R.C.U.K. should not become a shambles and I am sure that this view is shared by yourself and the other unattached members of council. Now the point of my letter is to offer myself as a link (or if you prefer it, a "go-between"), neutral and disinterested, whereby unattached members of council can have a communication channel through to the chairman and officers and - most important-vice versa. If I proved acceptable to both sides, I could not guarantee that all issues could be speedily settled but in a percentage of cases I feel that a lot of time, heat and exasperation could be avoided at the council meetings. My three main qualifications for this task might be summarized as follows:- ts Die I am independent of the issues likely to arise but at the same time feel a responsibility to promote and support the proper and fair administration of A.R.C.U.K. as a statutory body. I am experienced in the conduct and behaviour of a number of organizations which are democratically based. All of these organizations have, from time to time, their ginger-groups, rebels, protest movements as well as their reactionaries, "establishments" and the like. At various times I have found myself a member of almost all such factions! I have served on the council of my own professional organization (the ACE), I am President elect of the consulting engineers Common Market liaison committee and I have written the constitution for and helped with the administration of, a successful national charity - apart from all my technical work as an engineer. Bo Any services I provided in this respect would be confidential i.e. I would not be known outside the parties using the channel of communication nor would I be known in this role to the council itself. I am making this suggestion off my own bat and there is nothing lying behind or underneath the offer. I have not so far approached the chairman and obviously his co-operation would be essential. I hope you will pursue my suggestion for at worst, nothing would be lost and at best, both time and temper would be saved and perhaps some of the objectives of the unattached architects would be achieved more speedily. With best wishes for a happy Christmas. Yours sincerely, A.J.Leggatt » Mo De.Kappa OA yr o_ Fae eneGUO oe ain. ere GN Ja QU yor a) CS CRS ES Ane Gun x HikeDaven Cs. Bppnsec Cink - Sots i aoe Zs Fe et rofess rofessor Gabriel Epstein AA Dipl (Hons) Hon D Litt FRIBA SADG ‘eler Hunter Dipl Arch (Oxford) RIBA FSAI ssociate John Thacker Dipl Arch RIBA onsultant Derek Bridgwater B Arch FRIBA 60 Kingly Street Regent Street London W1R 6EY Tel: 01-734 8577 s Nos, CSL ee aeee inUSA The Graduate School of Fine Arts, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Pa 19104. inFrance 43 Rue Mazarine 75006 Paris. in Belgium in association with CERAU Architects, 12 Avenue du Venezuela, Brussels 1050. J Shepheard Epstein & Hunter Architects Town Planners and Landscape Architects orPeter Shepheard CBE BArch Hon DLitPPRIBAFRTPI PPILA O>uwDT ee 72- JS Ulu QU rol dy AT Acq Uk A ” Valen OD cau Len Novy NAG, DWNx j LNG e ase I herey prs Gly Whee one Prfmeails Osi (ay ay OR eae MaCLUS Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource AL/JA Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1979 Subject The topic of the resource Letter to John Allan from A. Leggatt re. ARCUK Council Meetings https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/1d4113e4536fb68028f50aca03950a17.pdf f7f08464c32612ed593dd82cbf80327d Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Draft letter to ARCUK Registrar re RIBA actions in Council Description An account of the resource i \ \ A LilAsh f es 21% SRUUD web Gh Ceo. gy128)ashyHe? wvLIGg im Questv | er dytU4IvoIespowseAKwerelCrd thenteed. Crudiuy Udalktelurd: WaartricabletateIsta, Vvnk tah byRIP cowtiert ? Tue runy’ Lud [urn file bnigiu\aghatedKarpv’ MaaleficePROV dinedastibuking \ Va luktuste DpteDe>) ie “yin Weba Codes6]Doct and CordihousJLengageuaxok 15 KRU poli. Wadkatlved wudlikels An vee Was, »Ow bowkuianelly aye VMs Unncctlils i pein | PAduc:aed meee snrMOU une wie Ww Lanny ewh We dneliews of bu Kegistvaluion Kiks by i on postin) Ku WAN Pw WAH ulzevslurp rules ou PROUIA . AWA ye Duyowuad he ATW full. | Wau paniiuwlan awn of ability WstdA du BD wus Mei. peeiawunnelANbyPPChnteNowSew @ PACK awd ovpuueKRWE crdalrility vould be erm be ng onyAAneMAA fiaaupsANweldtoe wip ihUyCaysvtcouldbanfinMpthe pale Krad |Bea aan u U 44 wel McPRC- o-¥yi oAlnYessI ee Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource PC Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1980 Subject The topic of the resource Draft letter to ARCUK Registrar re RIBA actions in Council https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/7e21fd5a359c93e85a2c4a93b79c6dd8.pdf ad6b001cfa859e0fa0a72d5059822548 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource DOE Consultation on Future of Building Control Description An account of the resource A Z LEVY Hh 270640 © Mths ita Cheltal Pages” with compliments fim bette ve hie pa Changs Wehorfavs +Sy Gvy Ai|hidewr cam tak altifafl tr OFTbusinesvsdhe-. Gon -Shepheard-E&pHsunterianctitecis-tounPtaners-end-Lendecape Architects 60 Kingly Street Regent Street London W1R 6EY Tel 01-734 8577 INDYULUNRGUrDUTTINeTUUivastayBivLaueivaThea 3. Comments on the principles of the proposed changes should reach the Department by 4 July; and any further comments you may have on their detailed operation by the end of August. Comments should be sent to: LG Packer Room 1034 b Becket House Lambeth Palace LONDON SEl 7ER Road 1. My letter of 11 December 1979 invited comments from those bodies listed at Annex B on the options for change in the system of building control. Comments were also received from a large number of other bodies and from individuals. I am now directed by the Secretary of State to invite comments from all of you on the specific possibilities for change set out in the consultative paper at Annex A. 2, To introduce and implement a radical reform of building control will take some time, and revisions must be undertaken in a manner which will at no point put at risk public health and safety. ‘Yith this in mind, the Secretary of State proposes that the first steps shall be to take action on: a) reducing the range of buildings controlled under the Building Regulations; b) introducing "certification" as an alternative to local authority enforcement; and ec) recasting the Building Regulations. (Telephone 01-211-7415 ) 4. This letter also goes to local authorities responsible for enforcing the Building Regulations in Fngland and Wales. I am Sir Your obedient Servant alee sir Department of the Environment Room Becket House Lambeth Palace Road London SE1 7ER TelephonotHOAR Ol 211 7415 Our ref BRA/759/23 6 dune 1980 THE FUTURE OF BUILDING CONTROL IN ENGLAND AND ‘WALES 1. My letter of 11 December 1979 invited comments from those bodies listed at Annex B on the options for change in the system of building control. Comments were also received from a large number of other bodies and from individuals. I am now directed by the Secretary of State to invite comments from all of you on the specific possibilities for change set out in the consultative paper at Annex A. 2. To introduce and implement a radical reform of building control will take some time, and revisions must be undertaken in a manner which will at no point put at risk public health and safety. ‘ith this in mind, the Secretary of State proposes that the first steps shall be to take action on: a) reducing the range of buildings controlled under the Building Regulations; b) introducing "certification" as an alternative to local authority enforcement; and ec) recasting the Building Regulations. I am Sir Your obedient Servant A Z LEVY \9 3. Comments on the principles of the proposed changes should reach the Department by 4 July; and any their detailed operation by the end of August. Comments should be sent tos LG Packer Room 1034 Becket House Lambeth Palace Road LONDON SEL 7ER (Telephone 01-211-7415) further comments you may have on 4. This letter also goes to local authorities responsible for enforcing the Building Regulations in Ingland and Wales. (20 THE FUTURE OF BUILDING CONTROL IN ENGLAND AND “VALTS Introduction EXEMPTION ANNEX A 1 1. In his speech of 10 December 1979, the Secretary of State reviewed the nature and extent of criticisms levied against the current system of building control and the Building Regulations. He announced a radical revicw and invited comments from all interested parties. As guidelines he set out four principal objectives: a) maximum self-regulation b) minimum government interference c) total self-financing and in operation d) simplicity and identified a number of possible means to these ends. 2. This speech has elicited a widespread and searching response. Following a careful scrutiny of all the points made to him, the Secretary of State has chosen certain options on which he is minded to take action, subject to furthcr comments which are made to him. 3. Those buildings now exempt from formal control under the Building Regulations are Crown buildings, the operational buildings of statutory undertakers, and maintained schools and colleges. Underlying this exemption is the consideration that the bodies concerned are publicly accountable for their policies and have the continuity and the means to pay any compensation that may be awerded against them. These characteristics give an assurance of public responsibility over the design and construction of buildings and redress if necessary. On this basis it is logical to extend formal exemption to all buildings of statutory undertakers and also to all the buildings of local authorities. The Secretary of State would however exp ct all exempt bodies to comply with the technical requirements of the regulations, or their equivalents. 4. It is also proposed to exempt from the regulations certain types of buildings, of which some are at present partially exempt. Action is already in hand to exempt completely some agricultural buildings at present partially exempt and consideration will be given to exempting industrial buildings constructed solely to house plant or machinery and occupied by people only from time to time for purposes of inspection or maintenance. 5. Alterations and extensions to existing buildings make up most of the applications for tuwilding approval. The jobs are varied and often carried out without professional advice: there is no obvious means of classifying them as likely or not to impair safety and health. Even if such classification were possible local authorities would still have a formidable task in checking public understanding and compliance. Some minor works, however, would be exempt from the regulations: the sort of things the Secretary of State has in mind are: a a) detached domestic buildings such as garages and car—ports, and : b) greenhouses, sun—lounges and porches built on to dwellings. CERTIFICATION 6. At present, enforcement is a procedure entirely for the local authorities. The risks to life from structural failure are low and the present system has undoubtedly contributed to this, but it is frequently criticised as cumbersome and bureaucratic: the Secretary of State considers it desirable that an alternative should be available. He notes that from time to time local authorities make use of consultants to check calculations and to inspect works on their behalf. He notes also that the NHBC already provides a system of inspection for new houses covered by its warranty scheme. He is therefore minded to provide that certification by a "competent person" should be available in all cases as an option to local authority approval. It normally would be for the owner or developer to decide whether to exercise this option. However, there may be a case for allowing local authorities to ask for certification in certain circumstances or for the Secretary of State to require certification for specified matters, such as energy conservation. 7. Local authorities would be bound to accept properly tendered certificates and, beyond checking that the certifier was a "competent person", would have no responsibility; for the works — nor would they receive a fee. The local authority's responsibilities and liabilities for the works, under building control measures, would pass, on acceptance of the certificate, to the certifier. LIABILITY 9. The Secretary of State is aware of the concern over the liability, and in particular the possible duration of liability, now attaching to local authorities in cases where negligence is occuring in the enforcement of building regulations. He is also aware of similar concern on the part of firms and professions engaged in the construction industry. 8. A national list of "competent persons' would be required: this is a matter which the Secretary of State sees as central to health and safety. Professional bodies could no doubt advise on individuals and practices whose qualifications, experience and insured status made them candidates for inclusion. Other bodies might qualify: for example, the N'BC might be regarded as a ‘competent person‘ for certification of new private housing. Minor works, services and thermal insulation might be “self-certificed". For structural works the certifier should be an independent third party. To ensure simplicity, and to clarify liabilities, the certificate put to the local authority should cover the whole of the project and the certifier or certifiers would guarantee that it had been designed, and would be built, in compliance with the regulations. APPEALS INNER LONDON 14. It is for consideration whether the new system that follows 3F 10. However, many of the legal issues which give rise to this concern are not confined to building control or to the construction industry, and the Secretary of State welcomes the Lord Chancellor's proposal to refer the question of latent damage to the Law Reform Committee. In view of this proposal, the Secretary of State believes that any issues which fall within the terms of that reference should first be considered by the Committee. Possible changes to the law such as limiting liability for negligence to actions started within a fixed period from the date of completion of the works would clearly be matters which the Committee would consider. ll. The Building Regulations are widely criticised as too complex, too detailed and difficult to comprehend. They are designed to be all-embracing, precise and justiciable — Objectives which are incompatible with Simplicity of style. It is not possible to deal BUILDING REGULATIONS in simple non-technical terms with Subjects which are themselves technical and involved. 12. The Secretary of State is therefore considering reducing the requirements of the regulations to a minimum number of functional requirements and performance standards set out in subordinate legislation along with procedural matters. For the rest, the formal concept of deemed-to-satisfy would be abandoned in favour of informal arrangements by which the Secretary of State would €ive his approval to codes of practice and other technical requirements as being useful guides to compliance. The increased flexibility provided by these arrangements would ease a number of problems, for example, those which arise in reconciling the regulations with Standards for specialised buildings, such as hospitals. A place could be maintained for energy conservation, expressed as performance Standards; and there would be scope in the system for enhancing the status of Agrement Certificates. 13. Consideration will also need to be &1iven to the system for dealing with appeals, bearing in mind that the Secretary of State does not wish to adjudicate matters which are essentially for local determination; nor is it usually appropriate for such matters to go before the Magistrates! Courts. these proposals should in due course supersede the present system in Inner London. Aluninium Window Association Ainalganated Union of Engineering Workers- (Construction Section) reviers Society Brick Development Association Limited Anglian Standing Conference Architectural Aluniniuin Association Architectural Association Architectural Metalwork Association Asbestos Cement Manufacturers Association British Bingo Association f Asnociated Master Plumbers and Domestic Engineers Association of Ballrooms Limited Assoc of British Chambers of Commerce Association of British Manufacturers of Mineral Insulating Fibres British Blind and Shutter Association British Broadcasting Corporation British Ceramic Research Associ«ntion British Ceramic Tile Council British Combustion Equipment Manutacturers Association British Constructional Steelwork Asseciation Limited British Decorators Association British Blectrical and Allied Manufacturers Association Limited British Floor Covering Manufacturers Association British Gas Corporation British Insurance Association British Tronfounders Association poe British Lead Manufacturers Acsociation British Multiple Retailers Association British Non—Terrous Metals Association Association of British Roofing Felt Manufacturers Limited Association of British Theatre Technicians Association of Building Component Manufacturers Limited Association of Consulting Engineers y AsscciaotfiCounty Councils Association of District Councils J fes0c lation of. Tadenendent Businesses Association of Tadependent Cinemas ~ sscciation of Lightweight hgercgate itenufacturers ; : British Airports Authority Brivish Airways British futomatic Sprinkler Association Ltd British Bath Manufacturers Association British Paver & Board Mdnstry Kederation ayae ~ S Peate 3 = Association of Matropolitan Authorities Asgcciation of Structure] Fine Protection a) NEE Manufacturers and Contractors 7 British Pest Control Association ? NINEX B JWTTYING REGULATIONS List! Gi KOMLLS INVITED TO COMAENT ON PROPOSALS TOR AMPADMENT (OTHER THAN GOVEMNHIN'T DEPARTHENTS ) Aggregate Block Producers Comittee Avrément Board Aluminium Federation » Ausociation of Thermoplastic Domclight Manufacturers Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Products Association ¢ ghish Plostics Fedoravion Rritish Ports Association — pritich Precast Concrete federation Rritish Property Federation British Railways Board H British Ready Mixed Concrete Association British Reinforcement Monufacturers Association British Rigid Urethane Foam Manufacturers Association British Standards Institution British Steel Corporation British Transport Docks Poard British Waterways Board British Wood Preserving Association British Woodworking Fedcration Builders Merchants Federation Building Centre Building Regulations Liaison Group Building Services Research and Information Association Building Societies Association Bye Laws Revision Committee (Isle of Man) Cuke und biscuit Alliance Ceinent Admixtures Association Cement and Concrete Association Cement Makers Federation - Central Electricity Genemting Board Ceramic Tile Council” Chartered Institution of Building Services Chemical ndestrics Association Anse Linited Gi Fire Retardant Additives Vorkings Geom Chief and Assistant Chief Fire Officers Association Chief Building Inspector (Jersey C1) Chief Insnector of TOM Local Governmet:it Bourd Chivcboard Promotion Association Limited Churches Main Coanittee Cinenatograph Exhibitors Association of Great Britain and Treland Civil Aviation Authority Clay Pipe Development Association Limited Cocoa Chocolate & confectionery Alliance Cold Rolled Section Association Committee of Associations of Specialist Engineering Contractors Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals of the Universities of the U.K. Committee on Restrictions ayrainst Disabled People Concrete Block Association Concrete Socicty Confederation for the Registration of British Gas Installers Confederatioonf British Industry CBi Smaller Firms Council Consortium of Local Authority Programme Consortium of Local Authorities — Wales Consortium for Method Building Constructional Steel Research and Development Association Construction Industry Research and Infor:mtion Association Construction Surveyors Institute Consumers Association Contract Flooring Association / Contractors Plant Association / Copper Cylinder and Roiler Nanufacturers i Copper Titbe Fittings Menufaclurers Association /) Council of British Ceramic Sanitary Ware Nanutacturers ” AS plish Plectics Sederniion British Ports Associaticn dritich Preeast Concrele Federation British Property Federation British Railways Board British Ready Mixed Concrete Association British Reinforcement Manufacturers Association British Rigid Urethane Foam Manufacturers Association British Standards Institution British Steel Corporation British Transport Docks Board British Waterways Board British Wood Preserving Association British Woodworking Federation Builders Merchants Federation Building Centre BuildingRegulationsLiaisonGroup Building Services Research and Information Association Building Societies Association Bye Laws Revision Committee (Isle of Man)~ Cuke und biscuit Alliance Cenent Admixtures Association Cement and Concrete Association Cement Makers Federation ~ Central Electricity Genemting Board Ceramic Tile Council” Chartered Institution of Building Services Linited Cif. Fire Reievdant Additives Vorkinys Gem Chief and Assistant Chief Fire Officers Association Chief Building Inspector (Jersey C1) Chief Insvector of IOM Local Governmer:t Bourd| Chivboard Promotion Association Limited Churches Main Connittee Cinenatograph Exhibitors Association of Great Britain and Treland Civil Aviation Authority Clay Pipe Development Association Limited Cocoa Chocolate & confectionery Alliance Cold Rolled Section Association Committee of Associations of Specialist Engineering Contractors Comnittee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals of the Universities of the U.K, Committee on Restrictions ayainst Disabled People Conerste Block Association Concrete Socicty Confederation for the Registration of British Gas Installors Confederation of British pndustry CBI Smaller #irms Counc ConsortiumofLocalaoa Programme Consortium of Local Authorities — Wales Consortium for Method Building Constructional Steel Research and Development Association Construction Industry Research and Inforimti6n Association Construction Surveyors Institute Consumers Association Contract Flooring Association / Contractors Plant Association } Copper Cylinder and Roiler Nanufacturers i Copper Tube Fittings Menufacturers Association 4J Council of British Ceramic Sanilary Ware Nunutacturers + Chomical Tndustr AS wetl for Small Industries in Nural Areas Country Landowners Association District Council Tectmical Association District Surveyors Association Domestic 0i1 Burning Equipment Testing Association Limited Domestic Solid fuel Appliances Approval Scheme Door and Shutter Association Dry Lining and Partitioning Association Federation of Master Builders Wederation of Piling Specialists lederation of Stone Industrics Meit Roofing Contractors Advisory Board Fencing Contractors Association i Fibre Building Board Development,, Organisation, Fibre Building Board Federation Fire Brigades Union Linited Ductile Iron Pipe Association ;; Electrical Contractors Association Electyical Electronic Tele— communications & Plumbing Union Tilectric Cable Makers Confederation Mlectricity Consumers Association Vlectricity Council Ingineering Equipment Users?’ Association Invironmental Health Officers EPS Association: Information and Technical Centre Faculty of Architects & Surveyors Paculty of Building A Pederation of Associationosf Specialists & SubContractors Guild of Surveyors Incorporated Society of Yalucrs and Auctioneers Fire Insurers! Research and Testing Organisation Fire Offices Committee t Fire Protection Association Fire Service Technical College Flat Glass Manufacturers Association Food & Drink Industries Council “ocd Nunufeacturers Federation Inc Forestry Commission Georgian Group a ie Glass and Glazing Federation Greater London -Building Sufveyors Asscciation Greater London Council Architect to the Council Department of Architecture and Civic Desig Gypsum Products Development Association Heating and Ventilating Contractors Federation of Civil Engincering Contractors Association House Builders Federation Housing Centre Trust : ~ Federation of Concrete Specialists. : Imperial College of Science & Technology Federation of Epoxy Resin Formulators & Applicators / A .neorporated Association of Architects and Surveyors Independent Proadcasting Authority Inner London Building Surveyors! Association Institute of Administrative Management Institute of Building Institute of Clerks of Works of Great Britain Incorporated Institute of Construction Management Institute of Housing Managers Institute of Plumbing Institute of Quantity Surveyors Institute of Registered Architects Laminated Plastics Fabricators Association Leathercloth and Coated Fabrics Manufacturers Associetion Lighting Industry Mederation Limited Liquefied Petroleum Gas Industry Technical Association (UK) Liverpool Polytechnic: Department of Architecture” London Boroughs Association London Transport Executive Manufacturers Association of Radiators & Convectors Mastic Asphalt Council and Employers Association ‘ Metal Roof Deck Association Methodist Church Division of Property Metropolitan Architectural Consortium for Education Wilk Marketing Board Modular Society Limited National Association of Fire Officers National Association of Licensed Bingo & Social Clubs National Association of Liftmakers National .Association of Local Councils Nationil Assoc of Loft Insulation Ontractars National Association of Shopfitters National Building Agency National Building and Allied Hardware Naenufecturers Federation National Cavity Insulation Association Netijensl Chamber of Trade National Clayware Federation Institution Officers Institution Institution Institution Institution Institution Institution of Building Control of Civil Ingineers of Electrical of Fire Mngineers of Gas Ingineers of Mechanical of Municipal Development Group Engineers” Engineers Mngineers VY Institution of Professional Civil Servants Institution of Public Health Ingincers Institution of Structural Ingineers Inter—Council Co-ordinating Committee Interdepartmental Construction Joint Conmitice on Building Legislation wwtionel Coal Doan, Sceeretary's Department Nation) Consumer Council Wational Cowicil of Building Material Producers National Council of Social Service National Farmers Union National Federation of Building Trades Employers National Federation of Clay Industries National Federation of Constructional Glass Associations National Federation of Housing Associations National Federation of Master Steeplejacks and Lightning Conductor Engineers National Federation of Painting and Decorating Contractors National Federation of Plumbers and Domestic Heating Ingineers National Federation of Roofing Contractors Nat Fed of Self Employed & Small Businesses National Fireplace Council National Fireplace Manufacturers Association National Freight Corporation National House-Building Council National Joint Council for the Building Industry (Operatives Side) National and Local Government Officers Association National Master Tile Fixers Association National Ports Comcil National Society for Clean Air National Union & Need orionbem and Allied Yorkers e. National Union of General and Municipal Workers National. Water Council Wew Towms Acsociation Orgenisation of Northtlest Authorities for Rationalized Design Paintmakers Association of Great Britain Limited Patent Glazing Conference Pitch Fibre Pipe Association Polytechnic of Central London Polytechnic of North London Portsmouth Polytechnic Post Office Prefabricated Building Manufacturers Association of Great Britain Ltd Refractory Contractors Association Registered Plumbers Association Retail Distributors Association Incorporated Royal Association for Disability and Rehabilitation Royai Institute of British Architects Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents Royal Society of Health Rubber & Plastics Research Association Sand and Gravel Association Limited Scout Association Sealant Manufacturers Conference Second Consortium of Local Authorities Trent Polytechnic ‘frinity House and Wales) 6F. South London Consortium for LAs Building Research & Development Spiral Stair Manufacturers Association Spray Contracts Technical Committee Steel Window Association shop and Display Equipment Association Society of Architectural and Associated Technicians Society of British Gas Industries Society of Chief Architects Society of Chief Building Regulation Officers Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings Solid Fuel Advisory Service Solid Sinokeless Fuels Federation South-Eastern Architects Collaboration Storage Equipment Manufacturers Association Structural Insulation Association Supervisory, Technical, Administrative, lianagerial and Professional Section (UCATT) Suspended Ceilings Association Swedish Finnish Timber Council Swimming Pool and Allied Trades Association Test Research & Inspection Services (International) Limited Timber Trade Federation of the United Kingdom UX Particleboard Assodtationi Yarsley Testing Laboratories Trades Union Congress Construction Industry Committee Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians University of Bristol: Department of Architecture Vitreous Ynamel Development Council Volume Housebuilders Study Group Wales Council for the Disabled Wallcovering Nannfacturers Meeccietien Warrington Research Centre White Lead Manufacturers Association Wood Wool Slab Manufacturers Association Timber Research and Development Association Transport & General Workers Union UX Alowie Mnergy Authority UK Association of Frozen ood "rcoducers Youth Hostels Association (England Zinc and Lead Development Association Ss a QP L 72 alti Stet CYA wl. ae1451 Jie ne LO blades, bin (02, brckeyHeyot lend Lam byt Vadece ANA |. _4 / / Pn aaee i , a fi CAAT. LTMCALN ViIAECVLT Lairdcamgiaur_PraliigCl ur bnglind 4 Walte — yori. SPA [ast [22 Atos ly Jo pteuK VE, The mdvergned, ae Meh tema d- ti Whites begistrion (anes 4a Vaid Kingday(420K).wewpathatferry de wiutdts nqistitd unde the Ayla Lequstadion bilo 1971, BB adstghalta "unpttaced -lEP MT brag Mnubae ang 4Ti piprssunal in the AT) . ustiitle end tare lla nad Ne nile yar 1990, gud avolav Pha 1999/23 fb fe that conde KIM Onin Tad Uwe whith avtulliet Nims. In 20 dV asthe payed Hungqes Te The Sup Pibissiine have bem Inktivns pnultd and 4 pildwiqg Gate afer al syrhatele LIRA f AT pebasaltMala "Unattached" putts *- *) Avg poem Vqislird umdw Tht act I. WE har weCoit atThis athe Pnapal dieters WW Frpnfinm- nvm er piltsate CWtificalia, 2- In The pavioat 4 Cntifiahin Westra Ainge thet tr doetem He pate of fur unattached biti” say be Hhetiatd if Me fran de (Niriatim is ystadttd Te Minntw 1) hfrssimat brats N nad PUMEE. The tybitile lrgistata Act hinendgne ,MTA fibt ulitet, 4VAqiAUK VEGGIE malty Th AT Ay¥:ay at4 Ti biting Comin fr Yeh f 4 ‘|‘ t} Nd£0 = tae 4 nels Wi Fe a> GiAAA Livy‘YatTeplatAVtiulfilres Cony C4 7. And WE Sug4freT 7VATA 5 [Mg Ve iunvbiditd a CO tint bisa tN The pmperes A ENbrentita. 6) MouAuyp Goa pllrsabal wsttte w Tndleuna Shadwlprdortrqbalict hal wai Statice om the vigikte D CliftTa PMS" hy bn hve? phy iz l Wattnthtd .YW (x) / :hy Mo be adadtd adity wth gitwdsA flv folhng 2udtond Ww Neltaln Nand. (cmmecnred/h 7) Te pittict” 4) jon Thr pple ullitsT, hay poem void hin The Legg, K i} prduticte Shivd z Linnbby — ? ap‘lafirelUwT14 AcA 6higd Pours" 246 "Cpt altiaaltically ve trurved o ‘Ch fart (MW2M4 itibAye hvtwid Thisnq byvrA46am Wn Te Act Korte gist é ) Yay [K5TM WWaghingy fin Th Liqust cy HUWlets shold be diriid te haw atc 151g AMnTheqb ¢}.CMlit Home "ie be poled this vqisti by Vie ob pgustiatim undies the Act. Thee BluA net,bye, piquMcr his bang linsitirda“Ympettiran“byGi he, her Catena . Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource DOE Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1980 Subject The topic of the resource DOE Consultation on Future of Building Control https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/8ee6f232bcf170fedddc03f32a4889a3.pdf 299aee1af0db7283b80111827b865346 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Correspondence by Unattached Representatives regarding fee competition and certification Description An account of the resource Lx Quechee Q due % Sayan, ROU D2. x y, [rooG-2oh Ft A eh7 pu Co AL Lae @ Cop, ATUWL~0/ Hi Bf Bxtcon xLSr Aira. fy 60 Kingly Street Regent Street London W1R 6EY =f “1 Ce mm), [Tie . ira Pncere :=‘ ers and LandscapeArchitects\ Tel 01-734 857 3 ie withcompliments os CRLat fk |2,4ACU :aoeCTO). Car Gu 5 4-,whichea, lsscnslESs ae from parchewler fee sca la_ WS pro Sions / QSsotahsons hn He mot to promo Panos intere Ko of thee DRAINEAS NAA GopI i/ , ; ARQQA SL a brfos Su. Phar AS, AwwWf_> Cge> oy Aavyelop , P ee) eCncent conckhons (ACL = chverse ae BSiouCann) cha Ciliateshe resort fo ca Vio. aA be. intevezshelo ues yy Tho. tort Ne eras A a neta AVERT theAble. Irterestby a ds enhen ie of a mOTIOA oheh nad face oefeated otk ALCO pine ptt ay Moods. Cee | look). foce-acols of LOS aA-Y. (ouiie eS Ce - ae and Kobback, ye Repraantatves Une Hached ABR CUK of Aycbitets Ve NeueOss “Nice chye on fee Com pehhonr ere n aclisp ce of our Nay on Truartclany . / shad Direhon tke bo draco cnr aHenton fo 44whichA. olsscns/és ARCUK from ey fhok professions] oHempt to promo pachiileA fee Sc QESCASASEAS pr fheir Members , and thee Eoblic Interest La_ 1A, Fhe intere Re of- which Sa fegue rls bg enhoengng tho conckhons ( (in whe = cere of oe Saracens SS cloyelop wihinak Cemm, Hie A , In Pendent resor ann Mootter | look. forward, of: (OFS Zar fo an Vice pire Pncere f= or7 ar «hot aoes SS) Orckn wo) Ae merece EZ Our proposed | enclose for Onr Cconmcevrahon Be interce ote. d to read tho Tort WS, Hallam Shy om Toxscloy pore 24 IDG . London h/. of a MONA chth nuao re defeated ot ARCKESL pene! ‘papi is Ce ce ve kelerin C= Directive on Kee Competition The following rules are required in order to permit fee competitior and at the same time safeguard A.R.C.U.K.'s three "'tenets' of professionalism. (1) (3) Monopolies Commission Report, paragraph 281. Le Prior Agreement Between Architect & Client: 2. Safeguard Against Supplanting: oe Safeguard Against Touting: In adopting these rules A.R,C.U.K. may be required to alter other rules or principles that may contradict or inhibit the operation of these rules. Architects shall inform prospective Clients of the services to be provided and of their proposed fee and shall agree with their Client the terms of their engagement. An Architect shall neither accept an invitation, nor proceed to quote a fee for a prospective commission in knowledge of quotations already offered or to be offered by another Architect or Architects. (2) Architects shall not solicit either commissions or engagements for themselves or business for their Clients or Employers, but may make known their or their practice's availability or experience, including the services to be provided and proposed fee, by giving information which in substance and in presentation is factual, relevant, and neither misleading nor discreditable to the profession, in response to a direct request. The following additional direction is also required in order to safeguard the Public Interest G3)DF 4, Safeguard to Prevent any "Recommended" Scale assuming a de facto Monopoly: There shall be no reference in any A.R.C.U.K. publication to any specific "Conditions of Engagement" or recommended scales of charges. Any revised or new A.R.C.U.K. code should be deposited with the O,F,T.in order that the 0.F.T. may satisfy itself that its directives have been complied with. (1) "Way Ahead", AppendiIxV, “Annexe G". (2) "Way Ahead", page 23. ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION COUNCIL OF THE UNITED KINGDOM a Motion to the 190th Ordinary Meeting 10th October, 1979 on all registered persons. Proposer: Jobn S. Allan This Council no longer wishes to defy the Government's requirement that mandatory scale fees be abolished*, and therefore declares that application of Conditions of Engagement and a scale of charges published by one of its constituent bodies shall hereby cease to be binding Seconder: John D. Murray * "The requirement of the ARCUK Code of Professional Conduct that an arohitect shall not contract with his olient except on the basis of Conditions of Engagement and a soale of charges published by one of its constituent bodies should be abolished.” "The rules of ARCUK should be amended so as to permit an architect freely to quote a fee in competition with other architects and so as not to prevent competition for business on the basis of fees". "aArchitects' Services — A Report on the Supply of Architects' Services with Reference to Scale Fees", Ch.8, IV Recommendatione - 286, (i) & (ii). The Monopolies end Mergers Commission, HMSO. i L.G.Packer, Room 1034, Becket House, Lambeth Palace Road, London SE1 7ER Sir, Elected representatives of "unattached" architects, A.R.C.U.K. 75 Hallam Street, London W.1 4 July 1980 Proposed changes in the system of. building control in England and wales, We refer to your letter dated 6 June 1980, ref. BRA/759/23. We note from appendix B that comments have been invited from several architectural professional institutes and from certain trade unions with architect members, but not from the Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom (ARCUK)- the govern- ing body of the profession, if it is your intention to seek the views of the architectural profession then only a fraction may be reached through the bodies listed in the appendix 5. This may be due to a misunderstanding and it may help to clarify the present structure of the profession and the role of ARCUK. Briefly, ARCUK is a statutory body constituted under the Architects Registration Acts 1931 & 38 to maintaina register of architects, to control entry to the register by professional qualification and to oversee the professional conduct of registered persons, Only persons registered under the Act may style themselves Narchitect"TM and entry on the register (not membership of a pro- fessional institute or trade union) is the sole definition of "architect", Council, which meets regularly, is composed of. nominees of architectural bodies laid down in the 1931 Act in proportion to their membership, elected representatives of registered outlined we have the following comments :- VW a) The Architects Registration Council maintains, in the public interest, a register of persons competent to provide architectural services and we suggest that in any system of self-certification Any person registered under the Act be considered a "competent person" for the purposes of certification, c) Architects registered under the Act should not be excluded as "competent persons" solely on the grounds of their residing in Scotland or Northern: Ireland, d) To protect the public interest, any person removed from the Register of Architects should automatically be removed from the register of "competent persons" if he entered that register by virtue of registration under the act. e) Any person resigning from the Register of architects should be deemed to have also resigned from the register of. "competent persons" if he entered this register by virtue of registration under the. Act, by "competent persons!! persons not being members of any of these bodies, in pro- portion to their numbers; and nominees of certain government departments and other professional bodies, It is as elected members of council that we write to you now, Coming to your proposals on changes in the system of building control it seems to us that the proposed system of self— certification is of particular concern to architects, The implications of these changes will no doubt become clearer as more detailed praposals are formulated but on the principles b) Membership of a professional institute or trade union should not endow an architect with greater status on the register of "competent persons" than an architect who is "unattached", De In any system of self— certification care be taken to prevent the increased liability of the certifier leading to indemnity insurance premiums prohibitive to the independent architect, xrours faithfully, YRAD Gut David Burney un behalf of : J.S.Allan n.F. Arnold D.J.Burney ».d.Cutmore P.W.Howe ¢.D,Murray D.Roebuck 2, Walker M.E.R.Roberts When more detailed proposals are formulated we may wish to comment further, if you would like any amplification of the above comments then please do not hesitate to contact the writer, As elected rep- resentatives of "unattached" architects on Council we have held discussions with present and previous Government ministers on matters affecting the architectural profession (including the recent monopilies Commission investigation into architects! services) and we would hope that this precedent would be followed in your consultation with the profession on the proposed changes in the system of building control. flected representatives of "unattached architects, A.R.C.U.K, Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Unattached Representatives Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1980 Subject The topic of the resource Correspondence by Unattached Representatives regarding fee competition and certification https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/e1460450831ff20b8084811216a9018a.pdf 0a74f1dacecf775435ba8393699ef753 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Letter to Unattached Representatives re Clean Up Report Description An account of the resource oe Dear. Aw A.R.C.U.K. Please find enclosed a copy of the draft report CLEAN-UP which was passed to a solicitor on 10th March 1980 for advice as to whether the circumstances of ARCUK's sufficient grounds for obtaining a court injunction to prevent proceeding as currently represented. to the lawyer a considerable appended to our own report. available, is omitted from this content but should in any case be would you please assist as follows :— constitution, which it describes, the Council You will note that in the submission amount of supporting reference This material, all of which Any volunteers ? lawyer advises. Very great weight is given to actual cases of provided material was is publicly Z| familiar. The solicitor's comments are expected soon. To help progress this matter to a point where, taking also the legal advice into consideration, we can make a decision whether to proceed or not, 1- Send comments on the enclosed draft to Bob Maltz, 14, Holmdale Road, London, N.W. 6. 26 Indicate the extent to which you would be willing to share in costs. (Initial legal advice will cost approx. £50 i.e. about £5 each among ten, or so. The solicitor recommended seeking Legal Aid for any eventual court action, as this would probably get expensive. This could turn out to be the deciding factor. To get the best chance of Aid it is recommended that the applicant is the most impecunious among us, and with the greatest possible number of dependents, etc. 3. Seek out cases of any registered persons who consider themselves ‘unattached' (i.e. not a member of any of the bodies in Schedule I i - vi, 1931 Act) but who did not receive election papers etc. at the last ‘unattached' election. This excercise is most important, the 67, Romilly Road, London, N.4. 19th March 1980. aggrieved (disenfranchised) persons. It is strongly recommended that @ Such cases are first collected together to form a dossier, rather than raised individually with the ARCUK Registrar thereby merely eroding our argument. 4. Indicate whether, assuming all’ comments on the draft can be assimilated, you are willing to have your name on the report. Many thanks, x Yoursfraternally,Nee ; ~ Distribution: Norman. Arnold David Burney Ian Cooper Peter Cutmore Anne Delaney Peter Howe Alan Lipman Bob Maltz 19th March, 1980. /2 & John Murray ea Marion Roberts David Roebuck Ian Tod Eddie Walker | Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource JA Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1980 Subject The topic of the resource Letter to Unattached Representatives re Clean Up Report https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/c064efa845e939528ae056ed02d7f844.pdf 1e008b977637354348fcb8e095f66c73 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Letter seeking legal advice re Clean Up Report on improper constitution of ARCUK, enclosing report Description An account of the resource A REPORT BY ELECTED COUNCILLORS OF THE ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION COUNCIL (A.R.C.U-K.) at‘—I f;a ; — Fem AGndt Rarbuck . 25 NE Georges Aronia . W~Dry, Nee | Akxs Craw, <99, |Vos ant “Pack (4° oa wae Ze aCape 2MPRMR Cry 7z7IrS CR AREA, haQsee)euee. 42lhecteahARK, ]Connrecions : Loa 4alsin box ea matey meets SALWMG |foo AL AQ 420 o ARK iy Ypposttect 4 |4s ABACure Qwoe es |ee &QchibckeuwmeCakyenaALLK& RALSH TH Gobwa Lear Achar aS IQMuchGAOtoorteheae Bowes wea_s 104 Aarcl.. 1980 ESA SA| ElL# WeYO ANO|OD ; Ga Gslae Yar mas oo. 4a Adheees Omar! COeeyOleaneeegowbeens)tasConeAG.CN & Prvenin Se QypeQecnAck ia | Gs Wsk @oluie @ & ben Ader aa.he eee ae Gus Q-fake & ae = CeorlAuce an hsaa) . Aap WAG CremCLOTee 2. b. Qkockso( olecm 2.5 @-© “4. ARQeWr,K B5ow ‘paper,he Cscw(hRtGeR Gechee: SOGCCLORaieersoa)aCue GeAQhoLesh youCoe GeonomeKune G CRCa Oc Cnet hemaCoy Clones Niemen Tne Coke CG Qu nko coveAnta) Q@ wow 1 OME ONOCNtn hg Soe frum : Loo Dhertt “Qo Ajgarcak tu Golreg A, Sk, iae Akot Oe Go eae Oo 4 shor orola. eyEASI CreeOS re On foe GQ Kok. Sarl C2 4 ne :oa avs Su. Gols LO CaG a) wa TL > G GodoneQusol,meAyrewel6450.60 bm Qleck La Acten gt Dootet uo Detunmye@);OifraseorkUuuwat vl, CO. | Y ,Grdue, Ge Ca Pavole an, Ants, peforGets GQuradactAmtOe {mae fe RokerMatte(Sto~Fos)286)\RuAlla.(P54 $572) er Js) (637 - C685) \ Vunconn ae Bowes wea_s S out | OOD Wd Caml grade yr Colre2 on Hey A0nG p Lack, El # WeYOD ANO|OD Lek of Confe-ts. —Uce £ ALCirk 912 DE aarEyig Combrred slahskeof implicahoro of L TfT Sa mem Conca Ny Areas” —— Bowe awea_ aay CTe feuo>) ‘ Peatle Pulte) Hews‘seatsor.POEIED,POPS apporhored: in accordance ifs fre Avch tet’ Begichaten fet ef 193/. HawsACR TYEEZE)cnchhnfedCL). Has A2euUkeo a By cImplcohoredf parven P_SPOOR. a) Lee APEC mopreply constrhtad CHE) rege" Tspple re - Flea APCUE is empropert, corchhitedcz) -'bhr does on LIBRA eo é a eee, anshAtlea Zl Frepesed sycters ty enero eae ALCUK, PeeLy Less £ De brine nt enfferad &4y ’ Unattached Archlet® aca reef of fre imprope- Censhtutes ofACU. Nis er puuheo ef ARCH a7s ree =comchtr:te d. Ca Zk a Speafe hamed induritlielos arch. techs Cheviced fe Atchtectsee. 5C1931). Arch tect { Gag Kchahor 1 At’ C1988) ArchteetbBapenonCrendreont-)Act(1965) Beogulahsns asspprndby fh a, Arscaphins. ag. &hons SS = PRG a ae ey ARCAIK Shanckag orleans C73/25) « Ge-k lewen's Azyree rant _ conshtrhon ef Comnsttaz> C254f04). Nihee A. 23. feck Coe of Profesor! Cra ch- 4 CGuwdence fo Nes Gude. Boe ACHE Code. 2e- 3. Arnucetl Reports 1973/4, (974) 9S, 1975,(2&, (976/77, 1977]78, 1878/79, ed Oo tt Complants en Spe=hon of Canes RIBA Chote 4Bie fos 1971. FIBA Cota of Prof Corot PIBA Seoles of Charoes Conch tee fo rule a > March 1922, Conch tisbhen Crresponckenca— in Comrachon cihy FIBA subseriphens. EIGA "Becorbung an Acchilect! Bxckack fr Ly ARCUK Cerves POM cLercoe_ Report (2H) 72 29m feeG Leotle— Se Li # Registrar (C;— aportes sp, Ae. BA Connie Mong of hich gees 87/2/97) 4b. fy fredle ty PzdAchin en 47. Arhreles om BeesCCN peLPsse eciges Pricer “fo frG.,- ac ins hucley Foy ey)te blue)(er9) OPOKAsshererre 4].32-/-1230. Belrect frev~ PUA Annnol Reyort C1974-) . Bevel fre P2IBK Ayaie/ Reperr (19 2) ee 09 Gegn (S-4-/475 rHehon7Ah, #2exis Grower Seilert, Sealey & Lo. 14 Jooks Gourt London EC 4 = d4 nolmdale hoad 4cngonu Wa 6 11 march 1960 vear bir Grower, Iwproper Constitution of «iCUK further to our Jetter of yesterday with attached aocu. wents, foliowing our conversation, 1 enclose the remaining documents listed as “to tollow" on Document 2, List of Contents. i enclose also two further documents: 48 - Counsel's opinion in Keyte case 49 —- Notes on the apportionient of seats...etc. No. 48 was recently sent me by the khezistrar of ARCUK and concerns a case which AKCUK is considering under Sec.7 of the act. You night tind it of interest in its discussion of the act. I thought the discussion of literal interpretation of the act night be relevant to our case regarding the no lon-er existent "icllows, associates and liceutiates" o1 the kiss ana the Fisst Scheuule, var. 1 (i). (see vocunent 1). No. 49 contains no aduitional iniormation bat is incluueu as a very briet suniary o1 the situation. vocunents ob waltz E14 WeUD ANO|OD seats on AKCUK should be properly apjoitioned in accordance with the architects hegistration Act 1951 The Architects kegistration Act 1961 requires the Council to be constituted in accordance with the First Schedule of that act. The Scbbaule proviues for appointment of menbers by various bodies and Gov't. winisters as well for the direct election by architects of architect abers. There is no explanation of the intention of the constitution, no systematic approach. The members nay, however, be broken down into 5 groups (1) Those appointed by the Councils of a nunber of named rganisations presumea to have architect nenbers, in propoition ol one appointee ior every 500 (o1 part thereof) of s kinds of their architect nenbers. Appointees nay, but need not, be architects See Far. 1 (i-vi) subject to 0 (a-c). Those elected by sone architects not considerea by the Act to be some kinas of architect members of the above organisations, again on a 1:500 basis. Those elected must be architects. See Par.1 (vii) subject eo One member appointed by the Council of another organ- isation of architects, who may, but need not, be an architect. See Par. 1 (viii). Five menbers in total appointeu by various Gov't. entities, who may, but neea not, be architects. Se area Ct) One member appointea by the Council of each of 7 organisations connecteu withthe building industry, who may not be architects. See Par.2. ots] a | | | 2 | | | El # WeYO ANO|OD they are menbers (f). (a) Account is to be taken only of "teliows, associates & licentiates" of the bodies citea in Par 1@i) ana (ii) but no such qualification appiies to the bodies cited in (iii-vi). Account is not to be taken of stuaent members of the body cited in Par 1(iv) but no such qualification applies to the bodies cited in (iii) (v) and (vi). Architect members of nore than one of the bodies cited in (i-v) are taken account of in all the bodies of which they are members. (Accordingy to AC figures as of 31-i1U-79, there are 21406 individual architects reckoned for the purposes o1 the Act t be members of the boaies citeu in (i-V), but seperate totals ada up to 22196, thus 792 multiple nenber ships. Honorary, corresponding or retirea members of the bodies citeu in (i-v})#NkxxBk are to be taken account of under (vii) and not under (i-vi). Par 3(c). E-g-, although ARCUK's Regs. refer to those architects taken account of under (vii) as "unattached", they may well be membe! ot one of the hodies citea in (i-vi). The "anomaly" of (3) above. although seats on ARCUK covered by (1) and (2) above appear to be on a basis of 1 seat per 50U people, the Act clearly does not establish a consistent system of 500 architects = i AR€UK member. note for example that {aj as below, some architects are not to be represented (a) (b), some architects are to be represented more than others (c)(a), only some architects must be represented represented and not represented by the body(s) of which by architects (c), and some architects are to be uirectly Eye SYP lily) as non-architect booklet published arch 1976, attached, and note total absence of elected Councillors. See also “aaverts" on )---is that ARCUK is composed of architectural “constituent bodies" (a term of ever-changing meaning which appears nowhere in the act or kegs) of which the RIBA is "the leading constituent body" (see p.15, draft AKCUK Annual Report for 1979-80) if not the only one of any signilicance. (Note that despite AkKCUK kegs lo and 14, nenbers of AKCUK appointed under Far.1(ix) and 2 are never (£) The varying qualitications for Councillors, architect or not under (1) (2) and (3) above. ») Only architects ordinarily resident in the UK are to be taken account of although the appointing Councils of the bodies cited in Far 1 (i-vi) pre- sumably represent architects resivent abroad as well being fellows, associates or licentiatesS," while the Notice and licentiates)." The notice also makes no distinction between the bodies cited in (i-vi) regarding (a) ana (b) aiscussed above. (see attached docunents) it should also be noted that the Act definitely gives no special importance to any Councillors as opposea to any others. Ali are equal. The mouel of ARCUK'S constitution aspropounded by the KIBA---and even AKCUK see "Composition" on p.3 of peach-coloured AKCUK info. it may be of interest to note that the wording, and thus the meaning, on the ofiicial notice calling for nominations sent out to "unattached" architects by AKCUK departs trom the Scheaule in some way , the Schedule under Par.l(i) and (ii) states “...architect members reads "Corporate member (including fellows, a ciat PESTice Blire[ere) elected to the Council's important Finance & General Purposes ana Professional Purposes Com) ittees.) When the Council was first constituted in harch of 42 members there were 12 appointed by the KIBA, 15 by other "arch." bogies, 5 "representing unattached architects," 5 appointed by gov't. and 7 appointed by eae g] tae | | (mot merely of the so-called "arch. constituent bodie nay have a member of that body apvointes to a viscipline Comittee ot ANCUK hearing a case oi "disgraceiul conduct against him or her and (2)that those archs. not considered tor the purposes of the First Schedule to be menbers of one of the bodies referrred to in Par.1 (i-vi) may elect members of ARCUK. =| Finally. it should be noted that in no way does the Act sugpest that akCUK should be composed largely of architects, should be controliea by organisations with architectmenbers,orshouldservetheinterestsofarch- |EE | itects. ‘| -E | other construction industry organisations. (see attached). | By March 1940, by which time the 1958 Act had made regis- tration mandatory for architects, the figures had changed to 15 KIBA, 15 other "arch." boui x "unattached", with the remaining unchanged. (see attached). he only ways in which the Act appears to treat one architect differently trom another are (1)that any arch. who is a member of any boby reierreu to in the Schedule Pye STNe Blile)|er0) xx Zi tow K is improperly constitut ( The electea Councillors believe that AKCUK is allowing the xk&#K RIBA Council to appoint more members of AKCUK than callea tor by the Archs. Keg. Act 1931. proviaes {or AkCUK to include "one member appointed by (1) The First Schedule, Par. 1(i), of the 1931 Act the Council of the KIBa in respect of every 5UU architect wembers of that Institute, being tellows, associates or licentiates thereof." (our underlining) About ten years ago the kIBA amended its hoyal Charter (with Privy Council approval) to create a single class of “Corporate Member" ( a term not found in the Act) and eliminated all "fellows, associates and licentiates.” Although the Act seems clear that only architect members of the KIBA who are fellows, associates of licentiates houla } taken account of under Par.1 (4), ARCUK, ignoring the change in the kIp/ Charter, takes account of architect members 01 the KiBA under Par.1(i) who are not fellows, associates or licentiates. it should be noted that at a similar time, the K1IBA also amended its Charter to eliminate the class of ketired Members. hetired members since then have been classed as Corporate Members". (Figures supplied by the kIBA to an kkIbA member confirm that the hiBa now has between 1000 and 1500 such retired members classed as Corp. Members who pay reduced sunscriptions because they are retired.) Although the Act is very clear that Ketired henbers are not to be considerea as architect mewbers of the PIRA but shoula be taken account of under Par.1(vii) as "unattached architects, AkCUK has ceased to do this since the change oveEv I-lUroel are)(ole) in the hi#bsA's Charter. It may also be noted that although the Nat. Feu. of Building ‘raves Operatives (more recently known as the Nat. Fed. of Construction Unions) is entitlea to appoint a Council member under Par.2, since it dissolved (although its member unions still exist) its seat has remained ant, Annual Keports of AKCUK indicating “Not entitled noninate" rather than “not nominating.” | The electea Councillors believe, therefore, that | according to the Act, | (1) The RIBA Council has at present no right to appoint any AKCUK Councillors (and should not have been | allowed to do so since it changeu its Charter to | elininate teliows, associates anu licentiates). | Those architect menbers of the kibA who are ordinarily resident in the UK and who are ueened not to be architect wenbers of kIBA because they are honorary, cori esponuing or retired menbers--and only these--should be taken of by AKCUK under Par 1(vii) and be "represen- accordingly as "unattached" architects, as Par (vi) and (vii) excludes from reckoning all architect menbers oi the k1BA, not merely those who are iellows, associates or licentiates (subject of course to the proviso in Far 5 (c)). The Act should be applied to Par 1 (ii-vi), covering other organisations with architect members, in the sate way as it should be appliea to the k1BA. Assuming that ii the KIBA were not alloweu to appoint menbers of akCUK as per (1) above it would make appropriate changes in its Charter to make such appointments again legal, action should also be taken i EL# WeYO ANO|OD to insure that at that time seats on ARCUK are apppr- tioned strictly in acco:aance with the act. ‘here is good reason to believe that AKCUK at present considers as members of the RIBA many arch who are not kKIBA menbers and considers as "unattached" fewer architects than required,. The consequence o1 this is that there would still be more k1BA-appointed Councillors than called for by the Act and too tew “unattached". ihe evidence for be- lieving this is presenteu below, I1-1i1-I Sib, 4 Das How _AkC improperly constituted Gi In response to a questionaire published in the architects Journal of 30-1-80 (see attached), 28 (that “< ‘> tl | 25%) of the 112 architects who said they were "unattached" and answered the question whether or not they had received | | architects should) said they had not. (Obviously, 112 architects responding is a small sample of the presumably over 5000 unattached. There is no 1eason om the face of it to believe, however, that the sample is nec rily biased regaraing the giestior Of these 28, 16 gave their nanes on the questionaire official nomination papers from ARCUK (as all "unattached" SyEvI-re lave)(eye) and the elected councillors have checkea their staterents against AKCUK records. Oi these,16, SNCUK records showed 6 claimed by one o r more of the bodies cited in First Schedule, Parl (i-v) incluging 5 claimed by the bIE Three were clained by no body but were not included in the unattached total (!). Une TM listea as unattached but was not shown on the list of unatiached voters (')- It has not yet been possible to ascertain whether he has been included in the total of unattachea used for appor— tioning seats on ARCUK. The other 6 are indicatea by AKCUK as being unattached (presunably a postal problem). Thus, | | not being considered by AKCUK as unattached, a coniirmation rate of 60%. Applying, this rate to the total of 2& who said they had not received papers, suggests that 16.8 of | | \ Pe a | | ot 1G traceable, 9 or 10 can be considered confirmed as the 28 might be confirmed, 15% of the tw 112 respondi i At the sane tine, ot 4K, 4391 +737 traceable, be elected and 40, not 41, appointed by the RIBA. it should be noted that the kegistrar oi A\CUK has papers in Nov.'79 returned them (as requested on the form) because they were members of one oi the relevapt bocies and were thus mistakenly considerd unattached. Assuming that AKCUK considerea then only 4815 (allowing for 66 istakes) as unattached, the above figures would be modified to 5076 unattached, 19790 KIBA. No change in implications ror seats on akCUK. It should also be noted that in addition to those responding to this questionaire, some of the elected coun- ciliors know personally architects who claim they resigned from the kiBA several years ago ana are still classilied by AnCUK as hIBA. They also occasionally meet architects who say ARCUK regards them as kKIBA althoush they have never been menbers oi the kKIbA. (One case vavid Heath, ym r= q E| | This implies that rather than there being now 4381 "un- attachea" archs. as claimed by AKCUK, there may really 5 were attributed to the RIBA, a confirmation rate of 51.25%. Applying this rate to the 28 oi 112 who said they had not received papers suggests that 8.75 might be confirmed. Thus, ARCUK may be attributing 8.75 to KIBA for each 16.8 | it may be wrongfully denying the "unattached." This implies that rather than there being 20090 KIBA members on the kegister (for Ist Schedule purposes), there are only 19719. The implications for the apportionment of seats on AKCUK of this alone is that 11, not 9, Councillors should pointed out that 40 os tue 1 supposedly sent nomination | 3 | be 773 nore, or 5154. / HL= 18 433] 5) S yeBTL eBlile)[<re) still regaraea as il#a by AKCUK even though he has never been a hibA member and has written expressly to akCUK to say so apd to ask to be properly consiuered as "unattached".) The iigures includea here o1 people wrongly classi- fied by ARCUK could include some of the architects who had been expelled by the KIBA, or resigned, after the Oct. 31 ARCUK "cut-off" but before the jan/Feb 1980 survey date. See(ZI) for how K1IBA uses Regs. loophole by admitting and reinstating members just before 31 Oct. and expélling nembers just after. The figures would not include people who still consiaerea themselves K1BA members, despite not having paid their subscriptio perhaps for several years, because they had not bee expelled by the k1Ba. See 625 (Vv) iow AKCUK is improperly constituted (111) One reason why the KIBA Council has been allowed by ARCUK to appoint more members than the Act calls for is that the kegs. of ARCUK (made under Sec 15 of Act, by K1BA-controlled akCUK, with Privy Council approval) call ior the membership submitted to AkCUK to be that on a single day only, 1 Uctober annually. ‘the k1BA Council conveniently admits new menbers ana reinstates ex-nembers annually just before that date but expells members annually just aiter that date. Thus, once a year%at Oct.351 the membership of the RIBaA for ARCUK purposes is higher than during the rest of the year. For the past three or four years these expulsions have averaged ahout 750 per year. As about 76.3% of the k corporate membership is consiuered by AKCUK to be architects resident in the UK, one may assume that of those 75U, £ 76.0 or 570, are creaited by AKCUK to RIBa. The tigure which AnCUK uses to apyoition seats tor appointment by the kIA Council thus ought to be 19520, not 20090, on this assumption alone. Fresunably most (95y0, or 545) of thes O should be added to the total of those considered by AKCUK to be “unattached," with the renainder still members of another body enabled to appoint members of AKCUK under Ist Schedule, Par 1 (ii-v It s pointed out by the fegistrar that in 1977 the kIBA Council considered that it had by error not enployed this aevice. Apparently, the ‘true" menbership was thus for once reported to AKCUK. 4 figures for Y, Use of AkCUK Regs. "loophole* by kIBA (Oct.51 date) eL# WED INo|OD the "unattachea" reitlect this: in 1975, 2707; in 1976, 3128; in 1977, 4120; in 1978, ,4s64. ELE -a5999- 6 bey ce CQyeayorn) ) sedieci?, ery Bs SAVEie h Fproewa4y)eyoey Arnab mo How ARCUK is improperly constituted CV When aoes an RIBA member cease to be a member for WhendoesanKIBAmembercesseoore AKCUK purpose: the guestion of KIBA arrears. Having heard continued stories of architect members of the RIBA resident in the UK who had not been expelied by the K1BA despite long subscription arrears, the elected councillors were also struck by what appeared to be an annual discrepancy between the number of corp- orate members clained by the k1bA and the subscription De 4-42 income actually received from those nenbers. According to the RIBA's treasurer, this apparent [Doe.38] discrepancy is due to the fact that many RIBA members pay subs at reduced rates, thus accounting ior the apparent rortfall in subs income (compared to the total to be expected if all corporate members paid full sub). In recent years this apparent discrepancy has been the equivalent of 550U members (approx.) not paying any sub out of a total of 26500 if the remainder paid full sub. It is difficult to find out the nunbers ot members atfullandreducedsubsandinarears. KIBArefusesto givesuchinfotonon-members andevenmembershavefound it so far inpossible to secure the info fron the kIBA. Fion seme figures recently supplied by the kIBA to a menber, account can be taken of those who pay reduced subs and the apparent discrepancy described above brought down to a more realistic figure. kIBA full sub for 1979 was £50. an assumed apparent discrepancy of 5500 members (it was 5811 in 1978) would 7 Document @ EL# WeUD ANO|OD 488 "semi-retired" to account for It is known, however, that of the RIBA's approx. 5500 overseas corporate members (5522 in 1976), those in BEC countries are expected to pay full sub and all others, half. We have not been able to obtain a breakdown into these categories from the k1Ba, but examination of several pages selected at randow trom the kIbA Direct of Menbers suggests that roughly 9 (say, 500) are irom other EXC countries, principally Mire. An examination of I membership figures at the time (1970-71) when Eire members ceased to be shown in kIBA's UK figure and begar to be shown in the overseas figure confirms this estimate. Thus another 5000 members wust be reckoned at a reduction of£25, accounting for£125,000 #191,075 (4rom above) -{125,000 =£66,075 still unaccounted for. This could be accounted for if 1322 members on full sub were completely in arrears haa not paid any of 1979 sub. But menbers at full sub are expected to account for only 62.6% of the total expected sub income. So it is really more likely that there are 1601 members in arrears, if TEES 7 fas -fes925 =f191,075 still account for a shortiali of £275,000. 3335 newly-qualitied members 1026" o 53 "semi-retired" ove 219 retired members © reduction it 922 "fully retired" members & Peay eBlaTe arrears are assumed spread evenly aniong all members regard— as "mewbers." income. we think it safe to assume that of the architects whom AKCUK presently counts as h1Ba members for the purpose of apportioning seats on AKCUK, approx. 1500 of 20090 are in arrears and that the great majority of these, 95j or 1 (since les than 5y of KIBA menbers so counted by AKCUK are also members of one of the other bodies mentioned in the Ist Schedule, par 1 (i-v}), should be considered as "unattached." Ii this were done, on these grounds alone the kIBA Council shoula get 38 (not 41) seats on AKCUK and 12 (not9) councillors should be elected. It possible that there may be another explanation for the discrepancy in the RIBA's membership and sub income 2 less of sub level they are on, li these arrears are then distributed proportionally among those KIBA members on the Kegister of Architects and resident in the UK (76.3% of total), and those who are not, one can assume that 1222 are people whom ARCUK counts as RKIBA members for the purpose of apportioning seats on AKCUK. However, it is probably correct to assume to assume that this figure should be higher, for two reasons: (2) It can be assumed that a higher percentage of the people being kept on as menbers despite arrears are on the Register and resident in the UK since the K1ba has little to gain by keeping others on Pye stale PUlere) Presunably, some people have paid some part of their sub, so the total number of people in arrears must be increased to account for the same shortfall in described above. 1t could not, however, be fully accounted incone. > less of sub level they are on. li these arrears are then (76.3% of total), and those who are not, one can assume that 1222 are people whom ARKCUK counts as RIBA members for the purpose of apportioning seats on AKCUK. However, it is probably correct to assume to assume that this be increased to account for the same shortfall in ve think it safe to assume that of the architects whom AkCUK presently counts as k1Ba members for the purpose of apportioning seats on AKCUK, approx. 1500 )0$0 are in arrears and that the great majority of these, cele (since les than 5y of kiBa members counted by AKCUK are also members of one of the other bodies mentioned in the lst Schedule, par 1 (i-v}), should be considered as "unattached." grounds alone the kIBA Council should get 38 (not 41) seats on AKCUK and 12 (not9) councillors should be elected. It is possible that there may be another explanation for the discrepancy in the RIBA's membership and sub income If this were done, on these distributed proportionally among those KIBA menbers on the kegister of Architects and resident in the UK figure should be higher, for two reasons: (2) It can be assumed that a higher percentage of the people being kept on as members despite arrears are on the Register and resident in the UK since the k1ba has little to gain by keeping others on as "mewsbers Fresunably, some people have paid some part of their b, so the total number of people in arrears must EYPETL-WOBIT(-ro) described above. 1t could not, however, be fully accounted tor by short term (one year) arrears, since tre sub income from members in arrears one year would be largely compensated for by members paying off their arrears of the previous year. There seems to us to be only two logical conclusions: (2) as described above, that there are many members in long-term arrears who ne pay off their arrears e.g., "terminal" arrears, or (2) the number of people in short-term arrears is already very large and is growing at an ever so that those paying off their arréars can never make up for the ever larger nunbers just going into arrears. This seens implausible. E1# WeUD INE|OO A. “unattached “architects laisse _e 425° Ame |29390 2440 The combined stehstical eerie TTBeDouments4-7+ “towPROUAKU6 aecoed“) |. Totad acording teARCLK 31-l0-74 = 4351 ; | scbsequerbyonvmodwsahached’byMOKnom () Z. (EL ie om a Assum Ft wleryreked m 1336 | | Spunk(wotti), Feler,sna Heantiates ley Members. but R160 I \ i OF 1131 w UK assume YaonRefs =505 “vetived” cout ag “unattached ae 3.(E) [en re ees 4.() Add hecaure4 eas ole+54S ¢ J“i(240|| Deduct est.240 fou =240 | \ (O00 151000 \ | Yoceclep’ of iandIE 6.(BL) Ade becauseoflangle Ores PIP Sco lirclcre) FST. REAL porat“unarTAcuen'= 73 26 THIS SUGGESTS “UniaTiacHeD “ swoucp BE ENTITLED To ELECT I5 Counaiees (NOT 4 AS | 3 a FRESENTLY AUD ATED.) | - THis SUGGETS AREUK S18ULP AeeeepioN 35 SEATS Fee APPOINTMENT BY The RIBA Count. (NET 4) AS PRESENTLY ALLS ceTED) 2 RIGMMoccia a eae of eae Seals on CUR [, Tetel accercling 4 ARCUK 3(-107R = 20040 assumedslestoycfrmaARALMC +40 ( ; ZO\ZO A (Z) See prenens 3,(qs) ct n page 565 mA -300 My Ley O70: 870 | Deduct est. (Fofer x72 | “oeclap” ofTardI 6.Gf)SlotrectCe -.Foo ounvea<S Esp RAL yerac “eIeA” = 17365 =/S00 suetrncr 2765 =27b5_ Peetlow litelco) ie AKCUK not constit qd) There is no outside agency to insure that ARCUK really is the ARCUK aescribed in the First Schedule of the 1951 Act. No person or body is held responsible for so ensuring. ARCUK, under Sec 15(1)(£) may make Regs. "generally for carrying out the purposes of this Act," but apparently is not obliged to. It should be noted in passing, howeve: that the ist Schedule did provide for such a responsible agency for the first constitution of the Council (the Secretary of State and a committee appointed by him), and that Kegs. made by ARCUK must be approved by the Privy Council and that "any person aggrieved by the hemoval of his name from the kegister Recon t appeal to the High Court or Court of Session, whose “order shall be final." (Sec 9). (2) The Regs. (43-45) made by AKCUK under the Act to prescribe the manner of the election of members under lst Schedule Par 1(vii) are not adeguate to insure that seats on AKCUK are apportioned in accordance with the Aét or may even tena to prevent their being so apportioned. (a) In a nunber of ways, hegs 45-45 do not strictly follow the Schedule (eg, compare Par 3(b) and(c) to delinition of "unattached" in keg 43). (b)The use of one day as a reference point for determining the relevant members of various organisations provides a loophole preventing the ist Schedule fron being properly inplemented. (see III) (c) The kegs do not proviae for an outside and impartial body to administer the appo1tionnent of seats ed by eye yey InojoD those with a vested interest in the outcone o1 the apportionment , their control of akc (dG) In oraer to determine the nunbers of "unattached" archs. and elected councillors---and, in practice but not according to any keg., coincidentally the number other Councillors to be appointed by bodies in Par 1(i- keg 45 allows for, but does not require, those bodies to supply the Clerk of the Couicil with a list of their members. In the case of those lists not being supplied, the Clerk is to use the "last published list" of such boay. At a time when the relevant UK memberships of all those bouies are apparently declining, while the “unnattached" are increasing in number, this provision is clearly insufficient to carry out the act. im any case, there is no provision in the hegs as to how the Clerj is to use or interpret these lists in determining the nuiber of unattsched archs. (e) No keg provides explicitly tor determining the number of AkCUK members which each of the bodies cited in Par 1 (i-vi) may nominate. (£) The kegs provide that the only infornation to be used to deternine the number of votinig archs. under Par 1 (vii) shall be proviuea by the bodies cited in (i-vi), rather than allowing for or providing that into be supplied by the indiviaual architect regarding his or her membership o1 such bodies. And when AiCUK has asked individual archs. for info (Ann. heport 71/72, par 27, attached, and attached Form A), it has only asked "unattached" architects whether they night be attached, without ing attached archs. whether they might be unatt, el# Mello) AINOJOD ‘ibere is no mechanisi Lor reiuting a claim by one of these bouies that an arch is a menber. the system is clearly one-sided and open to abuse. (eg) There is no system for determining the validity of such menbership claims by such bodies. (h) The lists of members called for by the kegs are not required to specity the class of membership, thus giving AkCUK insufiicient info, to apportion seats aetermine the number of "unattached" as per the Scheaule. (i) There is no explanation 01 who (akCUK or the body concerned) is to determine what tor the purposes oi the Act constitutes being a meuber of such an organi- sation and on what grounas that determination shall take place. For exanple, the ketention F_e which each arch. nust pay AKCUK under 13 (1)(a) is due Jan. 1 of each year in advance and AkCUK normally strikes off the ister the following Lecewber 31 all those who owe any The various bodies cited in Par 1 (i-vi) may keep tembers in arrears on their rolls ior varying amounts of tine. AkCUK goes not appear to question any claim by a body that an arch. is a member oi that body for any reason. Like AhKCUX, KIBa memb. subs. are due Jan 1 annually in aavance and the kIBA's Charter allows it to expel] menber after only 7 w.onths in arrears. It appears to us (see IV) that the kIBA claims for AKCUK purposes many architects in long-term, terminal arrears and others who have resigned or were never members at all and that AiCUK accepts theese claims. (1t may be noted that the Faculty of Architects & Surveyors, seePar. 1(iii), currently claims as menbers for AhCUK purposes only"those whose subs. were fully paid and with whon we were in contact." See attached document.) 2 1t is also open to question whether the purpose of the Act can be servea when seats are apportioned t appointing bodies based on memberships totals which those bodies can inflate (gaining extra seats on AKCUK) with architeets who are members under duress. Employee architects probably couprise at least 75% of those on the kegister resiaent in the UK. Although the kIBA publicly claims to be a voluntary body (see attached), many employee architects are members of the KIBA only because their employer requires them to be so, in violation the Employ. Protect. Act and TULRA, as the kIBA is not an indepenuent trade union (being enployer-aowinatea) and because k1bA menbership is in no way’a higher qualilication than kegistration with AlCUK. be estimate that 4000 01 the #Kis k1Ba's UK arch. members are required by their employers to be hiba members, ana it is probably sate to say that at least 2UUU are probably k1BA members for that reason only. 1 should be notea that many other arch. members of the kIBA who are employees are "encouraged" to join the kIbA by their employer, usually an KIBA member, paying their kIBA sub. This is probably as widespread as invol- untary membership. It should also be noted that Inlana }evenue permits *ke KIBA subs to be an aliowance against income (eg, public subsidy of Kiba) but does not vo this in respect oi all the bodies in Ist Scheaule Par 1(i-vi) who are entitled to appoint members of AkCUK on the 1:500 basi Ea evel Blircl(cre) (3) Though AKCUK'S Kegs are clearly totally inadequate A) sure that the Council is properly constituted in accordance with the A€t, it appears also that they are not being properly implemented. Thé lists provided for in keg 45(1)(b) are not being supplied to the Clerk. Nor are the ast published lists", as required by the Act, apparently used. (4) e believe that human error and fraudulent intent hate been given free rein because of (i)(2) ana (3) above. Given the political complexion oi AhCUK as it is presently, and apparently wrongly, constituted, it is very unlikely that this AkCUK will make ana inplempnt any kegs which could ensure that the Council is properly constituted. For the sane reason, it is also very unlikly that tkehibA & ARCUK will proauce and make public the info wich would indicate exactly to what extent the Council is wrongiully constitute €1L# weUD INE|OD oposed tem to ensure properly constituted AR ARCUK for what at present pretends to be ARCUK) needs to be obliged by some outside agency to amend its Regulations under Sec.13 of the 1931 Act, as well as taking equivalent short-term measures despite its present kegs., to, (1) require apportionment of seats on ARCUK in accordance with the First Schedule of the 1931 Act to be the responsibility of an external, impartial, lay (non- architect) agency which would each year tell ARCUK what its constitution would be for the following year. define membership of the bodies cited in Par 1 (i-vi) of the Ist Schedule to discount menbers in arrears longer than AKCUK itself permits and to discount members who affirm that they are members only because they are obliged to be as a condition o1 enploymen plug up the "one day of the year" loop-hole so that menbership for AKCUK purposes is a realistic 1epre- sentation of the organisation's membership. consider an architect not to be a relevant member of one of the bodies cited in Par 1 (i-vi) unless confirmed annually by the architect (not the body) that he or she is a member of such a body in accordance with the definition of membership in (2) above and in full accordance with the provisions of the Ist Schedule. (ARCUK already writes to every architect twice a year.) if (4) is not acceptable for any reason, require bodies cited in Par 1 (i-vi) to furnish ARCUK such information at it requires in order to ensure that the Council is constituted in accordance with the First 7d | | ese | >| g| = 2| — -| EYPETB (oro) the proper nunber of eected councillors Scheaule, in abseuce o1 which alleged mewbers tor whose "case" the into. is requireu would be considered "unattached" ana voting. Furthermore, in the tirst instance, we propose that it be required €G) that persons improperly appointed to the Council by the RIBA Council be imuediately removed trom the Council, that any election by the Council 01 persons to serve on the Board of Arch. Education, Admi ions Cttee, biscipline Cttee, F&GP, PPC, other Council boards, panels, delegations etc. as well as the Council's ana their chairpersons, anu Council appointments, be considered void it held while the Council is improperly cousituted ana provision maae for new elections ana appointnents by the properly constituted Council. (8) that as soon as practicable a special election be that those bouies, incl. AkCUK and FIBA, which have information which could clarify the extent of mal- apportionemént of seats on ARCUK should make freely available that info. (40) that the legality o1 acts of the Council carried ELi#WUD sNo|OD held to elect adaitional councillors so that there is out while it was ivproperly constituted be clarified. LOSS AND DETRIMENT SUFFERED BY ‘UNATTACHED' ARCHITECTS SEE AS A RESULT OF THE IMPROPER CONSTITUTION OF A.R.C.U.K. oO 1.01 It was clearly the intention of The Architects Registration Act 1931 to provide equal rights of representatiom to all those persons who, though registered, choose not to become members of those bodies referred to in Schedule I, 2. (4) = (vi), and that such persons should enjoy equal benefits and likewise be equally subject to the Council's disciplinary powers as provided im respect of all registered persons. persons. entrance qualifications. / yeBTL eBlile)[er0) 1.02 To the extent that correct representatiom of registered persons under Schedule I, 1 (vii) is currently not acheived, both the spirit and the letter of the Act are being thwarted. To be denied their due representation in the Council's affairs in itself constitutes a fundamental grievance of this category of registered 2.01 The primary functions of A.R.C.U.K. as enshrined in the Architects Registration Act 1931 are the establishment of a Register of Architects (1,(3)), the admissioomf names thereto (1,(3)), and the removal of names therefrom (1,(3a & b),7 &11). The recognition and holding of examinations suitable to qualify successful candidates for admission to the Register is made the explicit duty of The Board of Architectural Education to recommend to the Council, (5, (2a & b)). In this way, through their representatiom on Council; tunattached! architects were intended to participate in the determination of EG 2.02 However, by its undue dominance of the Council, the R-I.B.A. bas removed the exercise of this duty out of A.R.C.U.K. into its own system of Visiting Boards, im which BsA.E. representation (invariably by R.I.B.A. members) is merely a token gesture. (See A.R.C.U.K. Annual Reports 1974/5 (101/2), 1975/6 (49), 1976/7 (71), 1977/8 (62), 1978/9 (60/ 61). N.B. the latter Report in which the B.A.E. is actually referred to as "a wide ranging assemblage of educationalists .. called together LOSS AND DETRIMENT /2 atconsiderablepublicexpenseforamereformality.") The‘unattached' architects have thus been denied their due part im establishing the quality of those eligible to enter the Register. 3.01 In the matter of removals from the Register, the Discipline Committee is appointed (1931 Act, 7(2)) to examine cases where a registered person may have been guilty of conduct disgraceful to him in his capacity as an architect. The criteria employed in considering such cases are as embodied in the A.R.C.U.K. Code of Professional Conduct. 3.02 However, the disproportionate representatiom of the R.I.B.A. on Council has enabled the Institute to extend the applicatiom of its own association rules beyond its own membership to all registered persons. This illegitimate extension of R.I.B.A. control is clearly evident in the content of the A.R.C.U.K. Code, which is substantially identical to that of the R.I.B.A., and indeed is published with the R.I.B.A. Notes appended. to practice in ways which the Registration Acts do not prohibit. continued defence of the Conditions of Engagement in defiance of the Ze 3-03 In this way ‘unattached’ architects may be disciplined to the detriment of their livelyhood for breaches of a code not freely determined in their own Council, but emanating from a private associatiotmo which they do not belong. 4.01 Equally, this illegitimate protection of the R.I-B.A. Code by the identical A.R.C.U.K. Code curtails the freedom of non-R.1.B.A. architects 4.02 Thus ‘unattached' architects are, for example, obliged by Rules 1.1 and 3.2 of the 'A.R.C.U.K. Code' to apply the 'recognised' Conditions of Engagement of bodies listed in Schedule 1, 1 (i) - (vi). (A.R.C.U-K. Code of Professional Conduct. p.5, footnote.) 4.03 These Conditions of Engagement (in fact those promulgated by the R.I-B-A.) require that an architect's fees are charged in accordance with a fixed Scale of Charges, thereby denying ‘unattached' architects their proper freedom under the Acts to enhance their livelyhood by quoting fees in competition with other architects. The degree to which A.R.C.U.! thus improperly controlled by the R.I.B.A. is evident in the Council's LOSS AND DETRIMENT /3 Monopolies & Mergers Commission's conclusions and recommendations (accepted by the present and previous Governments) that such fixed Scales of Charges be abandoned in the public interest. (See "Architects' Services — A Report on the Supply of Architects' Services with Reference to Scale Fees", The Monopolies & Mergers Commission, H.M.S.0., 8th Nov. 1977, paras. 285 & 286.) 5.01 Likewise an 'unattached' architect's freedom to carry on his practice in the form of a limited liability company which isnot proscribed by the Registration Acts is nevertheless denied by Rule 2.4 of the (R.I.B.A.surrogate)A.R.C.U.K.CodeofProfessionalConduct. Inthie way the R.I.B.A. bas improperly used the 'A.R.C.U.K.' Code to protect its own members from what "unattached" architects may consider to be more advantageous forms of practice. 6.01 Another constraint in the manner of practice that the R.I.B.A. is at liberty to impose on its own members, but which is extended to all registered persons by means of its improper inclusion in the 'A.R.C.U.K.! Code, is the prosziption of advertising. (Rule 3.6) In this case, moreover, while through A.R.C.U.K. the R.I.B.A. prohibits 'soliciting' by registered persons, it simultaneously engages in vigorous advertising on behalf of its own members. Here again the improper constitution of A.R.C.U has prevented ‘unattached architects in their enjoyment of equal rights | in pursuing their means of livelyhood. 7.01 Lastly, and again by virtue of illegitimate R.I.B.A. representation | and dominance in Council, the equal opportunities in obtaining employment that are envisaged in the Act's single level of registered persons - (ise. equal qualification conferred by entry to the Register) - are prejudiced by the the widespread imposition of R.I.B.A. membership as a pre-requisite for job applications. Although A.R.C.U.K. has frequently been advised of this practice it remains negligent in informing employers of its injustice. (R.I.B.A. membership entails no higher qualification.) 8.01 In sum, through the improper constitution of A.R.C.U.K., ‘unattached’ architects are seen to suffer loss and detriment in the equal treatment and right to livelyhood to which under The Architects Registration Acts they are entitled, tee elaOecd ese) / at © me notes on the politics of AKCUK as it no! D: uted (b) 6 persons appointed by the Councils of certain other i | 6 non-architects appointed by certain other bocies involvea in the construction industry Since 1977, nearly all of the elected councillors have been enployee-architect nembe of the New architecture Movenent, a group aiming to make the profession more accountable to the public ana more democratically con— a trolled at ali levels. These NAN. members elected as | are all members of the relevant trade union, TASS or NALGO as the case may be. Although probably of its own (non-retired) UK member ship are employee architects, the K1Ba Council regularly appoints 90) management architects to AlCUK. The RIBA Council and its committees are similarly dominated by employers, whose interests the KIBA is widely seen as pursuing y | Es xcept for the elected members, other akCUK councillors generally rally behind the kIBA appointees' position, with one or two exceptions. sl ARCUK at present (1979-80) consists of 66 members, (a) 40 persons appointed by the RIBA Council bodies because they have architect member | (c) 9 architects electea by architects one person appointed by the Council of the koyal Society of Ulster Architects (part of kIBA) 5 persons appointed by gov't entitie < | Those under a, b, d and e need not be architects but invariably are and are with at most one or two exceptions per year, nembers of the k1BA as well. 6. Previous to the passage of the architects hegistration Act 1931, the K1Ba had sought trom Farliament a monopoly on the use of the title "architect" for its own members. When Parliament refused this and set up ARCUK and the Register instead, the RIBA Council apparently resolved to control AKCUK (see Loc. 46) as an RIBA puppet in its own interes and to prevent its proper functioning as an independent, public interest boay. The present situation can be compared to a classic "banana republic" (AKCUK), with the United Fruit Co. (i1BA) manipulating the puppet with little attempt to apply a veneer of derocracy over all the usual procedures of a tin-horn dictatorship or one-party state. (see voc. 14). {he agministration 01 AKCUK is carried out by a kegistrar and h taif. The present Kegistrar was selected in secret by a committee of KIBA members, some of whoni were no lounger members of AkCUK, and presented to the Council for reatification only, two years ago. The RIBA's UK membership, after increasing for man years, has been in decline since 1975, both in absolute terms and as a proportion of UK architects. Ihe nuiber oi UK architects in other boaies entitled to appoint persons to AKCUK on that basis is also declining. A recent survey published in the Architects Journal (see boc. 37) indicated that 70 of 294 KIBA members responding (anu 99% of 153 "unattached" architects) thought that RIBA control of AKCUK was not in the best interests of the public. 66% of the KIBA members (and 95% of the “unattached") also thought it w not in the best interests of the proiessior = Pye staleBll cre) A.C.Drysdale of Architecture Guildhall Portsmouth Hants .David Heath Levitt Berstein Assoc. 30 Oval Road London NW1 WSreertve Named (ncindvar Cazes o Hsontranchsement ot “vuattachoA ’Archdtcely Evidence of disenfranchisement of "unattached" architects. In response to a questionnaire to the profession published in the ARCHITECTS JOURNAL of 30 January 1980, 21% of a sample of 150 "unattached" architects claimed not to have received nomination papers for the 1980/81 Council elections. If representative this indicate assive disenfranchisement of "unattached" architects and a loss of at least 2 seats on council if these 21% are excluded from the ARCUK list of ache a to the "unattached" would be made worse if the 1% were attributed by ARCUK to one of the 6 nominating bodies thereby increasing their representation on Council at the expense of the "unattached". € es yweuo Tatel[oto) vespondents(14%) gave their name and that the elected councillors were able to r statements against ARCUK records The results of this eck are as follows:- A.-Registered architects considering themselves "unattached" but listed as 4a member of one or more of the 6 nominating bodies. Name & address Registration No. Body J.S.Dodd 23271 AA 37 Braemar Road Worcester Park Surrey Ian Redford Lowden 44945 101 Turnbert Avenue Ardler Dundee Martin Goodwin 38515 Dept. of Architecture London Borough of Southwark L.Tek Ong 41849 ; | Architects Dept. London Borough of Hammersmith Roger Thompson Sevenoaks Kent W.J.Wintle Dawn Dartington Totnes Devon TQ9 6HE 30144 The RIBA has informed ARCUK that thi are their members. ARCUK accept this despite at least one written request to ARCUK (from David Heath) to be listed unattached. David Heath is not and never has been, amember of the RIBA. L.Tek Ong Roger Thompson and Martin Goodwin resigned from the RIBA in 1978. Sworn statements to this effect can be obtained. Dept. of Architecture and Civic Design Civic Offices Guildhall Portsmouth PO1 2AT B.1.Patel Dept. of Architecture and Civic Design 7 1 | ; | | Saale ] Civic Offices Giuldhall Portsmouth P01 2AT . M.G.Watts Directorate of Architecture Telford Development Corporation Priorslee Hall Telford Salop TF2 9NT had walker toAe inae : architects Kxaned RIGA 1 ] A| Bayleys Hi Registered architects not attributed to any | of the nominating bodies and yet not included on the list of "unattached", and therefore not sent nomination papers. z oyeeele telre) P.Lowendon 31348 C. Registered architect listed as "unattached" but not included in mailing of nomination papers. D.W.Olden 35906 28 Bell Place Edinburgh EH3 SHT Bey LOE mus is on the arch itect to inform the Registrar of any change of addr and failure to do this mi account for those sent to old addresses. No explanation was given by the Registrar for groups A,B,&C above. This short investigation was only possible because a sample of names was available and the elected councillors were prepared to devote their time to checking them. It is alarming that this should reveal 12 architects wrongly disenfranched and the fear is that there are many more as yet undisclosed. There is at present no intention within ARCUK to carry out a thorough scrutiny , nor to allow an independent scrutiny ofmembership status. CTE tLe bluaicre) Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource NAM Unattached Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1980 Subject The topic of the resource Letter seeking legal advice re Clean Up Report on improper constitution of ARCUK, enclosing report https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/9d4a69afea6c347f2d309798eec19ed9.pdf 64633f2370416e320e4b7366ad264c96 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Draft Ten Point Plan from Burnham Mill Meeting of Professional Issues Group Description An account of the resource BURNHAM DRAFT The Architect's Registration Council of the U.K. was established by Parliament to regulate the architectural profession in the public interest. All U.K. architects are subject to its discipline and must pay an annual retention fee to remain on its register. The Royal Institute of British Architects has, however, for its own self interest, prevented ARCUK from properly carrying out its statutory responsibilities. The undersigned all the elected councillors for 1979/80 and 1980/81 call for the immediate implementation of the following Ten Point Plan to enable ARCUK to operate in a proper manner in the interest both of the public and of the architectural profession. TEN POINT PLAN ( i) ‘The chairperson should be neutral. Council business should be conducted in an impartial manner. The chair of all committees, boards, panels etc. should be rotated among their respective members on a meeting to meeting basis. ii) All council meetings should be held at a neutral venue, not at the RIBA headquarters. ( iii) Al] ARCUK committees, visiting boards, selection panels, delegations and other bodies should be so constituted that their representation reflects accurately the composition of the council, that is, Elected architect members, nominees of the professional associations, Government nominees and non architect nominees from other professions, and other bodies. ( iv) The council should strictly observe its standing orders and its Regulations, as for example those governing the apportionment of seats. v) Votes taken in Council and Committees etc. should be properly conducted with the names of members voting for, against, and abstaining accurately recorded. ( vi) Full minutes of preceeding Committee meetings should form part of the Committee Reports to Council. ( vii) ARCUK should provide the elected councillors the facility to report back to and obtain the views of the electorate in order properly to discharge their responsibilities. (viii) The Council's Annual Report should include a minority report when necessary. Past reports have not accurately reflected diversity of opinion within the Council. ix) The misuse of ARCUK funds to subsidize RIBA activities should end. ARCUK should ensure that it takes the leading role in all activities that it sponsers and for which it has statutory responsibilities. Coappecto backs onc a Ab bz. YE Esliwesys ( x) All Council meetings, committees, boards and panels should be open to the public. BURNHAM MILL 24 February 1980 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Unattached Reps Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1980 Subject The topic of the resource Draft Ten Point Plan from Burnham Mill Meeting of Professional Issues Group https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/eac17e4ca20e1816cb43043eb550cc1c.pdf a27e3fda5dc604f90ca31bdc1a149b36 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Letter to Guardian re operation of ARCUK Description An account of the resource =z /4.2 Gare (aan //7 Farriagdér Loal Lendon ECIL BER By Lareoce Road % London (V9. g AngursT TRC. — .Ree Jo The Guardar ame Wiis Ie Ans arfhicle ax ery archilecTs place po ree preHe Crrinrert cal, a Step herr Games writes of yafegvar/s unposed SevregqislereeeVigeCEC Kayafithefle7]BunArch Achatiets.” Saree (73/ whew Farbeewen© 2 perses oa Ayclitets Posiatratee ee Gees (CEG (eel, Wahea,fEAS(Oe: iesprefeesSr een ‘aeenvftae iv ShatYtarArcch.fectsRegistrationWietotFLYe Kensefoon, {PLAGEY by ARCUAkK fas feen 4 4 Polen “LoCease Sa fegeeel Ea eealee ;kegstrFinn astheARG? ait ieeebershue of 4h. eIBA IS A recon séef Lea architect(Justasbewonorlaclcepdtpsnbershep of thea RAC, whatever 7s presemect men , GS G plshb & ye elyivagCE eae Ba C/A ee e ;subshadVe gees oeEe Ayitp numberof UR, antilects a1e cheosirg rot fo be rembces g te Kea tileon Thaes, Fhereare coh registered Mier esol Sf RIEA rere as artilects wrthARCHUK. Arhanes PMOL teatpresenT Yirbiell. LEE puppet itr ‘Gouncul packed «th 2) ped,CaAfellowTheR/LA“Loe, Cvternthat hag Us eos EEaBote peWe.xr Pafh eeeClaiioeLe ArchTeefeJoxrns/:AO of een RIGA meusbecs Prevsht Bal carbo! ARO by he.VeBAN Corea) se an Ye ream of interes tS of Ta pub le. /fore over , By. Though t aa gra lfrca ho aaa itself “ (jibe hue io Ay, fre Bro Wr Da vi Heyheu/ Roberz Me VieeTM Toho Nv (aSects) Was Peavs CVveiw a Phe best te,(OresTs of Ska Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource JM et. al Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource August 1980 Subject The topic of the resource Letter to Guardian re operation of ARCUK https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/652fdd71b97004b799e65fa16e320989.pdf 1450fb3cd4d5761123c7bf40859ee560 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Letter from ARCUK Registrar to John Murray re joining Board of Architectural Education Description An account of the resource Registrar: Kenneth J. Forder M.A. Dear Mr. Murray, Yours sincerely, 9th May, 1980 Borough Architect ee Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom ESTABLISHED UNDER THE ARCHITECTS (REGISTRATIOACNT)S 1931 TO 1956 73 Hallam Street London W1N 6EE Tel: 01-580 5861 One of the items that was discussed at the meeting of the Board of Architectural Education on May 7th was ARCUK representation on the RIBA Visiting Boards during 1981. The procedure the Board has recently adopted is for nominations to be notified to me for presentation collectively to the General Purposes Committee which meets later this year, so that a final list can be sent to the RIBA for selection. At the Board meeting last Wednesday your name was given to me and I am therefore writing firstly to obtain from you confirmation that you would be available for this purpose, and secondly to ask you if you could kindly let me have a summary of your qualifications and experience. With regard to the first I enclose herewith a copy of the set of criteria which the Board has made use of and which may be helpful to you in coming to a conclusion. On the second it is necessary for background material to be provided in respect of newcomers 50 that the General Purposes Committee can make some sort of assessment. There is no immediate urgency about the matter but I should be grateful if you would let me have a reply within say the next month if this is at all possible, John D. Murray, Esqe, Borough Arch. Service, L.Be of Haringey, Grosvenor House, The Broadway, London Ne8 1 2 MAY1980 98/79 Criteria for service as ARCUK representatives on RIBA Visiting Boards At the last meeting of the Board I gave an undertaking that we would look again at the criteria followed in assessing eligibility for service as ARCUK representatives on Visiting Boards. The matter has been discussed by the GPC, and their conclusion is that the five criteria previously outlined to the Board would be more suitably expressed in the following terms: October, 1979 D.W. BERRY Chairman To take part as a member of the Board, the ARCUK representative should be on the Register and acceptable to the Schools and their parent bodies and the profession. This requires a wide experience of the academic side of the profession including a knowledge of educational trends and educational administration together with an understanding of trends in practice; additionally or alternatively a wide experience and knowledge of the needs of practice with a sympathy for educational requirements and if possible some direct knowledge of the work of students. Both of these mean a known commitment to education. In all cases there is need for the time and commitment to join the Visiting Board for about 4 years and to give the equivalent of 3/4 days at least to the visit, preparation for it and follow up 3/4 times a year. Some visits involve much more work. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARCUK Registrar Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource May 1980 Subject The topic of the resource Letter from ARCUK Registrar to John Murray re joining Board of Architectural Education