9 10 310 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/a3b225d42b18824fe5f7e5b0307180b0.pdf 3ce7f32eded210d4f08c1e901e75c84a 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 Education Description An account of the resource Many NAM members were engaged in the field of architectural education, either as staff or students, and pursued new ideas for course content and pedagogy, reassessing existing course structures and priorities in conventional architectural training. The concern to focus on socially necessary buildings and to find new and meaningful ways of engaging with building users and the wider community- both central NAM themes - illuminated much of the discussion. 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 Council Directive Subject The topic of the resource re. recognition of diplomas, formal qualifications in architecture Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource EC Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985 Description An account of the resource D r a f t on the Zit-a-al certificcteg other evidence of formal qualifications architoctur•o, including zee-gur•eg to facilitato tho o%octlvo ezcre±D0 of the right of cgtcbllchczt freedom to provide ocrvlceg ( 1 ) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, regard to the treaty egtabl±guzg the European particular Articlee 49, 57 and 66 thereof, regard to the propooa..i from the ( g ) rege--*. to the Opiz.±cz of the Europccz regard to the Opi210z o? tho Ecozoz±e a.zå Social (emet) (1 ) The citations and recitals will be re—examined during the final editing of the text by the Working Party of Legal and Linguistic Exoerts. OS 239, 4.10. 1957 PO 15 CJ r.o C 72, CC C 22.3.%966, 3 6242/85 - 2 - to the Treaty, 6.11 treatment be-seå on regard to egtablizhzext EZå of ee:-vlcea• the Of the ti-tÄEitiona1 period; . eas the resulting principle of treataent es %-egardg nationality applies inter to the grant cf a-ny authorization req•zred to take up activities in the field of architecture Cleo to the regigtntion Tith or membership .01 professional organizations or bodies; b'neree-g It neverthelee.g eeezg desirable that certain provisicne be introduced to txe effe:tiye e'ærclee of the right of to provide eer•viceg reepect of activities the field of Tneree.s, to the Yeats, tho Stctes are requ±red not to gar.t forz of ilk-ely to dotort the of establishment; Article 57 (1) of the directives issued for the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificat.eg other evidence o: fo=e.l qualificatiots; Fnereas architecture, the quality of •ou-ildings, the they v:ith their respect the natural the collective individual cultural heritage are ratters of public concem; Rhereas, therefore, the of diplozae, certificates and other evidence of Comal qualifications m:st be founded on qualitative c.nd quantitative criteria ensuri.n€ that the holders of recog'äzed uplozas are able to underst?-anä givo practical expression to the neeåB of individuals, social groups cmd as regardg gpatial planning, the design, orgara•zaticn cad constructi on of bail diz€s, the cozgervation c.nä• of the architectural heritage precervation of the natural balance; Whereas methods of education traln{n.g for thoee practiging professionally in the field of architecture are at present very varied; Fhereas however provision should be made for progressive alignent of education and train-Ing leading to the purgu.±i .of e: tivitieg W'lder the title of architect; Vrhereas, in some i.tezber States, the taking up end pursüit• of the activitieg of architect are by law conditional upon the possession of a diploma in architecture; whereas, in certain other States where this condition does not exist, the right to hold the title of architect is nonetheless governed by law; whereas, fin:21y, in some Member States where neither the fomer nor the latter is the case laws and resalations are on the taking up Qr-id pu.rs•zt of these activities under the professional title of architect; whereas, therefore, the conditions under which such aet-uvities be teken up pursued in those States have not yet been. 22id down; whereas the cutuel recognition of diplomas, certificate and other evidence of fo:eal qualifications presupposes that such diplomas, certificates..ænd other evidence of formal authorize the taking up pursuit' o: certain activities in the .:cezber State of issue; whereas, therefore the recotnition of certain cer$.%cetes u—.äer this Directive should on iv contir.ue to apply i r,sofar as the holders cf such certificates be author: zed, in zccoräance with. 2 e -a 2 orovisions still to be =opted the .%ezber State of issue, to take up activities u:-.der the % tie of arcztect; Vlhereas acquisition of the lawful professional title of architect is subject in some Member States to completion of a period of practical experience in addition to the possession of a diploma, certificate or other evidence of formal qualifications; whereas, since practice in this respect at present varies from one Member State to another, to obviate possible difficulties completion of an equal period of appropriate practical experience in another Member State should be recognized as meeting this condition; Whereas the reference in Article 1 (2) to "activities in the field of architecture" as being "those activities usually pursued under the professional title of archite c t" the justification for which lies in the conditior.s prevailing in certain Member States, is intended solely to indicate the scope of the Directive, without claiming to give a legal definition of activities in the field of architecture; Whereas in most of the Member States activities in the field of architecture are pursued, in law or in fact, by persons who hold the title of architect, whether alone or together with another title, without those persons having a monopoly in pursuing those activities, save where there are laws to the contrary; whereas the aforementioned activities, or some of them, may also be pursued by members of other professions, in particular by engineers who have received special training in construction engineering or building; Whereas the mutual recognition of qualifications will facilitate the taking up and pursuit of the activities in question; Whereas in some Member States there is legislation allowing the lawful professional title of architect, by way of exception and notwithstanding the usual educational and training requirements e ry / DJM/emb for access to the title, to be granted to certain distinguished persons in the field, who are . very few in number and whose work shows exceptional architectural talent; whereas the case of these architects, who are very few in number, should be covered' in this Directive, particularly since they frequently enjoy an international reputation; the recognition of a number of the existing diplomas listed in Articles 10 to 12 is intended to enable the holders thereof to establish themselves or provide services in other Member States with immediate effect; whereas the sudden introduction of this provision in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg could, in view of the country's small size, lead to distortion of competition and disturb the organization of the profession; whereas as a result of this there appears to be justification for allowing this Member State an additional period of adjustment; Whereas, since a Directive on the mutual recognition of diplomas does not necessarily imply practical equivalence in the education and training covered by such diplomas, the use of titles should be authorized -only in the language of the Member State of origin or of the Member State from which a foreign national comes; - 6 . Whereas the national provisions with regard to good repute and good character may be applied as standards for the taking up of activities if establishment takes place; whereas, moreover, in the circurnstances a distinction should be drawn between cases in which the persons coQcerned •have never. yet exercised any activities in the field of architecture (Article 17) and those in which they have already exercised such activities in another Member State (Article 18) ; Whereas, in the case of the provision of services, the requirement of registration with or membership of professional organizations or bodies would, since it is related to the fixed and permanent nature of the activity pursued in the host country, undoubtedly constitute an obstacle to the provider of services by reason of the temporary nature of his activity; whereas this requirement shoul therefore be abolished; whereas, however, in this event control over professional discipline, which is the responsibility of these professional organizations or bodies, should be guaranteed; whereas, to this end, it should be provided, subject to the application of Article 62 of the Treaty, that the person concerned may be required to notify the provision of services to the competent authority of the host Member State; 62.42/85 e ry / DJ rc (Allis'EX Ahereas, as far as the activities of employed persons in the field of architecture are concerned, Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers wi thin the Community ( e ) lays down no specific provisions relating to good character or good repute, professional discipline or use of title for the• professions covered; whereas, depending on the individual Member State, such rules are or may be applicable both to employed and to self—employed persons; whereas activities in the field of architecture are subject in several Member States to possession of a diploma, certificate or other evidence of formal qualifications; whereas such activities are pursued by both employed and self—employed persons, or by the same persons in both capacities in the course of their professional career; whereas, in order to encourage as far as possible the free movement of members of the profession within the Community, it therefore appears necessary to extend this Directive to employed persons in the field of architecture; Whereas this Directive introduces mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications giving access to professional activities, without concomitant co—ordination of national provisions relating to education and training; whereas moreover the number of members of the profession who are concerned varies considerably from one Member State to another; whereas the first few years of application of this Directive must therefore be followed particularly attentively by the Commission, HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: CHAPTER 1: SCOPE Article 1 1 . This Di.rective shall apply to activities in the field of architecture. 2. For the purposes of this Directive, activities in the field of architecture shall be those activities usually pursued under the professional title of architect. CHAPTER 11: DIPLOMAS, CERTIFICATES AND OTHER EVIDENCE OF FORMAL QUALIFICATIONS ENABLING HOLDER TO TAKE UP ACTIVITITIES IN THE FIELD OF ARCHITECTURE UNDER THE PROFESSIONAL TITLE OF ARCHITECT Article 2 Each Member State shall recognize the diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications acquired as a result of education and training fulfilling the requirements of Articles 3 and 4 and awarded to nationals of Member States, by giving such diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications, as regards the right to take up activities referred to in Article 1 and pursue them under the professional title of architect pursuant to Article 23(1) , the same effect in its territory as those awarded by the Member State itself. Article 3 Education and training leading to diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications referred to in Article 2 shall be provided through courses of studies at 6242/85 ery/DJM/emb (ANNEX - 9 - university level concerned principally with architecture. Such studies shall be balanced between the theoretical and practical aspects of architectural training and shall ensure the acquisition of: 1. an ability to create architectural designs that satisfy both aesthetic and technical requirements, 2. an adequate knowledge of the history and theories of architecture and the related arts, technologies and human sciences, 3. a knowledge of the creative arts as an influence on the quality of architectural design, 4. an adequate knowledge of urban design, planning and the skills involved in the planning process, S. an understanding of the relationship between people and buildings, and between buildings and their environment, and of the need to relate buildings and the spaces between them to human needs and scale , 6. an understanding of the profession of architecture and the role of the architect in society, in particular in preparing briefs that take account of social factors, 6242/85 ery/DJM/emb (ANNEX 1 ) 7.of the m tl»d5 of investlgation and preparation for a pro Sect, - v..e etruc%arc-l deeign, constractione2 end ergoc±etod with bailding 9 . adequate )æotyiedse of ph.ycicc-l problezg and technologies e.nd of the function of 00 c: to provide them rith conditiong of comfort and protection aæirst the climate, 10. the necessary to meet userg' requinzents iz-poced by cog t factors rega.ictiozs, eäezuzte of tho industries, organizations, tra=olcti-zc dcciöl concepts into pie-zs into overa21 Article 4 1. The education and training referred to in Article 2 must satisfy the requirements defined in Article 3 and also the following conditions: (a) the total length of education and training shall consist of a minimum of either four years of full-time studies at a university or comparable 6242/85 ery/DJM/df (ANNEX 1 ) - 11 educational establishment, or at least six years of study at a university or comparable educational establishment of which at least three must be full-time; (b) such education and training shall be concluded by successful complet.ion of an examination of degree standard. la. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, recognition under Article 2 shall also be accorded to the training given over 3 years in the "Fachhochschulen" in the in the Federal Republic of Germany in the form in which it exists at the time of notification of this Directive and insofar as it satisfies the requirements laid down in Article 3, giving access to the profession of architect in that country with the professional title of architect, provided that such training is supplemented by a a—year period of professional experience in the Federal Republic of Germany sanctioned by a certificate issued by the professional body which shall previously have established that the work carried out by the person concerned constitutes conclusive proof of the practical application of all the knowledge referred to in Article 3. On the basis of the experience gained and bearing in mind developments in archi tectural training, the Commission shall, 8 years after the end of the period specified in the first subparagraph of Article 31 (1) , submit a report to the Council on the application of this derogation and the appropriate proposals on which the Council shall decide by a qualified majority. 62<2/85 ery/DJM/df - 12 2 . Recognition under Article 2 shall also be accorded to education and training which, as part of a social betterment scheme or a part—time university course, conforms to the requirements of Article 3 and leads to an examination in architecture successfully completed by persons who have been employed in architecture for not less than 7 years under the supervision of an architect or firm of architects. This examination must be of degree standard and be equivalent to the final examination referred to in paragraph 1 (b) . Article 5 1 . Nationals of a Member State authorized to hold the professional title of architect pursuant to a -e aw giving the competent authority of a Member State this possibility for nationals of Member States who have particularly distinguished themselves by their achievements in the field of architecture shall be considered as meeting the requirements laid down for the pursuit of architectural activities under the professional title of architect. 2. In the case of those referred to in paragraph 1 a certificate issued by the Member State of which the holder is a national or from which he comes shall constitute proof of the status of architect. 62<2/es ery/DJM/1r Article 6 Certificates issued by the competent authorities of the Federal Republic of Germany attesting the equivalence of qualifications awarded after 8 May 1945 by the competent authorities of the German Democratic Republic with the formal qualifications referred to in Article 2 shall be recognized under the conditions laid down in that Article. Article 7 1 . Each Member State shall communicate as soon as possible, simultaneously to the other Member States and to the Commission, the list of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications which are awarded within its territory and which meet the criteria laid down in Articles 3 and 4, together with the establishments and authorities awarding them. The first list shall be sent within twelve months of notification of the Directive. Each Member State shall likewise communicate any amendments made as regards the diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications which are awarded within its territory, in particular those which no longer meet the requirements of Articles 3 and 4. 2 . For information purposes, the lists and the amendments thereto shall be published by the Commission in the Official Journal of the European Communi ties after expiry of a three—month period following their communication. However, in the cases referred to in Article 8, the publication of a diploma, certificate or other 6242/85 ery/DJM/1r evidence of qu:llficaticng chall be deferred. -Coagel.åcted ligto be public-hed pricåicaily by the Co=icsion. f.r±iclo 8 If a Member State or the. doubts as to whether a diploau, ce i cate or other evidence of Ccrce2 qualifications meets the laid in 3 tad 4, the Co=isgioa 3h211 the matter before the E vigor-y Coz=ttce three acaths o: to Article 7 (t). {he Coeittee shall deliver its o ±nion vath±n three monthe icate or other cvldezce o: Co.-z-22 qualifications e.heii be N blie.hed he three bt2thg foilotnng i.e.livery o: the or expiry of the dee-å>no for doh very thereof except the following fio cages: — 7here the Lezber State the cati= t:zde 0'.i.rsuczt to Article 7 (1) — where a Member State or tbO Commission fizpicacnte kx-ticle 169 or 170 the 'ricer to the zcttor before the Cc•art of Cuc "ice tae Du-ropecz Articlo 9 tene Advico:-y nay be concv2ted by e State or the Co.—ice ion vhenever L'e:nber State or thc Cc=iecicn hag doubte es to Whether d%lcza, certificate or other evidence _ of formal quall f i ceticnc includcd pabliched ± h the Official Cour•aal of tho c till neetE the 62<2/85 e ry/DJ rc requirements of Articles 3 and 4. The Committee shall deliver its opinion within three months. 2 . The Commission shall withdraw a diploma from one of the lists published in the Official Journal of the European Communities either in agreement with the Member State concerned or following a ruling by the Court of Justice. Chapter 111: DIPLOMAS, CERTIFICATES AND OTHER EVIDENCE OF OUALIFICATIONS ENABLING THE HOLDER TO TAKE UP ACTIVITIES IN THE FIELD OF ARCHITECTURE BY VIRTUE OF ESTABLISEED RIGHTS OR EXISTING NATIONAL PROVISIONS Article 10 Each Member State shall recognize the diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications set out in Article 11, awarded by other Member States to nationals of the Member States, where such nationals already possess these qualifications at the time of notification of the Directive or their course of studies leading to such diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications commences during the third academic year at the latest following such notification, even if those qualifications do not fulfil the minimum requirements laid down in Chapter Il, by giving them as regards the taking up and pursuit of the activities referred to in Article 1 and subject to compliance with the provisions of Article 23, the same effect within its territory as the diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications which it awards in architecture. 6242/85 e ry / DJ rc - Article 11 The diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications referred to in Article 10 are as follows: (a) in Germany — the diplomas awarded by higher institutes of fine arts (Dipl.—ing. , Architekt (HfbK) ) ; the diplomas awarded by the departments of architecture of "Technische Nochschulen 't , of technical universities, of universities and, insofar as these ins* ituticns have been merged into ' 'Gesamthochschulen", of "Gesamthochschulen" (Dipl . —Ing. and any other title which may be laid d0',.n later for holders of these diplomas) ; — the diplomas awarded by the departments of architecture of "Fachhochschulen" and, insofar as tm = v institutions have been merged into "Gesamthochschulen" , by the departments of architecture of t 'Gesamthcchschulen 'l , accompanied, where the period of study is less than four years but at least three years, by a certificate attesting to a four—year period o? professional experience in the Federal Republic of Ger7 any issued by the professional body in accordance with Article 4(1a) (Ingenieur grad. and any other title which may be laid down later for holders of these diplomas) ; 6242/85 e ry / DJ .'•'./emb ( — the diplomas (Prüfungszeugnisse) awarded before 1 January 1973 by the departments of architecture of "Ingenieurschulen t ' and of "Werkkunstschulen" , accompanied by a certificate from the competent authorities to the effect that the person concerned has passed a test of his formal Qualifications in accordance with Article 13; (b) in Be lei um the diplomas awarded by the higher national schools of archi tee ture or the higher national institutes of architecture ( archi tecte — architect) ; — the diplomas awarded by the higher provincial school of architecture of Hasselt (architect) ; — the diplomas awarded by the Royal Academies of Fine Arts (architecte architect) ; the diplomas awarded by the "écoles Saint—Luc" (architecte — architect) ; university diplomas in civil engineering, accompanied by a traineeship certificate awarded by the association of architects entitling the holder to hold the professional title of architect (architecte — architect) ; the diplomas in architecture awarded by the central or State examining board for architecture (architecte — architect) ; 6242/85 ery / DJ M/ emb - 18 - the civil engineering/architecture diplomas and architecture/ engineering diplomas awarded by the faculties of applied sciences of the universities and by the Poly technical Faculty of Mons (ingénieur-architecte, ingenieur-archi tect) ; c) in Denmark — the diplomas awarded by the National Schools of Architecture in Copenhagen and Ärhus (arkitekt) ; — the certificate of registration issued by the Board of Architects pursuant to Law No 202 of 28 May 1975 (registreret arkitekt) ; diplomas awarded by the Higher Schools of Civil Engineering (bygningskonstruktdr) , accompanied by a certificate from the competent authorities to the effect that the person ccncerned has passed a test of his formal qualifications in accordance with Article 13; (d) in France — the Government architect's diplorna awarded by the ;.linistry of Education until 1959, and subsequently by the Ministry of Cultural Affairs (architecte DPLG) ; the diplomas awarded by the "Ecole spéciale d' architecture" (architecte DESA) ; €.2<2/85 ery/DJM/pe — the diplomas awarded since 195S by the department of architec— ture of the "Ecole national e supérieure des Arts et Industries de Strasbourg" (formerly the "Ecole national e d t ingénieurs de Strasbourg") (architecte ENSAIS) ; in Greece the engineering/ architecture diplomas awarded by the METSOVION POLYTECHNiON of Athens, together with a certificate issued by Greece 's Technical Chamber conferring the right to pursue activities in the field of architecture; — the engineering/ archi tecture diplomas awarded by the ARISTOTELION POLYTECENION of Salonik-ka, together with a certificate issued by Greece's Technical Chamber conferring the right to pursue activities in the field of architecture • the engineering/ civil engineering diplomas awarded by the METSOVION POLYTECHNION of Athens, together with a certificate issued by Greece's Technical Chamber conferring the right to pursue activities in the field of architecture; the engineering/ civil engineering diplomas awarded by the ARISTOTELION POLYTECHNION of Salonikka, together with a certificate issued by Greece's Technical Chamber conferring the right to pursue activities in the field of architecture; 6242/85 e •-y/DJl.1/pe ( ANNEX 1 ) — the diplomas awarded since 1955 by the department of architec— ture of the "Ecole nationale supérieure des Arts et Industries de Strasbourg" (formerly the "Ecole national e d' ingénieurs de Strasbourg") (architecte ENSAIS) ; in Greece the engineering/ architecture diplomas awarded by the METSOViON POLYTECHNiON of Athens, together with a certificate issued by Greece 's Technical Chamber conferring the right to pursue activities in the field of architecture; the engineering/ architecture diplomas awarded by the ARISTOTELION POLYTECHNION of Salonikka, together with a certificate issued by Greece 's Technical Chamber conferring the right to pursue activities in the field of architecture; the engineering/ civil engineering diplomas awarded by the METSOVION POLYTECHNION of Athens, together with a certificate issued by Greece's Technical Chamber conferring the right to pursue activities in the field of architecture; the engineering/ civil engineering diplomas awarded by the ARISTOTELION POLYTECHNION of Salonikka, together with a certificate issued by Greece 's Technical Chamber conferring the right to pursue activities in the field of architecture; e / DJ M / pe - 20 - ( f) in Ireland the degree of Bachelor of Archi tecture awarded by the National University of Ireland (B. Arch. (NUi) ) to architecture graduates of University College, Dublin; — the diploma of degree standard in architecture awarded by the College of Technology, Bolton Street, Dublin (Dipl. Arch. ) ; the Certificate of Associateship of the Royal Institute of Architects of Ireland (ARIA I) ; — the Certificate of Membership of the Royal .:nstitute of Architects of Ireland (MRI Al) ; (g) in Italy "laurea in architettura t ' diplomas awarded by universities, polytechnic institutes and the Higher Institutes of Architecture of Venice and Reggio Calabria, accompanied by the diploma entitling the holder to pursue independently the profession of architect, awarded by the Minister for Education after the candidate has passed, before a competent board, the State examination entitling him to pursue independently the profession of architect (dot t. Architetto) ; ery/DJM/cc "laurea in ingeneria" diplomas in construction engineering awarded by universities and polytechnic institutes, accompanied by the diploma entitling the holder to pursue independently a profession in the field of architecture, awarded by the Minister for Education after the candidate has passed, before a competent board, the State examination entitling him to pursue the profession independently (dot t. Ing. Architetto or dot t. Ing. in ingegneria civil e) ; (h) in the Netherlands the certificate stating that its holder has passed the degree examination in architecture awarded by the departments of architecture of the technical colleges of Delft and Eindhoven (bouwkundig ingenieur) ; the diplomas awarded by State—recognized archi tectural academies (architect) ; the diplomas awarded until 1971 by the former architectural colleges (Hcger Bouwkunstonderricht) (archi tect HBO) ; the diplomas awarded until 1970 by the former architectural colleges (Voortgezet Bouwhunstonderricht) (architect VBO) ; e ry / DJ i•l/cc .22 the certificate stating that the person concerned has passed an exarnination organized by the Architects Council of the "Bond van Nederlandse Architecten" (Crder of Dutch Architects, BNA) (architect) ; the diploma of the "Stich ting Instituut voor Architectuur" ("Institute of Architecture" Foundation) (I VA) awarded on completion of a course organized by this foundation and extending over a minimum period of four years (architect) , accompanied by a certificate from the competent authorities to the effect that the person concerned has passed a test of his formal qualifications in accordance with Article 13; a certificate issued by the competent authorities to the effect that, before the date of entry into force of this Di rective, the person concerned passed the degree examination of " Äandidaat in de bouwkunde" organized by the technical colleges of Delft and Eindhoven and that, over a period of at least five years immediately prior to that date, he pursued architectural activities the nature and importance of which, in accordance with Netherlands requirements, guarantee that he is competent to pursue those activities (architect) ; — a certificate issued by the competent authorities only to persons who have reached the age of 40 years before the date of entry into force of this Directive, certifying that, over a period of at least five years immediately prior to that date, the person concerned had pursued architectural activities the nature and importance of which, in accordance with Netherlands requirements, 6242/85 ery/DJÆ/df guarantee that he is competent to pursue those activities (architect) ; The certificates referred to in the preceding two indents need no longer be recognized as from the date of entry into force of laws and regulations in the Netherlands governing the taking up and pursuit of architectural activities under the professional title of architect, insofar as under such provisions those certificates do not authorize the taking up of such activities under that professional title. ( i ) in the United Kingdom the qualifications awarded following the passing of examinations of: — the Royal Institute of British Architects; — Schools of Architecture at: = universities — polytechnics = colleges = academies = schools of technology and art, which were, or are at the time of the adoption of this Directive, recognized by the Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom for the purpose of admission to the Register (Architect); 6242/85 ery / DJ M/d f certificates issued to nationals of bier.ber States by Member States which between the time of notification and implementation of the Directive introduce regulations governing the taking up and pursuit of activities in the field of architecture under the professional title of architect, stating that the holder has received authorization to bear the professional title of architect at the time when the Directive is implemented and has effectively exercised the activities in question under such regulations for at least 3 consecutive years during the 5 years preceding the issue of the certificate. Article 13 The test of formal qualifications referred to in Article 11 ( a) , fourth indent, Article 11 (c ) , third indent, and Article 11 (g) , sixth indent, shall comprise an appraisal of plans drawn up and carried out by the person concerned while actually pursuing activities in the field of architecture for not less than six years. Article 14 Certificates issued by the competent authorities of the Federal Republic of Germany attesting the equivalence of qualifications awarded from 8 May 1945 onwards by the competent authorities of the German Democratic Republic with the formal qualifications listed in Article 11 shall be recognized under the conditions listed in that Article. ery/DJM/1r - 26 - Article 15 The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg shall be authorized, without prejudice to Article 5, to suspend application of the provisions of Chapter Ill (Articles 10 to 12 inclusive) as regards the recognition of non-university diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications, in order to avoid distortions of competition, for a transitional period of four and a half years from the notification of this Directive. Chatter IV: USE OF TITLE Article 16 1 . Without prejudice to Article 23, host Member States shall ensure that the nationals of Member States w' ao fulfil the conditions laid down in Chapter Il or Chapter Ill have the right to use their lawful academic title and, where appropriate , the abbreviation thereof deriving from their Member State o: origin or the I•lember State from which they come, in the laazuage of that State. Host Member States may require this title to be followed by the name and location of the establishment or examining board which awarded it. 2 . If the academic title used in the Member State of origin, or in the Member State from which a foreign national comes, can be confused in the host t•lember State with a title requiring, in that State, additional education or training which the person concerned has not undergone, the host Member State may require such a person e ry / DJ M/ rc to use Member by the Chapter V: the title employed in the Member State of origin or the State from which he comes in a sui table f omn to be specified host Member State. PROVISIONS TO FACILITATE THE EFFECTIVE EXERCISE OF RIGHT OF ESTABLISHMENT AND FREEDOM TO PROVIDE SEP.ViCFS A. Provisions soecifi.c to the right of establishment Article 17 1 . A host I•iember State which requires of its nationals proof of good character or good repute when they take up for the first time the activities referred to in Article 1 shall accept as sufficient evidence, in respect of nationals of other Member States, a certificate issued by a competent authority in the Member State of origin or in the Member State from which the foreign national comes, attesting that the requirements of that Member State as to good character or good repute for taking up the activity in question have been met. 2 . Where the Member State of origin or the Member State from which the foreign national comes does not require proof of good character or good repute of persons wishing to take up the activity in question for the first time, the host Member State may require of nationals of the Member State of origin or of the Member State from which the foreign national comes an extract from the "judicial record" or, failing this, an equivalent document issued by a competent authority in the Member State of origin or the Member State from which the foreign national comes. e ry/DJ rc 3 . Where the country of origin or the country from which the foreign national comes does not issue the documentary proof referred to in paragraph 2, such proof may be replaced by a declaration on oath — or, in States where there is no provision . for declaration on oath, by a solemn declaration - made by the person concerned before a competent judicial or administrative authority or, where appropriate, a notary in the country of origin or the country from which the person comes; such authority or notary shall issue a certificate attesting the authenticity of the declaration on oath or solemn declaration. 4 . If the host Member State has detailed knowledge of a serious matter which has occurred outside its territory pr:or to the establishment of the person concerned in that St e te, or if it knows that the declaration referred to in paragraph 3 contains incorrect information and if the matter or information is likely to affect the taking up within its territory of the activity concerned, it may inform the Member State of or} gin or the blember State from which the foreign national comes. The Member State of origin or the Member State from which the foreign national comes shall verify the accuracy of the facts insofar as they might affect the taking up of the activity in question in that Member State. The authorities in that State shall themselves decide on the nature and extent of the investigation to be made and shall inform the host Member State of any consequential action which they take with regard to the certificates or documents they have issued. Member States shall ensure the confidentiality of the information forwarded. e ry / DJ / cc Article 18 Where, in a host Member State, laws, regulations or admin is— trative provisions impose requi rements as to good character or good repute, including provisions in relation to the pursuit of the activities referred to in Article 1 for disciplinary action in respect of serious professional misconduct or conviction on criminal offences, the Member State of origin or the Member State from which the foreign national comes shall forward to the host Member State all necessary information regarding any measures or disciplinary action of a professional or administrative nature taken against the person concerned or any criminal penalties concerning the practise of his profession in the Member State of origin or in the Member State from which he came. 2 . If the host blember State has detailed knowledge of a serious matter which has occurred outside its territory prior to the establishment of the person concerned in that State and which is likely to affect the pursuit of the activity concerned in that State, it may inform the Member State of origin or the Member State from which the foreign national comes. The Member State of origin or the Member State from which the foreign national comes shall verify the accuracy of the facts insofar as they might affect the pursuit of the activity concerned in that State. The authorities of that State shall themselves decide on the nature and extent of the investigation to be made and shall inform the host State of any consequential action which they take with regard to the information forwarded under paragraph 1. Member States shall ensure the confidentiality of the . Information forwarded. Article 19 Documents issued in accordance with Articles 17 and 18 may not be presented more than three months after their date of issue. Article 20 1 . The procedure for authorizing the person conce -sned to take up the activi ties referred to in Article 1, pursuant to Articles 17 and 18, must be completed as soon as possible and not later than three months after presentation of all the documents relating to that person, without prejudice to delays resulting from any appeal that may be made upon termination of this procedure. 2 . In the cases referred to in Article 17 (4) and Article 18 (2) , a request for re-examination shall suspend the period laid down in paragraph 1 . The State consulted shall give its reply within a period of three months. On receipt of the reply or at the end of the period the host Member State shall continue with the procedure referred to in paragraph 1 . 62<2/85 ery/DJ ( AN',IEX Article 21 Where a host Member State requires its own nationals wishing to take up or pursue the activities referred to in Article 1 to take an oath or make a solemn declaration and where the form of such oath or declaration cannot be used by nationals of other Member States, that Member State shall ensure that an appropriate and equivalent form of oath or declaration is offered to the person concerned. B. Provisions soecific to the orovision of services Article 22 1 . Where a Member State requires of its own nationals wishing to take up or pursue the activities referred to in Article 1 either an authorization from or membership of or registration with a professional organization or body, that Member State shall, in the case of provision of services, exempt nationals of Member States from that requirement. The person concerned shall provide services with the same rights and obligations as nationals of the host State; in particular he shall be subject to the rules of conduct of a professional or administrative nature which apply in that Member State. 6242/85 ery / DJ For this purpoge and in addition to the declaration to in paragraph 2 relating to the provision of services, Member States may, so as to permit the implementation of the provisions relating to professional conduct in force in their territory, require automatic temporary registration or pro forma registration with a professional organization or body or in a register, provided that this registration does not delay or in any way complicate the provision of services or impose any additional costs on the person providing the services. Where a host Member State adopts a measure pursuant to the second subparagraph or becomes aware of facts which run counter to these provisions, it shall forthwith inform the Member State in which the person concerned is es-•.ablished. 2. The host I.lember State may require the person concerned to make a prior declaration to the competent authori ties about the services to be provided where they involve the execution o? a project on its territory. 3 . Pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2, the host Member State may require the person concerned to supply one or more documents containing the following particulars: — the declaration referred to in paragraph 2, — a certificate stating that the person concerned is lawful Iv pursuing the activities in question in the Member State where he is established, 6242/85 - 33 - — a certificate that the person concerned holds the diploma(s) , certificate(s) or other evidence o: formal qualifications requi red for the provision of the services in question and that those qualifications comply with the criteria in Chapter Ii or are as listed in Chapter Ill of this Directive; — where appropriate, the certificate referred to in Article 23(2) . 4 . The document or documents specified in paragraph 3 may not be produced more than twelve months after their date of issue. 5 . Where a Member State temporarily or perrnanently deprives, in whole or in part, one of its nationals or a national of another Member State established in its territory of the right to pursue the activities referred to in Article 1, it shall, as appropriate, ensure the temporary or permanent wi of the certificate referred to in the second indent of paragraph 3. C. Provisions common to the right of establishment and freedom to provide services Article 23 1 . Where in a host Member State the use of the professional title of architect relating to the activities referred to in Article 1 is regulated, nationals of other Member States who fulfil the conditions laid down in Chapter Il or whose diplomas, certificates or other evidence of formal qualifications referred to in Article 11 have been recognized under Article 10 shall 62<2/85 ery/DJM/1r 34 •ate be vested with the professional title of the host Member and the abbreviated form thereof once they have fulfilled any conditions as to practical training experience laid down by that State. If in a Member State the taking up of the activities referred to in Article 1 or the pursuit of such activities under the title of architect is subject, in addition to the requirements set out in Chapter Il or to the possession of a diploma, certificate or other evidence of formal qualifications as referred to in Article 11, to the completion of a given period of practical experience, the Member State concerned shall accept as sufficient evidence a certificate from the country of origin or previous residence stating that appropriate practical experience for a correspm.iding period has been acquired in that country . The certificate referred to in Article 4(1a) shall be recognized as sufficient proof for the application of this paragraph. Article 24 1 . Where the host Member State requires its nationals wishing to take up or pursue the activities referred to in Article 1 to furnish proof of no previous bankruptcy and where the information provided pursuant to Articles 17 and 18 does not contain proof thereof, that State shall accept a declaration 62<2/85 ery/DJM/1r J ) on oath — or, in States where there is no provision for declaration on oath, a solemn declaration - made by the person concerned before a competent judicial or administrative authority, a notary or qualified professional or trade body of the State of origin or of the State from which the person comes. Where, in the host Member State, sound financial standing must be proved, that Idember State shall accept attestations issued by banks of other Member States as being equivalent to attestations issued in its own territory. 2 . The documents referred to in paragraph 1 may not be produced later than three months after their date of issue. Article 25 1 . Where a host l•lember State requires its nationals wishing to take up or pursue the activities referred to in Article 1 to furnish. proof that they are covered by insurance against the financial consequences of their professional liability that State shall accept certificates issued by the insurance undertakings of other Member States as being equivalent to certificates issued in its own territory. Such certificates must specify that the insurer has complied with the laws and regulations in force in the host country as regards the conditions and extent of cover 62<2/ es e ry / DJ i•l/lr (AIS'NEX 2 . The certificates referred to in paragraph 1 may no. be produced later than three months after their date of issue. Art.icle 26 1 . Member States shall take the measures necessary to enable the persons concerned to obtain information on the laws and, where applicable, on the professional ethics of the host Member State. For this purpose, Member States may set up information centres from which such persons may obtain the necessary information. In the event of establishment, the host Member States may require them to contact these centres. 2 . Member States may set up the cent-res referred to in paragraph 1 under the auspices of the competent authorities and bodies which they designate before expiry of the time limit laid down in the first subparagraph of 31 ( 1 3. Member States shall ensure that, where appropriate, the persons concerned acquire, in their own interest and in that of their clients, the linguistic. knowledge needed to follow their profession in the host country. 6242/85 ery /DJ M/ - 37 - Chapter VI: FINAL PROVISIONS Article 27 Where legitimate doubt exists, the host Member State may require the competent authorities of another F.ember State to confirm the authenticity of the diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications awarded in that other Member State and referred to in Chapters Il and ill. Article 28 Within the time limit laid down in the first subparagraph of Article 31 ( 1 ) , States shall designate the authorities and bodies empowered to issue or receive diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications as well as the documents and information referred to in this Directive, and shall forthwith inform the other Member States and the Cornmission the reof . Article 29 This Directive shall also apply to nationals of Member States who, in accordance th Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68, are pursuing or will pursue as employed persons the activities referred to in Article 1. Article 30 Not more than three years after the end of the period provided for in the first subparagraph of Article 31 ( 1) , the Commission shall review the Directive on the basis of experience and if necessary submit to the Council proposals for amendments 6242/85 e ry / DJ 1 r (ANNEX - 38 - after consulting the Advi sory Com:nittee on Education and Train i az in the Field of Architecture. The Council shall exa;nine any such proposals wi thin one year. Article 31 1 . The Member States shall take the measures necessary to comply with this Directive wi thin twenty-four months of its notification and shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. Member States shall, however, have a period of three years from the date of notification within which to comply with Article 22 of this Directive. 2 . Member States shall corntnunj.cate to the Commission the texts of the main provisions of national law which they acnpt in the field covered by this Directive. Article 32 This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Done at For the Council The President 62<2/85 ery/DJM/1r (ANNEX 1 ) covx;c.E-, OF Having regerä to the 'I haropcæ2 sconczlc C omzu-n1tY9 Eav±n.€ roszx-ä to the (-1222t Docizlcz by CozziU8icz, (9 its ?.esolüti.cn 6 1974 the rec..it±oa of certificates other of fort2--i (94) the Council declared itself in favour of the establichze-nt of the context of the recogÆticz cf diploazs, certificates other evidezce qualificzticac in it is i ±portæ-.t to czgure cc:-rparabl'o• high of education Fnerees, orie:• to to the cc•r-Lcvczezt of %.is an Advisory Co—zittee should be cet up to cc?vise the The citations and recitals will be re—examined when the text is finalized by the Working Party of Legal and Linguistic Experts. see R/ 2751/77 102. OJ No C ea, 28. 8. 1974 , p. 1 . 6242/85 ery/DJM/pe HAS DECIDEC AS FC Ln gory tho Yield of , here i.".dtc:• cha-Il ba up 'Ü,der tho C"" pic co o: tho scion. 'Article 2 Cho tt=k of the cht-ll be to help to cacure cozpcrabiy hi ch of czuc=tion cza for crchitect3 It chez I out the teczc of to tho c±acatioz tre-i-ni.-ng zethoå2 ena the cczte.üte i cvai and C; tractv•e of theoreticc.-l ud practicci counc;o the %ezber Stateo; — taccuss±oz oozsu2t•at1cz the obiect of co.=az •to tho ate.nd?.xd to be attained 12 the of crchitccte c.ppropazte, to c. tracta:-o cad coatczt cuch c&ocotic.n criteria to 62<2/85 ery / DJ vee c•nc-.ii carrot out the to it the Directiv•30 tasks assigned 4 . The Cor=ittee eh e 'l the Uenber States itc vien it considcr= it appropzk.te; cpa ".zc,tiozs for c=czåzezte to be r:ade to the of architects in Directive Coz-it te the cz cz e-zy other natter which the Cc --v• H Ctl. .%0$ to in relation to the education end of architects. ery / DJ Mpe 3 1 . The Committee shall consist of three experts from each Member State as follows: - one expert from the practising profession; - one expert from the universities or equivalent teaching institutions in the field of architecture; — one expert from the competent authori ties of the blember State. 2 . There shall be an alternate for each member. Alternates may attend the meetings of the Committee. 3. The members end alternates described in paragraohs 1 and 2 shall be nominated by the 'eiember States. The members referred to in the first and second indents of paragraph 1 and their alternates shall be nominated on a proposal frc,-r, the practising members of the profession or the universities or equivalent teaching institutions in the field of archi tecture . The members and alternates thus nominated shall be appointed by the Council. 62<2/dS 4 1 . The term of office of members of the Committee shall be three years. Upon expiry of this period, the members of the Committee shall remain in office until they are replaced or their term of office is renewed. 2 . The term of office of a may end before expiry of the period of three years by virtue of the resi.gnation or death of the member or his replacement by another person in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 2. Such an appointment shall be for the remainder of the ter-• of office. Article S The Committee shall elect a Chairman and two Vice—Chal r:-r.en from its own membership. it shall adopt its own rules of procedure . The a-enda for meetings shall be drawn up by the Chairman of the Committee in consultation with the Co.-.traiss:or, . 62.12/ e S ery / DJ (ANNEX 6 The Committee may set up working parties and may call upon or allow observers or experts to assist it in connection with any particular aspect of its work. Article 7 The secretariat shall be provided by the Commission. Done at For the Council The President 62<2/85 ery/DJi•I/ernb (ANNEX 11 ) Draft COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION concern inc holders of a diploma in architecture awarded in a third countrv ar:d nationals o:' tLhird countries who are of Greek origin and hold a aioloma awarded in a State THE COUNCIL in adopting Directive / EEC on the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in architecture, including measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment and freedom to provide services ( noting that this Directive refers only to diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications awarded to nationals of l.':ernber States by other Member States; Anxious, however, to take account of the special position of nationals of Member States who have studied in a third country and who hold a diploma in archi tecture recocnized under the legislation of a State; Anxious also to take account of the special situation of Greek— speaking nationals of third countries who are of Greek origin and who have studied in a State and hold archi tectural diplomas recognized under Greek law; 62-12/85 ery/DJVMdf Hereby recommends the Governments of the Idernber States to facili cate the taking up and pursuit of activities in the field of architecture within the Community by the persons referred to above by recognizing these diplomas in their terri tories. 62<2/85 e ry / DJ i•i/clf ( ANNEx 111 ) ,t.l .'NEX for entry in the minutes of the Council meeting at which the Directive is adopted 1 . Stater:ent by the Council cn the definition of the persons cove re: "The Council conf i rms that it is to be understood that freedom of establishment , particularly for the holders of certificates obtained in other Member States, must be accorded on the seme terms to nationals of other blemter States and to nationals cf the State concerned, as is the. case with the other Directives. ' ' contents I 'l•.'he re leciti.7.ate doubt exists concerning the authenticity of docurnents which a national of another State has submitted with a view to enjoying the right of establishment and freedom to provide services, the host State may take all appropriate s zeps to contact the compete.".v authorities and bodies of the other States of the Cor..munity in order to check the authenticity of these documents and the veracity of their contents. The States undert=rs necessary arrangements for this co—operation to be put into effect." 3 . Statement bv the Council on the scote of the Directive "The Council notes that, a longs ide architects, various professional groups pursue activities in the field o f construction, in oarticular encineers and quantity surveyors. The Council agrees that the status in their cov.ntries of the members of these groups is in no way affected by this Directive and that the V.ember States are not obliged to change their la•ss, regulations and administrative provisions 6242/85 ery/DJ M/ 1 r (ANNEX i v) relating thereto. The of these professional groups may continue to pursue their activities in other States as hitherto with the same rights and obligations as nationals of those States. " a . Statement by the Council on landscape archi tects, garden desi-ners, interior designers and planners "The Council notes that in some Member States there is a tendency towards tY.e demarcation of certain professions — such as those of landscape archi tect, garden designer, interior designer and town—planner — and requests the Commission to study the problems raised by this development and, where appropriate, to submit the necessary proposals. " 5 . Statement bv the Council and the Commission on comoanies or r.-r s "The Council and the Commission note that, Community co—ordination, tine laws, regulations and Administrative provisions of the States relatino to L. , . - ak . ng up end pursuit by companies or firms of activities in the sphere of the liberal professions continue to apply; the Council re i its request that the Commission should as soon as possible submic proposals for the alignment of these national provisions. 6 . Statement by the Council on freedom of movement for engineers "The Council emphasizes that it is eager to see the free movement of engineers facilitated within the Community as soon as possible. It will therefore do its utmost to have this brought about by the time the measures to facilitate freedom to provide services in the field of architecture are due to come into force under this Directive. " 7. Statement by the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council , concerning refugees "THE REPRESENTATIVES OF GOVERNMENTS OF . STATES WITHIN COUNCIL, Having regard to the statement on refugees made at the 128th meeting of the Council, held in Brussels on 2 S l'iarch 1964, at 6242/85 e ry / DJ M/ pe ( ANNE)'. IV) - 3 - which the Council adopted the Regulation on freedom of movement for workers within the Community anci the Directive on the abolition of restrictions on movement and residence within the Community for workers from Member States and their families; Anxious to take account of the special situation of refugeees in the spirit of the international inst ruraents in force, having regard also to the wishes expressed by the Executive Co:nmi t tee of the Prograrnme of the United Nations High for Refugees ; Whereas, by virtue of the abovementioned statement, refugees employed in the activities referred to in the Council Directive of .. are to enjoy the most favourable treatment possible; Anxious to grant to refugees resident in a Member State and pursuing an activity on a self—employed basis the same treatment as that granted to those pursuing this activity as employed persons; Noting that the situation of refugees cannot be deale •ith under the provisions of the Treaty concerning the right of establishment and freedom to provide services, HEREBY STATE THAT: the taking up and pursuit in their territories of an activity as a self-employed person covered by the Council Directive ofin respect of establishment or the provision of services, by refugees recognized as such within the meaning of the Convention of 1931 and established in the territory of another '•'ember State of the Community, must be given especially favourable consideration, in particular in order to accord such refugees the most favourable treatment possible in their territories. " 8 . Statement the Council on the concept of professional organizazions and boil es "The Council acrees that wherever reference is made in this Directive to professional or e aniz.ations and bodies, the terms also cover bodies established under public law." 9 . Statement bv the Council on Article 4 "The Council states that the terms "comparable educational establish.rr,ent" and "examination of degree standard" are concepts not defined solely in terms of the national law of the 62<2/85 ery/DJ rc State co.v-,cerneu , aor do they imply that Che educational est ash— ment is part of a university under the law of that State. "The Council states that the phrase t ' co.-npetent authority" should be taken to mean either a competent public authority or a body which, under national law, is authorized for the same func t ions . 't O. Statements by the Council and the Commission on Article < "The Council and the Commission agree that the periods of training incluö.ea in the training concluded by an examination do not affect the full—time nature of such training. " "The Council and the Commission state that Article 4 of this Directive, which provides for a special arrangement for holders of diplor.as awarded by the German ' 'Fachhochschulen" , is wi thout preiudice to other Con•.mission orooosals concerninc the right of establishment and freedom to provide services in the technical field t. '.' 1 1 . Statement bv the Council and the Commission on Article 11 "The Council and the Commission state that, without prejudice to referred to in Article 11 entitle their holders to pursue the activities referred co in Article 1 under the professional title of architect in the host State , even if that State allows only holders o. an architect's diploma to take up and pursue the said activities. 12 . Statement by the Council on Article 12, second indent "The Council is prepared to consider extending the time—limit laid down in the first subparagraph of Article 31 ( 1 ) regarding the implementation of Article 12, second indent, in cases where Member States which do not have regulations governing the taking up and pursuit of activities in the field of architecture under the professional title of' architect at the time of notification of the Directive are unable to introduce such regulations before the Directive is implemented. 13 . Statement by the Council on Articles 17 and 18 "The Council notes that Articles 17 and 18 concern the procedure for the establishment of the person concerned in the host country. It follows from this that Articles 17 (4) and 18(2) 6242/65 ( Al.'!.'EX IV) can apply only to a "serious matter" which itas occurred prior to the establishment of the person ccneerned in the host country and prior to his pursuing the activity in question in accordance wi th that country's laws. Any act committed thereafter by the person concerned will there— fore be subject to assessment by the competent authorities in the host country in the same light as acts committed by nationals of that country pursuing the same activities therein. This applies not only to the present Directive but also to those Directives already adopted which contain similar provisions. As regards the text of these provisions, attention should be drawn to the wording used in the present Directive which is different from that used in the Directive on the mutual recognition of doctors ' diplomas ( • ) and is designed to remove any doubt as to the interpre tat ion of the provisions concerned •, f cr this reason, the words prior to the establishment of t.he concerned in that State" have been introduced into the provisions and, in the Italian version of the Directive, the word ' 'sopravvenuti" has been replaced by 't avvenuti" The Council also notes that, for the purposes of applying Article IS, States agree to observe the principle that, except for cases relating to acts cornmitted in its own territory, the host Member State may not suspend or withdraw the right of establishment unless the particulars communicated by the State of origin or Member State frorn which the foreign national comes include penalties which temporarily or permanently depriv a che person concerned of hi s right to pursue his activity in that Article 22 ( 1 ) should be interpreted as Member States are cove r od by the Directive, includinc in particular those persons who are nationals of the count r.' in which the service is provided but who are established in another I•tember State. L 167, 30 . 6 . 1975 62<2/85 e ry / DJ l•l/cc 15 . Stat.e:r.ent b • the Council on the oractical ex erience referred to in Arc i cle 23( 2 "The Council states that it interprets "appropri ate practical experience" as meaning archi tectural experience acquired in work of which the level and nature are generally regarded as consistent with the qualifications of a person wishing to practise under the professional title of architect. " 16 . Statement bv the Council and the Com.mission on the (i i certificates and o Zher evidence o L f or-:pl enabling the holder to take activizies in the field -he t i z 1 e of referred to i r, Chao ter IJ of "The Council and the Cor.-nission note -hat Articles 2 to 9 apply irresoective of the date on w'Æch the diplc.T,as and evidence of formal oualifications in question were awarded. " 17 . Statement by the Council and the Cornr,issi.on on the draft Decision "The Council and the Corn-ission state that the Committee' s rules of procedure, which are to be adopted by the Committee, should specify among other things under what circumstances opinions are to indicate the views expressed by individual Committee members. " 6242/85 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/06d8bc2e9e9ec771db00afad0d9fc55d.pdf 5281a63d7f93c64667907360526128d2 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 BAE Nominating Authorities Description An account of the resource DRAPT . [re Canal,rahe—expen,oe m_thefactionwisdpor:4oe unit the Nomimiatinn 2AyTRi® wate 117 A0_Nominatingauthorifiestothe Gp Nonin of Architectural Education Dear sir, ARCUK recognition procedures We wish to draw your attention, as one of the nominating authorities to the BKaard of Architectural Education, to certain areas in which the board is no longer fulfilling its duféss, and to call for your support in restoring the Board to its statutory function under the Architects Registration Act, 1931. TheBAE,establishedbyparliamine1n93t51,hasthestatutory function of recognising examinations the passing of which qualifies persons for admission to the Register of Architects. its duties are therefore of prime importance both to the profession and to the public interest in that the great majority of architects enter the Register by virtue of having passed an examination approved : by the Board. Unfortunately the board haye, since 1963, delegated if thetr responsibility to assess the standard of courses to an outside non-statutory body whose recommendations x£ form the sole evidence for the approval of courses, the enclosed notes, prepared by the ARCUK Registrar, illustrate the stages by which the board has devolved its responsibilities for assessing courses to this outside body (the Royal Institute of British Architects), and then made some attempt to regain control. From 1932 to 19635 the Board sought evidence, covering all aspects of their courses, from schools wishing to have their courses rec- Ognised, From 1963, however, the board decided to abandon this direct relationship with the schools and rely upon the findings of RIBA quinquennial Visiting boards, the recommendations of which were "rubober-stamped" by the Board.of Architectural Education, in 1974, however, the Board had second thoughts and secured token representaftion on KIBA Visiting boards to the effect that - "€t least one member of each Visiting Board should represent the interests of both ARCUK and the RIBA." (Registrars note p.3) This is the system which prevails. today; in which the ARCUK representative is a minority on an KIBA visiting board, and moreover has to date always been an RIBA member (twice yearly) it approves visiting board recommendation. also. iihen the BAE sits of the KIBA system of assessment of architecture degree courses in the public fonda Wl . ohn 0 e —_ courses solely on the basis It receives no evidence from the Universities themselves nor from the CNAA which operates its ow Nhe sector of higher education, because of the heavy RIBA involvement in the running of the architecture schools, and the complete absence of lay representation on the visiting boards (despite their majority on the HAE), this system cannot be seen to provide members of the Board with adequate impartial evidence on which to base appoval (or otherwise) of courses, The Board has a statutory function by act of parliament; the RIBA, as a4 private institute, owes allegiance only to its membership, In 1974 the Board, recognising this, attempted to regain the initiative by securing ARCUK representation on visiting boards, In 1980, however, the Board has yet to regain that position in which, to return to the Registrar's notes - " if the statutory bAE was properly to undertake the task of recognising examinations in architecture for the purpose of registration, it must have first hand know- ledge of the courses leadin, up tovthose examinations," Wie would like to see the Registrar's sentiments fulfilled, In our view the board, with 75 members, should be capable of making direct contact with the 57 schools whose examinations it recognises, The Board meets again in May 1981 and between now and then we would{to open informal discussions with the nominating authorities with a view to preparing a proposal for discussion by the poard, We would very much like to discuss this with you in more detail and would be most grateful for any initial comments you may have. Yours faithfully, David Burney Bob Maltz (members of the board representing Unattached architects, ) 2. = tTf inL 1} if 1! / Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom ‘ Id TU a 4oan ARCUK Recognition Procedures eee Catia yet In 1932 when the 1931 Act came into operation, the General Purpose Committee of the Board of Architectural Education reported to the Board that it had inserted a notice in the Times, the Builder, the Architects Journal and the Architect and Building News to the effect that the Registration Board were prepared to consider applications, for the recognition of such examinations as a qualification for registration under the Act. The Committee had also sent letters to the RIBA, the IAAS and the FAS, and to ten schools of architecture mentioned in the Second Schedule to the Act, inviting them to supply the following particulars for the consideration of an ad hoc Committee: (1) Present scheme of examination - whether single or a series of examinations. (2) General educational standard demanded for candidates (3) Date of foundation of course or examination, (8) Examination methods, as for example, whether results are approved by a Board of Moderators or External Examiners or otherwise. (7) Names and qualifications of Examiners and subjects taken by then. (10) Any other particulars thought desirable by the school or examining body making the application. (a) by schools for entrance to the course, or (b) by examining bodies for entrance to examination. (4) Figures showing percentage entered, passed and relegated during the last five years, or from such later period as the examination may have been founde (5) Syllabus of course or examination. (6) Questions set for each examination held during the last five years or less period since foundation, (9) Representative work ef five successful candidates both in Testimonies of Study and in examination or examinations themselves, together with programmes for design. Not more than five sheets of original drawings should be submitted of each student's work. Eight members were deputed by the GPC to examine the particulars, drawings etc. received from the applicants, and two computations were made in each case. First the standard and scope of the course and examination as shown by the requirements of the Examiners in preliminary drawings and reports, the subjects included and the quality of the papers set; syllabuses and curricula were consulted; all questions sent in were read and subjects assessed on an agreed basis of comparison, that being the RIBA Intermediate and Final Examinations as being the best known. Secondly, the standard of the work done by the candidates and the standard of marking etc. were assessed. Finally, on these two data, the scope and standard of the examination and the quality of the work submitted, the whole course or examination was given an assessed value. PEEEEEEEEEOOE Oe Over forty years later there can be no objection to the marks of the successful schools being disclosed: 1. Liverpool School of Architecture, University of Liverpool | 44 2.- School of Architecture, The Architectural Association, London 13 3. The Welsh School of Architecture, The Technical College, Cardiff 13 4, School of Architecture, University of Manchester 12 5. The Bartlett School of Architecture, University of London 11 6. Royal Institute of British Architects, Final Examination 10 7. Royal Institute of British Architects, Special Final Examination 10 8. School of Architecture, Leeds College of Art 10 9. School of Architecture, Birmingham 10 By 1949 the requirements for initial recognition had been amplified and each school applying for recognition had to send the Council examples of work as specified below: 1. The syllabus of the course. 2. The present scheme of examination, whether single or a series of examinations. 3. #The date of the foundation of the present scheme of examination. 4, The names and qualifications of the Examiners and the subjects taken by them. 5. Are the results approved by a Board of Moderators and/or External Examiners? If s0, give the names and qualifications of members of the Board or the External Examiners. 6. The general educational standard demanded of candidate entering the school. 7- j##The number of students who entered the course, the number passed and the number of students relegated at the completion of the course during the last three years, or for such shorter period as the complete course has been in existence. 8. A complete set of examination questions set in each year of the course for the past three years, or in the case of the senior years of the course, for such shorter periods as the examinations have been held. 9. In addition, the following drawings, notebooks and examination scripts are to be submitted on behalf of three students who have obtained high marks, and also two others who have just satisfied the Examiners, in each year of the course for the past three years, or for such shorter period as the examinations have been held. If there are fewer than five students in any year of the course the work of all those students shall be submitted. (a) Portfolios of work and/or testimonies of study in each year of the course. (b) Complete sets of students' notebooks for each year of the course. (c) The worked examination papers in each subject in each year of the course. The maximum mark obtainable, the pass mark, and marks actually awarded should be clearly indicated in each case. 10. Any further particulars thought desirable. This procedure was followed in every case, including overseas schools until 1963 _ when ARCUK started to be represented on RIBA first recognition visits to the schools “instead of the schools sending voluminous documentation to the Board of Architectural Education. April, 1980 Kenneth J. Forder Registrar te From 1963, following the increase in the number of schools, a sophisticated system was designed and administered by the RIBA with a roster of architects and architect/educationalists from which visiting teams were drawn. Guides were drawn up for schools to provide information and material prior to visits, as well as guides for conducting visits and reporting on them. Through these quinquennial visits in the 60's the experience of members of Visiting Boards led to increasing expertise in assessing the resources of schools and the standards they achieved. In addition the Visiting Boards took on the task of monitoring the examinations in Professional Practice and Management. These had increased in scope following the introduction of Practical Training in 1961 and the structuring of courses, supervision and examinations had been delegated to the schools, In 1965 the forming of the Commonwealth Board of Architectural Education extended the UK system to schools throughout the Commonwealth on a voluntary basis. During the following years UK members of the RIBA roster were invited to participate in many visits abroad on a ‘sampling’ basis to help in establishing common standards and report to the CBAE. From 1963 until 1974 ARCUK piayed no part in the quinquennial Visiting boards, but in 1974 it was agreed that conditions had changed and that if the statutory BAE was properly to undertake the task of recognizing examinations in architecture for the purpose of registration, it must have first hand knowledge of the courses leading up to these examinations. Hence in 1974 it was agreed that ARCUK should be represented on all the RIBA Visiting Boards to schools whose Part 2 was recognized by the Council. / é 3 } At least one member of each Visiting Board should represent the interests of both ARCUK and the RIBA. On quinquennial Visiting Boards ARCUK has one such representative although in fact frequently two or even three of the members of the Visiting Board are members of the BAE or Council; but when a School requests initial recognition of their Part 2 course ARCUK has two to three members on the VisitingBoard. ame The General Purposes Committee of the BAE receive very full reports on all Visits; and make recommendations to the BAE. A precis of each report is circulated to BAE members, and the full report is made available at ARCUK for any BAE (or Council) member who wishes to refer to it. aoe | Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource DB/BM 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 April 1980 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/7842940760d83486fef39b449f7b1545.pdf 311796437b1bdad2165d5291d2f27468 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 Miscellaneous Subject The topic of the resource Miscellaneous issues Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1976-1980 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 Presentation Subject The topic of the resource Hand-written draft presentation examining the reasons why NAM appeared now Description An account of the resource N.AM. is a movement of architects and laymen committed to radical change in the relationship of the profession to the public, and within the pro- fession itself. N.A.M. believes that architecture is a public service which should be available equally and directly to all sectors of society. Therefore we are working to redistribute power in architecture among the 80% of the population who at present have no say in the design or use of their environment. The following pages give a synopsis of our background, structure, aims and programme of action. If you wish to find out more or join us, contact :— Nex. Aiden70K MOU ERT Bia Reeatibinee/LDBac Ghana) 4 40, Bla Ahurre aie etek, faye gf te rmMtr AsLiiiol ® firlx Jb her. MPUOMAQ UL! baOw &£9&4OnRol &Bek9GrQa: VS1 Qo Beads OPS mghe|62MAW Q!heYoh ? |frteOe7Ks Gey ge. JAsrivel “AumreAyey ANP I<h— 7 miley Qe Ax wWQreurQde Quo Couire Ky Hes agHyArocesFDBachan!Olocse CQ Arik 27%, fis Sax asclen WSoudtwe Onan, AME nk iG -OLAS Vereot AS ou Ae Aemitc OQ Guo WOon ASG fr20k Kjhen hebeeZmab'eGobet| Q moe GIR Ga Swe Cuentue” pmhlrad WOmabamict JL. Ths.Ps boQeCOfr&fakCor QuAs QUDMnAg 2 £2 Phra, CH GH “Any ween KO Qeomtrrs fos 5AERhoe PreeSOOLand Procsuey, NEG Aa G Denon, SayQu bse 4 Bote tom a, QAQ)LQ &&, CO Ching tKcr faeprel, anna depevlsOtee Quer Cunradurati “Qn Ashgbee , MVE Ka, A wsQ, wOK ee LC 6 Bbrtersg Gas A Out |Qrrol Arngtsuxe 4O%og, a PASE ING [RC -gon ah Oem 4aGar ado, e hs. PRESALS ALG 50tae » XEPawioek Qee bwkigcenekPEERQN 4 ma’ “ee (45% ConrfnO46 Bihho US FORD VELL, Crack oth - Cee Ane tgl rock Ar.grnQ. 2|; mk “—e = Le PT—QL ke Y[rvod anh Votstssay oy oC, Qn ' SLDPres7 GH 6lQrk OrQ0QbK,.J uF° Ane ; . bok Qh Arclriisit : Qi Carlet Se Ussus Asst) bip Core +|/ a ADDY Qurrol mek Qe ria ARIK AGA Cenodtoten | | SPrurncas Asw Ky KS OCrnalon Osrnemntée VAG IN ae Mroeen wa ing af . Serer Ene, Bs Jor JPswrtr Adan Tks. Ceri ]GurlSficBiel,,fPrenetaCrayQretire Swe Ss Prot Hk woaar, PepPra Qeunork 42. Kil rep BA LeouminG ssg, VeGole, Guo OLS rQtimrg x Raat ok — [Avtrs- AguccQ 26 » ink ARQ. 2 Abae aw Mes NK Sen. ey euOL AU - orsQurirol |)CMeCb. @becs4 7 Qe oa Anbhixzadh Act unCO % 4a WRG Tks Crnrente COMO PwWwOly,be Cro olives AS.Qt KOK Fin &UM om9arvet, te we ou Cow, GP Aetinkbg CHK &Qo JOY rg ~— keyYon, KR MAO OR Net PRL ENG “4 oC : : . ni CE res ;. wa toncte & af poy wlOoke AuowwrG f& ow Cece wow eh 77BuSEn wehae Ow Contix — Ere frrnnsick ohLY/ Soom Qo OBE onentacttCGhI Ele x Ante Oobroneat ann Gok SsSoriGc — “99 ey SolesAnan PrsoleriaeQed Pree uvte Orrey J PEfrra hs CEAle .A ms. Q Ly SEYfart QeaEng WRCROSE LQ anora LALKCQCa be A OGRA ane, ENS S88 7d PINAL PMR MeSik NPS | Ka R8A, RS ednmmotos, NE hea”Onn AOLy Sy GQrck aa chy wo oe,eon@Ve,Of ohPod ZLhbete TA,seer, Qyp2 Ov Ques At he ela tet wntrkale 7 a Qn 4M, LonelyA20h, aR Qo tame » Oa VAGLR Corneie) ae Anol BasKO GAArecctnsch Eyal Alonwow Ga. Ensen PS De £ wiésr greys Pat. ALE. (Ao Acer, Aveslbers opars AQ WOW Are yate ) CBA ret foe KOA See oh Je @ =< =) A920. irre ; Tho ‘Enktsre Wee & rrnetorre Q Alan GHmslembieoeAe ARCQruolOKKevOug Cin2 Cerrehole G now hig Qucl if Ques, Of Ks. Btn reno onll 2 VQ COLD, A909 LR £0OLhenkeof MP5ane Gn foe.. Rat ksfoneAO af Rebun Gust Cont TTMacine 40 H.QtQR Oak the UMDbrsol Amr2 Work, Alnth,OnAictrek, MSA lak ERAIO QLLARSryou0l ueShee|Qinck g Ra Leg QPreyCom Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource John Murray 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 1977? https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/4eb6f174d752a74a8769996959e8262b.pdf 46b90b02fb7211359eb211a757173ea1 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 Trade Unions and Architecture Description An account of the resource Themes included action on asbestos and Health &amp; Safety, and involvement with Direct Labour Organisations and Building Unions. Following comparative research of possible options, NAM encouraged unionisation of building design staffs within the private sector, negotiating the establishment of a dedicated section within TASS. Though recruitment was modest the campaign identified many of the issues around terms of employment and industrial relations that underpin the processes of architectural production. 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 TASS-BDS leaflet Subject The topic of the resource Draft work for BDS-TASS Leaflet (8 pp.) Description An account of the resource SSL oe Serumsee Ze Manmeat braitTASS=bvbSleatlet,sarki Goa,6ne (front "cover" text) 5 | Builaing ; vesign Statis eO7 ’ (space tor-Heliman cay 20, Wraps B-way around cover; text on "newsfaper"TM to read; “staits propose uesign tnion.") y ZI are organising within TASS, the union tor all the ui lding Professions. , (back "cover" text; in leit halt o1 1/5 page) If you ure a bprolessiciiai, techuicel, auiinistrative clerical enployee it (vertical list) ARCHITECTURE , or UsNiEeY SULVEYING, Strocttrk uNGINLENING, BUILDING Deh bry 7SethiheSUVHYING,Lanuscape sbenitecture,-Towr Plunoing, imterier Design... anu want to begin to gain control over join TsSS and buila a Strong, active, unisiec staii organisuiion NopaAx ln your oLiice and among your 9U,UUU colieavues in “private Gepartrenrts . AXHSINEAtEXK (folded 1/5 page to have recruiting info; adoress, nenber- ship form, and advert/order form to Main for working for what? © 40p) { f list, NW. (inside text) (in "box") what is T3sS? bpsuv 165,000 professional, technical, clerical workers are meubers ot Tass, Section oi the l-million member maintains conplete industrial three sections of the AU construction sites. (main text) Sulariew stuii in erchitecture, : Cugineering, Surveying : your working life, aenocratic and sector" DEES 6He- : KD adninistrative anu’ the "white coliar" AUK, in which TASS autonomy. One ot the other (ote. represents 05,UL0 workers on "back"~ q —- and phoning... like ecuployees in 1 by other protessional Breups who are alreagay orpanised in honu-’ide trade unICHS... le BOLDFACE (in "box") What is "BuiluvSo"? Builaing vesign the union" set from throughout on May 14, 1977 Olgaiiise. They options (astiS, Stafis Urgenisation is a “union within recora 4s an eftiective union engineering TASS can offer. expertise anu efficiency but also by its denecratic social coucerns. up at tie request britain who met at a special to Gecide on GN® union within of TASS's staifs in of the Support chose Tass atter EMA, STAMP, ConSicering TGWU) because auong Gesign ana quality plus the st.ength ‘hey were impressed uot only by the committment or the union's of TASS oitficials of building design statis conference which to tour other research and structure and wide-ranging and the legal departments, public sector stafi unions which represent them. Management in the private sector 3s alreauy well oOrganiseu. it's now time for staii to join together and make an end to the days of §01nug cap-in-hand to the boss, alone and without a Strong organisation to Support them. A bona-tide, TUC-aftiiiated trade union is the recoguiseu, orderly and established way, protectéa by legislation, for employees to collectively negotiate with their enployers. Already, a new London ouiiaginy Design Stafis erancl oi 4a55 has been esiablispeu ana is rapidly prowing. 1 atsice Tonuon, stati join the beucral TASS braneli in their bi DAG Ne TASS is the only hbona-fide, effective trade union in which building ueSign staiis in the private sector are actively organising. Building Design Statts Orgatisation in TASS is the one union tor all people ernployed in private sector offices in architecture, surveying, engineering, and planning... whether in Consultancies, industry ana conrerce, or the voluntary sector. It hus the rull backing ol TASS's electeu national executive anu OL its highly-e1iective full-time ofticials anu back up stuit. “Ss more and tiore join TASS, siniler BLS branches will he couiirn oraer Guu eeeLome short text Lor each item Lisgnting Yeuwiuaucies. 14565 sees tial all set up’ in other areas. a 1 employed in building design. (end of “box") ypQty, Literg \ union orgdénisa— Join TAsS Lov tion. veciue loge ther with tne key eiiective, aenwocratic trade your issues in your Oltiice are; .pay &@nd conaitions: career Structures? + Undermanning? «+-Wonen's rights? to get “open books, clear chennels reper nlnLSC Caps)o Mos nS Ovuer A taice rt2niOCh1’Con.ittees Uevery Ww Wh alternatives are explored before auy men— practice. mM c LASS. TASS has !roCh /} OL the opportunity to do each job responsibly. 4 1s 4 viVE wil ( stiveu of TASS members women in Li: durcéiront of the Ch 4L> WO» Ci. Cas. dis eucition colitact by a "national advisory comiittee ofiice colieagues, in unavoicuble, TASS insures that they are ee eFCUGudauC1eS? ‘aSS has a louie recoru o1 Successtully earbitiary ana petty conditions? BUS-TASS niewhbers are kept in consultation with stait iro: other ofiices, aud with the --hanggenent secrecy? Join together with your colleagues o &£ OL CoOWiwunicetion anu @ begining tor the canpeign for equal pay, concitions, anu eCuucetionul anu enployment opportu- nities Lor women. In aduition to enjoying the same rights anu benetits as every level of the uudiou, are repicsertea girectly expert auvice anu Support that only 1sSS can give what [erent Outl £ ber is tid#ue reuduant. If reuuLuencies are agreeu, aiter iull Cousultations, to be 1airly tiauuleu aud usually manages to Win substahtial payments tor its menbers. TASS also pays its own Supplementary long-term unenploynent benefit. detocratic control of protessional Cane: ployment, overtine, etc.) e--Shouuy Ge€Sign auu cutting o1 corners? Fight with TASS tor There are already over 20,00 (in “"box") who controls TASS? TASS nerbers in each ofiice deciae to pursue anu Union officiais the means they are callea in only at thear ‘ request. % LinolOt (end "box") the policy they wish to use to achieve it. nx hannw tf stil wish ---elack of training facilities? i a Notions. \onen's Cfganiser. e- GeClining workloau?( political muscle, TASS record) +--lack O41 Contact with building users? (accountebility) o The orgunisution of employees in TASS in each office is the key unit in the union's structure and the means whereby Staff can aenocratically ana coltectively have a reel voice in ali the Gecisions which affect their work. This can include not only questions otf Wages, hours, holidays, Pensicns anu reuisuaicies, but also broaaer issues like the type anu quality oi work producead, px4*xXEX or office orgaénisetion anu cecision-i.aking structures. Broader TASS policy is determinea by the members through he union “renches, the enouel Co.ference, una elected regional anu national executives. administration of the zj- ;ie> union is by experienced, iuli-tine officials and backup staif. .'| TTS 2?of NW See Asx 5 tdface {) ASS/BSSU, Prgedsol een SukneyKayQuipZo Gs w Ow Se ent AbD Rene oe AGC, Way aTrade Union for Building “4 Vines : a E #) ae Design staff ? %y ee eet Over 90:3 ofthe building-design workforce SA RIS Set ASank Soy is Salaried.The promise of the__ ie: ;Qeeiimne tel juniorarchitectorotherprofessional,peSea“OPEwGiQo The economic crisis has shown how powerless private sector building design staff are to resist exploitation and redundancy. And this is only symptomatic of a Situation woich pervades all aspects of our work, whatever the econamic situation, Building design staff are at the mercy or 'market forces! in the private Sector and ape—unableto-secuerven Amott the most basic guarantees of pay and conditions,. which are now in steady i mapotyg i,Aeaniltong,, VA ( Architecture is a business. Tne owners (ar “yartners") of the business are well organised with their own advisory bodies; the staff are not. Building design staff s are therefore managed bysani-putsted, Ang, OG as0s 2 wr HAR ésSf expendec—at—thitet of thétr employers, ‘ Simply because of their neglect to organise themselves effectively so as to conduct relations with their employers on a rational, collective basis. On May 14 1977 a special one-day conference toolc place in London at which building design staff from throughout Britain one union building design staff should organise within. Phe conference chose TASS (Technical administrative and Supervisory Section ena toe building Design Stati Section was set un, This Special section is intendea f@ all workers met to decide which — AUE/ ) ae ye Orrell Ss gee bwAemoc) L decline. eke 2: worker rising to partnership and Nec having control over his or her ow work is illusory for the vast majority Coste : oe OC Ge WIPES Qu ane AO w Asne MW, & f- in building design who now reala&e that, m Lome Ccs we nk Eo an comion with other groups such as - Jie peCeres iio lawyers,teachersanddoctors,their OR)asBoyDWcee role and conditions of work will Poets. 7 Y Po, ROU on. continuetobedictatedbytheiremployers.LY jGf TALON) fPrace Union organisasion esdsts for this purpose, recognised and established by statutory legislation (the Bmoloyment Fretectim Act 1976) as the one appropriate basis for negotiations between employers and their starf. A Trade e Unionistherecognisedway—betieine-desimAKto oSa etais can ignore it no longer. Guth olsen, 02 prin eral es QOyt eoOe unkSen— Waat is the Guilding Desim Staff Section- TASS? Cc in the private sector building design \ professions;erchitetes,surveyors,—— an Ww CaAey(NAN 7 Vile ives step p SAO) pystiee* or, eet ae Craryloytra +LO0 4 Hy SQM, iS)LOck 06 to carry out full and thorough resaer vital issues > Saerch into € Luge CoesSLAar v 4-€ technicians, 2. structural engineers, planners secretaries,typists,etc.,whatevertheir Capo|Aopeas statusandqualifications.Ttisnota'craft'0,0ooiesank,tho, oifice as its membersA kt i 2 bayeceteneyAlon ide There are already pressing? sroblems of union and intends to have all staff in the = fosaso. A, CH rUlabin. pay and conditions, redundancy eles, Ho ADA, SOQ chek, whichbuildingdesignstaffcanonly Qeree oe unThe tackle effectivley if taey are organised, withexpertunion'back-up!'.jhenyou aeUma join BDSS you must dartte discuss and decide what policies yau wnat to put forward in your office. Yon will have'official'Union assistance where there is a majority union membership in the office and where the members representatives ask for union nelp. then expert full-time Union officials can help secure recogniti on of the union by Po G your employer and help you in negotiations or in taking cases to the industrial Tziounal, Phe Enplayment Protection Act requires that employers recognise a Trade Union where it has a Hajority membership in an office, and requires employers to divulge information which is seldom available to individuals, In this way it will be possible for members to make informed decisions on further pecker h AeHiner Ou oo LetoNaes Concern gon.Jedats see How can BIS help you ? bsteh you 4 Qa BDSS is especially well equipped to help building design staff because:— DSS already has recognition in many engineering consultanties and therefore ‘3 to2\ p Areal & understand? the problems in building design oifices, 25S can therefore srovide expert professional advice am the law as it affects your enployyaent and can give hely in enforcing taat lew. Oonrias bo BDSS wsaT recrait 211 staff in the office thus” preventing division end ensuring the mOSt eriective collective action, In_SDSyouwillhavetheOpportunitytomeet and discuss probless with staff froma other offices, and to decide on common policies, BD55 has full use of the ig; rescarca department a 20 Geron.0r vitaljiss ee sy¢h 5 worltloadyand Bee ooffenerstEovers boda sudan “~s OMIT. on Yoel%prpowaatAceontabat Toere are many wider issues acing 7 architecturetodayandBDSSwillprovide MadreWweee a farum at national level far all OG 1.0 aye buildingdesignstafftomeetanddiscuss Tees cammonproblems(thereareplansto rw Sconse coprdinate with building design staff in publicsedtorunions)andtotake CY collective action. If you would like to know more abaut te specs). BDSS- TASS please camtact the address belay. We can arrange f discuss the advantages «Caleyunpine os . J a speaker to of BDSS membership Oeee ee or to give advice am your affice Situation, Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource NAM Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource May 1977 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/3e93200ae4698dfbcef7803ee18bb5df.pdf dfd052f301f373b7df9234507ba78f13 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 Education Description An account of the resource Many NAM members were engaged in the field of architectural education, either as staff or students, and pursued new ideas for course content and pedagogy, reassessing existing course structures and priorities in conventional architectural training. The concern to focus on socially necessary buildings and to find new and meaningful ways of engaging with building users and the wider community- both central NAM themes - illuminated much of the discussion. 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 Education : Discussion Paper Subject The topic of the resource 2 sides Description An account of the resource When the Education Group was working on the paper for the Blackpool Conference we were concerned with providing a critique of the arch-= itectural education scene and a set of proposals for change within it as a springboard for action rather than as a conjuring up of a utopic vision of what the ideal school of architecture might be like. Aware of the dangers of falling into the "manifesto trap" and creating there= by an elaborate and imaginary system of rules for reform, the need for an independent voice in education seemed clear enough, and that the professional and educational bodies which regulate the process of ed- ucation could not be counted upon for producing the changes we thought were necessary in order to overcome their drift and inertia and stake in maintaining the status quo. The question this raises is that of what NAM's role can be within the educational debate. Looking at it from the students' point of view, NAM's general outlook can perhaps be useful. Students are both users of the educational system and workers within it, and in common with users and workers elsewhere they often have little chance to articulate their experience within the system or do anything to effect their circumstances. Thus surely NAM's aim of “radicalising the consciousness of the profession" should extend also to the individual student and educational scene generally- and as a radical movement it ought to attempt to provide the structure to consolidate and unite student and staff criticism in order to present a coherent alternative policy based on a direct contact with the schools and a variety of student/ staff opinion in them. Nevertheless, we need not be moved by the prospect of an incipient NAM Student and Schools organisation into an attitude of waiting to see what everyone thinks before we come out in favour of one position or another. To date we have noted our dissatisfaction with the conflict that exists between educational ideals and professional and organisational require- ments. With regard to education, John Hajnal notes in his book "The Stu- dent Trap"' that the sheer morass of regulations which university and college curricula become bogged down in, and their preoccupation with such nebulous concepts as "performance" and "assessability" mitigate against a concern for educational ideals and mark a tendency to adopt systems of administrative ease rather than systems geared to the needs of the individual student, and likewise that the adoption of standards themselves and means whereby students can be assessed on a common level reduce the educational content of courses. The maintenance of such notions as rigid curricula which are laid down in advance of a two-or three years' course and in which students do not have a choice between options must by now be indefensible for they provide a straight jacket designed for a mythical and non-existent average student. Courses must be allowed to be more responsive to student criticism and encourage a questioning of professional attitudes, for in a changing society it is willful to persist in an attitude of "no-change" in education. Similarly, we must note that in terms of the structure of the profession Parts I & II and RIBA course requirements for recognition fit into the same ideological framework as the Feegeale and Registration Act; thay are concerned with a profession which seeks to limit the variety of people who enter into it and maintain a "professional monopoly" over its patch. Thus we have concluded that in order to allow for a greater freedom for both students and a wider variety of courses, it will be necessary to seek for a relaxation of the controls that exist at present. In doing so we need to overcome the discontinuity between teorey and practice - between academic qualiftations and the acquisition of technical skills in order to avoid being caught between the extremes of a general approach which attempts to cover everything and succeeds in covering little in depth and that of a harrow over=specialisation which produces the inability to view the problems of architecture in their totality. Yet in terms of education we are also dealing with less easily definable concepts such as notions on what constitutes good design. We should not let such labellings as "design competence"! obfuscate the primary coal of the educational process as being the training of the Student not merely to enter a profession, but to design pleasing and Stimulating enviroments; to question the basic nature of his training and assunp= tions and attitudes towards design. The flaw in the NAM outlook which we should not be afraid to admit to is that eventually the issues of architecture are unquantifyable, in that one can envisage circumstances more ideal than the present in which the political structure of the pro= fession and our society generally could be more sympathetic towards the induction of an architecture of quality rather than Quantity, but that one nevertheless cannot simply through political changes guarantee this. The educational context is the one in which the philosophical and qual- itative aspects of design should be most strongly pursued and least frustrated by the mediation of technique, profession and theories about what educational theorey ought to be about. Nevertheless we must not forget that in architectural education, we find also the first link in the chain of alienation between architects and "the people"; that an abstract and disembodied view of architecture rather than a specific and human one, is the one which most students come across. For the student may emerge from his training without ever gaining any contact with the people who will be effected by his or her ideas; and certainly such notions as accountability to the user seldom permeate to the academic level. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource NAM Education Group Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Undated https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/9030ff5d04eac2bfcf238734ca9493ff.pdf ed4e598a42c56a79e9bc6ba83b4c1c28 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 Education Description An account of the resource Many NAM members were engaged in the field of architectural education, either as staff or students, and pursued new ideas for course content and pedagogy, reassessing existing course structures and priorities in conventional architectural training. The concern to focus on socially necessary buildings and to find new and meaningful ways of engaging with building users and the wider community- both central NAM themes - illuminated much of the discussion. 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 Education and the Profession Subject The topic of the resource 5 pp report for Conference Workshop (2nd Congress assumed) Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource NAM Education Group Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1976 Description An account of the resource One of the underlying themes of the New Architecture Movement is that the kind of architecture we possess is governed more by political and economic factors than by such notions as taste, aesthetics and social conscience. Further that we work within a self—interested rather than disinterested profession, the structure of which is such that the maintenance of its privileged position within society overrides its potential social usefulness. In the educational context this split between ideals and practice manifests itself in the contradiction that exists between the traditional role of the educational process in terms of imparting knowledge and learning, to stimulate understanding and discourse and the use of it as a means of preparing students to enter a particular career. Or to put it bluntly there can be a world of diff— erence between learning about architecture and following the require— ments of a degree course, and that architecture may be about something else. Following on from this, the nature of architectural education tends to have less to do with encountering the specific problems of architecture, and on the contrary takes its lead more from the require— ments of its controlling political forces. Thus when we talk of arch— itectural education we are trying to look at something balanced between two powerful institutions each with its own structure, allegances, in— terests and mythologies; the educational heirarchy in the form of the universities and polytechnics on the one hand, and the "profession" of architecture on the other. Nevertheless, it is increasingly a difficult balance to maintain, for the problems of education can be seen as aris— ing from the conflict of interests inherent in the different character— istics of each. Moreover, it is a conflict that tends to find its res— olution in the form of a "sell—out" of educational ideals and standards in the name of professionalism. The "de—schooling" arguments of Ivan 111 ich certainly outline the prob— lern, in emphasising the difference involved between ' 'skill teaching" and what he calls "liberal education", or the "open—ended exploratory use of acquired skills". He demonstrates how the one is measurable, can be learnt from anyone who has that skill; in the manner of for example, learning a language or learning to drive a car, whilst the other can be termed as education for inventive and creative behaviour. Most schools of architecture obviously try to encompass both aspects of learning, yet in arriving at a compromise between the two they invar— iably fail to do particularly well in either. Thus instead of arguing on whether students should learn the skills involved in archi tecture first, and then be allowed to go on to create or visa versa, we must indeed question whether the schools are the best places to achieve both of these aims of learning in the first place. So, if one can learn a skill from anyone who hac that skill, an architectural student can learn to draw from thousands of architects and technicians; he can learn build inc construction from thousands of builders, and so on. Infact in— directly he does, for a tremendous amount of what we learn, we learn casually, and not as a result of programmed instruction. Why then must the student be forced into a situation where he is told to learn things he could learn better elsewhere? And why is anyone surprised when he does not learn them? Education then creates its own myths which tend to reduce a discussion of the subject away from fundamentals conviction that towards our educational a technical institutionscode which engenders the complacent provide around the only such solutions issues as to the course problems content, of learning. the desirability Thus discussionof lec— centres tures as opposed exclusion to seminars, of all else. or exams We as have opposed consequently to continual built all assess—this ment, or into is a disunited to system the which and ineffectual. is somehow so Student solid that criticism all protest is dismissed becomes as futile being, of small value simply by virtue of the fact that each student is there for only 3 or 5 years; certainly not long enough to guarantee change within a system which moves slowly if at all. So it is that one of the most powerful of arguments placed in the path of student action and participation in education, intake is the will need be to followed demonstrate through that and the taken reformsad— demanded by one particular vantage of by the next. Furthermore, students are generally on their own in the action they take. It is usually seen within the context of a spec if ic situation within a specific school or university. It is isolated, lacking in support and in solidarity from amongst the students themselve Yet many student criticisms of schools of architecture, such as unfair assessments (or criticism hardened into judgement) too much pseudo aca— demic activity, too many staff waiting for retirement and who have lost touch and yet remain impossible to unseat, poor quality of teaching, innovation discouraged by glib references to RIBA course requirements, and school heads a law unto themselves, are not unique to architectural students, and in many respects are little different from the criticisms level led generally against our entire further education system. Never— theless, the relationship of architectural education to the profession is such that these problems become amplified by the addition of others general to the profession itself. For this reason it is just possible that the question of student action within architecture is an academic one in the first place. Architectural students are not renowned for their militancy or willingness to stick their necks out for some cause. Nor are qualified architects either. Thus somewhere along the line we have all been conned into thinking that there is something else at stake; something which places us apart from other groups of students or professional workers and which makes ours t a special case. Using an ideological shorthand, one way of looking at this problem is to talk about the "professional and elitist myth" which pervades the education and practice of architecture. The sheer length of time it takes to train as an architect and the number of academic and professional qualifications involved in doing so, is such that we are all causally implicated in maintaining the status quo. For the myth of the competance of the profession exists in order that those who use its knowledge and skills may remain dependant on it; moreover, it hides the profession's inability to cope with the problems of our enviroment. The force on architectural education is therefore one which attempts to re— create within each student a sense of its mystique. This is reflected in most schools in the continual emphasis on professionalism; of pres— entation in terms of speech, behaviour, drawings, the preparation of briefs for students' schemes and in criticism. From the beginning the aim is to concentrate the student's attention on professional trivia, rather than at any stage allow him to come to terms with why he is there at all. Surely this is from the onset one of the largest stumbling blockij in the way of any attempt to reform or change the profession, and which enables us to have an interest in opposing anything which makes it easiel for people to become architects by coming up through the "trade", or which allows a relaxation of academic entry requirements. Thus the pre— dominantly middle class nature of the profession is maintained, and in the office this manifests itself in the two—tier structure that exists between qualified architects and the technicians. Education consequently plays itc part in dividing the profession and in excluding from its ranks large form the numbers same of tasks.skilled and underpaid technicians, who can and do per— Educational autonomy in architecture is thus less certain than in many other disciplines. The realities of RIBA recognition of decree courses and control via its educational section is such that the profession is committed to controlling the education of architects, thereby putting every student in the impossible situation of having to prove his worth to a profession which has restricted his education in the first place. Furthermore, the nature of the educational heirarchy is such that it is self—perpetuating and reinforces the structure and characteristics of the profession by inculcating its values into students from the onset of their academic careers. If one is dissatisfied with the quality of architecture today, then surely the malaise in architecture must stem from a malaise in educational practice, and the manner in which it tends to limit itself solely to functional and technical considerations, with— out reference to the aesthetic, social and politic? 1 implications of architecture. Thus many schools still remain comrnitted to the well—worn dogmas of Eauhaus rhetoric in a period in which its products are increas— inc-Iy under fire for the simplictic and general approach to design that :he" have come to represent to the popular imagination. "Value judcement" is still a dirty word in some places where staff labour under the mig— apprehension that a building well—detailed or which conforms to "func— t ional desicn criteria" is a building well designed. Inspite of having lower staff—student ratios, better equipment and more nomey available than at any other period in the history of architectural education, many schools still fail to provide the kind of stimulating background essential for learning. The best many students can expect are the fac— ilities to involve themselves in their own work whilst trying as hard as possible to make what they are interested in fit in with what their tutors consider they should be interested in. Or else the schools fail in their attempt to provide a "general" education which combines both the sciences and humanities in their outlook. For in seeking to please everyone they fail ultimately through producing an architectural education determined by Committee, creating as a result an education "by lowest common denom— inator". 2here are too few brave or innovatory spirits in education today who are prepared to take the risk to create a stimulating laboratory o: ideas recenerative to the profession. Instead of seeking new and alter— native paths we operate in an atmosphere of "degree—factory", intent on producing architects who have been socialised into accepting the "mores" and values of the profession as a whole. If we wish our architectural education to be more closely related to the needs of etudents and of the individual people for whom they intend to design, any changes must take into consideration the influences of the educational and professional institutions. They must loosen the hold of the traditional teaching establishments, so that skills may be learnt from anyone and everyone who has the ability to teach and demonstrate them, and they must loosen the power of the profession so that the rel— ationship between users and designers is no longer clouded by the myth of professional expertise and competance. ARCHITECTURE MOVEMENT EDUCATION GROUP Frances Bradshaw David Somervell Andrew Fekete PROPOSALS FOR ACTOONg 2 Enable a wider group than at present to become the designers of the buildings around us. 3 1.1 Reform gchoolg' intake requirements. Portfolio, demonstrated practical experience and motivation to be major selection criteria. Relegate academic qualifications; i.e. A—levels, to a secondary position. 1+ 1.2 Discourage the school—leaver deferred strongly from entering case.straight into schools of architecture; places in every 1.3 Encourage mature students from every sphere to pursue a course in architecture. Carpenters, jewelry designers, site agents, brickies, graphic designers, artists, HND, OND, all to be considered along with the present typical intake. Part-time and non—standard, (i.e. timid-career") courses to be an in— tegral part of the school. 5 1.5 Special entry facilities between to schools be used of more architecture fully. and indeed from othe 6 Encourage trangfer disciplines and crafts. 1.6 Remove the archaic ruling, whereby a transferring student must obtain "permission" from his former head to enrol elsewhere. Direct transfer to be facilitated without penalty o? repeated years. 1.7 Entrance to be determined by a full representative panel drawn from the whole school community. A system of appeal to full school council. 1.8 A more intensive three .years to be the basic length of study. App— lication for higher study to be determined in a similar fashion to in— itial entry. All these acknowledge that the architect's work covers an extrem— ely wide field and the aim is thug to introduce a correspondingly varied group into the schools. 2 Ensure a more dynamic outlook from the staff in the schools. C 2.1 Tutors must be predominantly drawn from the world of the practice of their skills. 2.2 Re—assess the value of "specialist" teaching staff + facilities. Does a school really need a full time acoustician, colour psychologist, or wind tunnels and so on? Remove the academic window dressing! 1 2.3 Appointments to be made by a full representative panel drawn from the whole school community. A system of appeal to full school council. 2.4 Appointments to be of only 3 or 5 year tenure. Headships where applic— able on the same terms; to rid the ech0016 of the system of sinecure. 2.5 Encourage part—time and visiting tutors. These aim to reduce the debilitating stagnation inherent in our present authoritarian system of sinecure, hierarchy and privilege , and engure an adaptable staff more appropriate to a learning as opposed to a teaching enviroment. The school as a resource centre. Remove any pretence that the schools can produce "The Architect". Dig—establish the schools. Remove the control now veeted in central bodies and the local architectural establishment. Discontinue reg— istration. Encourage the full use of schools and their resources by local comm— associations, unity groups. enviromental These might include: groups and tenants' go on.co—operatives, amenity Schools to be accountable to the local community. Those groups it serves to be amongst the wide range of interests represented on an open forum. This forum to have the important function of stiumulating, informing and of reacting to the aims and achievements of the school. The emergent Schools of Architecture Council, once freed of its negative, determining policing role to act as a federation bringing schools to— tether to share common intereste and to develop free exchanges of people and ideas. This federation is to relate to and to be funded by each school's forum, so involving the widest possible spectrum in a contin— '-ting diologue. The whole school community to be responsible for the nature of the courses within and the activities generated by each school. Thus the reputation and respect for a school will rest with the collective out— look and aspirations of all involved within the school community. All executive decisions to be taken by a representative council directly accountable to the school community. Decision—makins on policy, proposals for introduction of specific pro— jects, internal management, student + staff intake, all to be an integral part of the learning experience in the life of the school. The reformed administrative staff, freed of their onerous policing and checking tasks, to service a network akin to Illich's "Ekill—exchance centres They must relate the needs and aspirations of individual Btu— dents to the inspiration and abilities of tutors such that groups come together which are matched appropriately to problems and projects pro— posed in the school 'B forum. Structure the courses within the schools to enable all mose from the wider intake to grasp and develop the skills an architect deploys. These must allow for part—time students and staff, married folk and those with other commitments. Abandon the hidebound notion of "year" banding and instigate vertical projects wherein groups of different outlook and experience can inter— act. Tutors joining these courses would merely offer their grea ter ex— perience and maturity to the learning process. Use the educational potential of the schools' immediate built enviroment to the full: — real experience on building sites, and in the study of the building process — ongoing studies of building performance: failures, inadequacies as well as exemplars. — socio—political studies in support of and leading to actual build— inc projects. — small works projects. — public and private response to buildings in use. These aim at democratisinc and de—institutionalisinc the schools as they are now: to provide an active and involved learning exper— ience. https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/54dd5a0ccd2a100c7b67050df07fd085.pdf 6e256ce05d728da4d7eb86ee0778aa22 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 End Architects' Fixed Fee Scales Subject The topic of the resource Marked up text with comments from Alan Lipman Description An account of the resource Parties have sought Ate off British Architects huncil, U.K. (ARCUK) , t architect' must be •n in the mid—60 t 3 In April 1967 the to the National {ay 1968 the ending review body to prepare ne eventually made , cil also controls tse and Industry referred infirmed the exist ence nade _ recommendations rt was accepted by the 1977. WÆfter gil months of discussion with the Office o? Fair Trading (OFT?) the RIBA and ARCUK have failed to comply with the Commission's and the Government's demands. Meanwhile detailed proposals for an alternative fee system which assimilates these demands, have been prepared by representatives o? the "Unattached Archi— —tectg and submitted to the We believe that thig report 't VIay Ahead" now republished may form the basis for a new and equitable system of architects' fees. * Report No. 71: "Architects' Costs and Fees n s Ctand. 3653. "Architects' Services — A •Report on the Supply o? Architects t Services with Reference to Scale ?eeg 't, ordered to be printed by The House o? Commons, 8th November, 1977 • END ARCHITECTS I FIXED FEE SCALES ! Synopsis of WAY AHEAD, a report by representatives of "Unattached Architect s t' on the architectg•t fee gystem NISTING ARRANGEMENTS WHEREBY ARCHITECTS CHARGE MANDATORY MINIMUM HAVE CONDEMNED BY CONSERVATIVE AND LABOUR SHOULD BE ABANDONED IN FAVOUR 0? A SYSTEM. BACKGROUND Over the past fifteen years governments o? both major parties have sought to end the fixed fee scales published by the Royal Ingtitute off British Architects (RIBA) and made mandatory by the Architects Registration Council, U.K. (ARCUK) , th•e statutory body which all entitled to use the style t architect' must be registered. Government investigation of architects' earningg began in the mid—60 t g with the Inter—DepartmentaL Committee om Professional Fees. In April 1967 the Government referred the level o? architects t eogtg and fees to the National Board for Prices and Incomes (11B?I) which recommended in May 1968 the ending o? mandatory gees and the establigtlment of an independent review body to prepare a new fee Although minor changes to the scale were eventually made, the RIBA — which through its voting majority in • ARCUK Council also controls this "public interest tt body — resisted the NBPI requirements. In September 1973 the Conservative Minister for Trade and Industry referred the matter to the Monopolies Commission, whose confirmed the existence o? a monopoly operating against the public interest, and made . recommendations similar to those of the NBPI a decade earlier. This report was accepted by the Minister for Prices and Consumer Protection on November 9th 1977. WÆfter six months o? discussion with the Office o? Fair Trading ( O.qxr) the RIBA and ARCUK have failed to comply with the Commission's and the Government's demands. Meanwhile detailed proposals for an alternative fee syst.em which assimilates these demands, have been prepared by representatives ot the "Unattached Archi— * Report No. 71: "Architectg t Costs and Feest% Cmnd. 3653. ** nArchitects' Services — A •Report on the Supply o? Architects t Services with Reference to Scale pees", ordered to be printed by The House o? Commons, 8th November, 1977. HAY AHEAD Our report "Way Ahead" exarhines the failure of' the existing fee sygtem and proposes criteria for a satisfactory alternative. The present 'ad valorem t scale (i.e. the more costly the building, the greater the fee) fails to meet the public interest' in showing whether value for money is obtained. —Woreover provides architects with an incentive to increase the fee irrespective o? building quality. "Way Ahead" accepts the Monopolies Commission t g recommendations, and proposeg a voluntary fee system in which architectg t charges are related to their costs. Thus standardised fee tenders would indicate cost rates for labour, overheads and profit for agreed services based on the building type, size, complexity, degree of repetition, etc., and the experience, capacity and location of practices. Ranges showing upper and lower norms for these variables would be prepared by the Independent Committee recommended by the Monopolies Commission for the guidance o? clients, principals and galaried star, etc. Such a gygtem would be easily operate , and has much: in common with contractors t compe itive tender procedures, which of course are already familiar to allwith the building industry. We algo agree that an Independent Committee should be established to determine the new non—mandatory fee system, and that it be appointed by Government • We accept the Commission t g view that the committee should not include representatives of those directly involved in charging and paying for architects t services, i.e. principal architects and clients. Rather the membership should represent the interests of those affected by the fee scales. but who are not party to the negotiations between client and principal in addition to a Government observer, advisors appointed to assist the c6mmittee should be selected to reflect the divergent interests and groups within the profession. Finally the report includes detailed proposals for modificat •on of the existing professional codes to enable the mandatory scale to be in the interim period before the new fee system ig introduced. The suggestion that interim jUStified by the present depression hag hag been noted by the Commission and others that a mandatory scale is insignificant in mitigating the difficulties o? reduced demand. tite therefore now urge the Minister and M. P. t 3 of all parties to take the necessary gtepg to bring thig restrictive practice to an end. WHO ARB ? In thig country architects are define • by being entered on the Register administered by ARCUK and by no other meang. Joining other professional associations BUCh ag the RIBA, is a gratuitous choice made by some architects but all. Those who choose to practige gimply as architects, and who are not memberc o? any of the bodies listed in Schedule I of the 1931 Architects Registration Act (some of which are now defunct) are degignatéd by the Act ag "Unattached". Apart from Government appointees and representatives of other building professions and the industry itselff, the ARCUK Council is composed o? the nomineeg of the councils of the professional associations in Schedule I, plug the elected representatives of the Unattached Architects. number 4120, almost of the profession, and form the largest group after the RIBA%, (19,618). those published by the RIBA by virtue of• the latter's votin rxty in ARCUK Council. We consider that this example of a poly fee scale, which hag been condemned as prejudicial to the pu interest, being itself imposed by a "public interest tt body highli e urgent need to review the ARCUK constitution and ammend the glat ion accordingly. We consider a more open and representative would be beneficial to public and profession alike. We there ge that the opportunity ig taken to reform the constitutiorz and r sen a Ion The Unattached Architects have no fee scaleg but are obliged to observe those published by the RIBA by virtue of the latter's voting majority in ARCUK Council. We consider that thig example of a monopol fee scale, which has been condemned as prejudicial to the public interes% being itself imposed by a "public interest" body highlights the urgent need to review the ARCUK constitution and ammend the legislation accordingly. (It may be noted that o? the present Council memberghip o? 68, 51 are members of the RIBA.) We consider a more open . and representative ARCUK would be beneficial to public and profession alike. We therefore urge that the opportunity is taken to reform the constitution, and introduce majority lay representation in ARCUK Council. THE PROFESSIONAL MAJORITY THE ARCHITECTS' REGISTRATION COUNCIL PREVENTS IT OPERATING AS A PUBLIC BODY, AND SHOULD REDUCED TO ALLOW MAJORITY LAY REPRESENTATION. END THE ARCHITECTS I MAJORITY ON A.R.C.U.K. COUNCIL ! Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Undated, c. 1977? https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/9bea0675b1c8129e9592b803a39c1375.pdf 4b281c2c9370f70a1d8a50da2377e687 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 FAIR PLAY WITH MONOPOLY? AJ Articles 16 November 1977 Description An account of the resource The editors Editor: Leslie Fairweather RIBA News and features editor: Peter Davey BArch, RIBA Assistant news editors: Dan Cruickshank BA Nick Wates BSc Deyan Sudjic BSc, DipArch Buildings editor: Patrick Hannay DipArch, DipUD Assistant buildings editor: Lynne Jackson Technical editor: Maritz Vandenberg BA(Arch) Assistant technical FAIR PLAY WITH MONOPOLY? The Monopolies Commission report on architects’ fees is an extraordinary document (p943 to p947). After four years of effort and the expenditure of untold public money, the mountain has brought forth a mouse. Its arguments for doing away with the fee scale are largely unsubstantiated. Nowhere, for instance, does the Commission analyse the relationship between architects’ costs and the fees they charge: an objective study would have substantiated the validity of the Commission’s claim that architects sometimes overcharge their clients for the work they do. Instead, the Commission, as in virtually every other case, relies on the arguments of prejudice: ‘there are obvious reasons’ for criticising the fee scale; ‘the client may [our italics] pay a fee which is disproportionately large’ and As worrying as the Commission’s prejudice and dogma is its inability to see architects as part of a great industry. The building professions are virtually unique in that their work—comparatively inexpensive in itself—results in massive expenditure of capital. editors: Barrie Evans MSc Jane Taylor BSc(Eng) Patricia Tutt AssocPoly(Arch), RIBA soon. Assistant editor: building economics Helen Heard AADip, RegArch, MSc(Econ) Production/art editor: Tim Cottrell Assistant production/art editor: Colin Jenkins Sub editors: Carol Hemsley BA Patrick Tierney BA Drawings editor: Louis Dezart Photographer: Bill Toomey Librarian: Dorothy Pontin ALA Editorial secretary: June Hoad Editorial administrator: Gillian Collymore Editorial director: D. A. C. A. Boyne CBE, HonFRIBA In one of its more offhand moments, the Commission remarks that the integrity of the architect will prevent him taking corrupt payments from suppliers and contractors. This may be so, but if the fee scale were to be made non-mandatory, there would be strong pressure to offer a low fee and to make up the difference between that and the normal fee by increasing the cost of the building (remember that the Commission would like to see the qss’ mandatory fee scale abolished too). This would be perfectly legal, very difficult (and expensive) to detect and, doubtless, be widespread: many contractors use a similar technique of bidding low and increasing the cost by claims. Once the profession has been forced into the market place, some architects would undoubtedly adopt similar tricks—yet the Commission never even considers the possibility. Is this kind of hard commercial behaviour, which saves pennies while losing pounds, what the public really wants? There is ample evidence from the report itself that the majority of clients favour some kind of fee scale and that they value professional ethics. The Commission is also stricken with myopia when it looks at quality. The Commission seems to think that the only kind of quality a client cares about is the ability of an architect to get his drawings done on time, accurately and so on. Yet just as important—more so—is the look, feel and performance of the buildings he designs. This kind of quality is not apparently understood by the Commission—so it is perhaps not surprising that the argument that fee cutting would lead either to more expensive buildings or to skimped, bad design is not seriously considered. We hope that the Government will be more enlightened—it cannot be unaware of widespread public pressure to hold costs down and to improve environmental quality. The initial reaction by prices and consumer protection minister John Fraser is both inaccurate and inflexible (p944). Surely the profession’s case must be considered by a wider—and fairer—spectrum of Government than this blundering minister alone. Advertisement manager: Roger Bell London and home counties arca managers: @ Phillip Capstick Peter B. Hadley Malcolm Hamilton Barry Lait Midlands manager: Ronald Baker Northern counties and Scotland manager: Elwyn Jones Advertisement production manager: W. Evans Advertisement administrator: Brian Storey Advertisement director: F. G. Dunn The Architects’ Journal 16 November 1977 939 appointment stable block attracted considerable attention in the tabloids last week. But less publicised was the role of the RIBA’s Clients Advisory Service, who in response to regal inquiries supplied the couple witha list of local architects who could carry out the design work involved. From these Peter Scott of Newbury was selected, and he is currently completing the project. Scott, who has several stable and stud buildings under his belt already, said that there was ‘nothing out of the ordinary about the building’. All the same, the blockwork clad steel framed building will include a special swimming pool for the horses. Strangely, Scott seemed unaware of the role of the Clients Advisory Service. It must move in mysterious ways itswonders toperform. Amidst al the battle cries and girding of loins following publication of the Monopolies Commission report on architects’ and surveyors’ fees last week, it is easy to overlook the rapid growth in the minimum fees now paid to quantity surveyors. Way back in January, the Price Commission agreed to an increase of 124 per cent ‘across the board’ on the published fees for quantity surveying services. The effect of this increase on, say, a one-off £250 000 job is to give the qs a fee of about £9530, or 3°81 per cent. The architect for the job would get, according to the RIBA scale of minimum charges, a fee of 6 per cent, or £15 000. The difference in fee is a little over 2 per cent, or £5470. Does this little gap really represent the true difference in skill, responsibility and liability between the two professions? Surely not. And the cutting of fees could only make abad situation worse. In last week’s AJ Idug up again that old cure for traffic congestion in city centres: ban the private car. Within a couple of days strong supporting arguments came from, of al people, a car manufacturer. Mind you, Pehr Gustaf Gyllenhammar doesn’t smack out just any old tin lizzie. He produces Diminishing differential The hammer of the car An exhibition of furniture, silverware and drawings of architect and designer Fosef Hoffman (1870-1956) begins on Friday at Fischer Fine Art*. Hoffman, in conjunction with Koloman Moser, set up the Weiner Werkstatte in 1903 after visiting London to view the work of Mackintosh and Ashbee and seeing Ashbee’s workshop in the East End. The Werkstatte produced furniture, leather- work and metalwork and, as Hoffman believed that the right-angle was ‘fundamental to everything’, the products are strongly Euclidian. Top, ink drawing of a wooden chair and, above, coffee pot drawn in ink, wash and pencil. *30 King Street, London SWI. Exhibition open 18 Novernber - mid January, 10am to 5.30pm daily, 10am to 12.30pm Saturday. The Architects’ Journal 16 November 1977 By PrincessAnne’sandMrMarkPhillips’ Volvo’s at upwards of £4000 apiece, necessitated by the fact that Sweden is now the second richest country in Europe and can’t afford to make cheap ones. Gyllenhammar, head of the Volvo Group, was on his way through London from Singapore and stopped at The Royal College of Art to give the annual Lethaby Lecture. His subject was the design of cars, organisations, production and public transport, and his paper was very impressive, as one has come to expect at RCA occasions. Volvo is world famous for initiating employee involvement in management, and for abandoning the assembly line for assembly by self-motivated groups—to put itvery baldly. Ihad always understood that the 20-mangroupsintheirownworkstations produced a complete car. This was the aim, but it turned out to be too difficult to achieve and the groups only produce a sub-function of a car—the electrical system or the safety system, for example. Nevertheless, absenteeism, one of the understandable problems with the tyranny of the production line, has been reduced. Clever chaps, these Swedes. Of course, our traditional British conservatism of management and men would quickly puta stop to any such ideas over here. A heartening thing happened a week or two backinOxfordshire: DerekWareham gota certificate. So? Well, Wareham was the project architect for the very pleasant Badge- more county primary school near Henley-on- Thames which won an RIBA award (AJ 7.9.77 p420). In addition to the normal three certificates to county architect (Albert Smith), client (Oxfordshire County Council) and contractors (Stoneshire Construction Ltd), for the first time the RIBA gave a fourth— to the project architect. Maybe a small thing in itself, but encouraging because itacknowledges the importance of the chap who actually does the design and carries the job through. Other award makers take note. I suppose everyone has his own way of looking at a paper. Colin Amery, features editor of The Architectural Review, who last week took his AA audience at a fine canter through the AR’s history from its origins to the present, saw the magazine as a wonderful plum cake, full of delights for nearly every taste. To Amery, the AR is far more than simply the missionary vehicle of the modern movement (from avant-garde to guard’s van) which many have held it to be. Sir Uvedale Price, father of the picturesque, was called in by Amery to define the AR’s approach as ‘an aesthetic based on variety’. And glorious variety in style, ideas, layout and buildings has been the hallmark of the Review for as long as anyone can remember. That the tradition is stil alive is aptly demonstrated by this month’s Jubilee issue—Living in Britain 1952-77—in which writers as diverse as Anthony Burgess and George Melly show what’s been happening in Britain since the Queen mounted the throne. In true AR style, virtually every article hasa little tailpiece in which the editors disagree with the author. Long may AR’s variety prevail. abolished. This was RIBA President Gordon Graham’s reac- tion to publication last week of the long-awaited report on architects’ services by the Monopolies and Mergers Com- mission.* The main recommendations of the Commission are that: @ The ARCUK code should no longer make adherence to a scale of fees mandatory and none of ARCUK’s constituent bodiesshouldenforceafeescale. @ Free competition on fees should be allowed between architects. @ A fee scale could be published by the RIBA and other bodies, provided that it is not mandatory and that it is laid down by an independent committee. This committee would be small (four or five members) al appointed by central Govern- ment and not ex officio representatives of architects or clients. @ The present fee scales should be allowed to be published (though not made mandatory) until the independent com- mittee provides itsown scale. The Commission argues that ‘there are obvious reasons’ why the present system ‘is open to criticism’. Yet, as Andrew Derbyshire (who led the RIBA’s Monopolies Commission team) pointed out last week, nowhere does the Commission produce evidence to validate its ‘obvious reasons’. Graham confessed himself to be ‘depressed’ by the Commission’s ‘lack of logic and reason and clarity’ in its attempt to refute the profession’s case. The marked lack of coherence of style and structure of the Commission’s arguments ‘leads us to fear that the essential nature of the conclusions may have been in somecone’s mind as dogma before any evidence was given’. ‘Commission fails to answer case” ‘The Commission completely fails to answer the central point of our case,’ he said. This is that the profession is more exposed to severe fluctuations in the demand for its services than virtually all others and that, if the scale was abolished, fee cutting would be widespread, particularly in a recession. Fee cutting would have a damaging effect on the supply and quality of architects’ services. Gordon referred to a 1970 report of the Monopolies Commission} in which the Commission itself suggested that control of price competition (ie some form *Architects’ services The Monopolies and Mergers Commission. HMSO, £2°85. +Professional services, Monopolics Commission, o/p- Astragal Derbyshire ‘The Architects’ Journal 16 November 1977 941 But more intriguing for AJ readers was Gyllenhammar’s acceptance that the car, however desirable, was a useless machine for city centre transport; that the incredibly expensive demolition, bridging and tunnelling to case car movement only allowed more cars in and solved nothing; that the car should be banned or priced out and that more efficient public transport could give almost as good a service. Gyllenhammar had an interest to declare: Volvo make buses and were developing avehicle with an interchangeable body so that rush-hour buses could be easily changed into lorries for delivering goods during the rest of the day. A neat economy in engines, drivers and streets. Commission recommendation that the fee scale should be Architecty’ Senvives Monopolies Commission End fee scale: Commission The profession will fight ‘every step of the way’ the Monopolies 042 The Architects’ Journal 16 November 1977 Architrets’ Servicns Monopolies report Commission When the report was published, John Fraser, Minister for Prices and Consumer Protection, announced that his boss Roy Hattersley ‘agrees’ with the conclusions of the report and that the Director General of Fair Trading had been asked to discuss changes to the codes of conduct with the professional bodies involved. The Director General has been asked to report to Secretary of State Hattersley within six months. Later, in a BBC radio interview, Fraser said: “The Com- mission have been very reasonable in saying that a recom- mended scale is a helpful benchmark. They recommend that there should be a continuation of the recommended scale, pro- vided that the customers as well as the producers are repre- sented on the committee which recommends it and as long as of fee scale) could be in the public interest in ‘those few pro- fessions in which there were considerable fluctuations in total demand’. Behind the RIBA’s argument is the hypothesis that, broadly, the fee scales represent the cash needed to pay for the costs of design and supervision (and a moderate profit). The it is made clear that the recommended scale can be departed Commission, though it studied architects’ profitability (and found that architects’ earnings do not seem to be ‘high relative to those of other professions’), refused to study the relation- ship between architects’ costs and fees on the grounds that “The investigation would be very costly, and the expenditure could not be justified in terms of the value to be gained from it in the context of our inquiry’. Clients’ evidence ‘ignored’ ‘The Commission’, said the President, ‘has ignored not only our evidence, but that of users of architects’ services’; the Commission itself admits that the majority of clients consulted were in favour of retaining the fee scales. Bodies who spoke up for the present system ranged from the PSA to the Country Gentlemen’s Association and from the British Steel Corpora- tion to the National Trust. Perhaps the strongest voice against fee scales came from the Consumers’ Association, which said that ‘each professional should be free to work out his own system of charging’. The Association was virtually the only body to raise the objection that under the percentage system, the fee gets bigger as building costs rise. RIBA would welcome review body: but report’s proposals ‘completely unacceptable’ Derbyshire admitted that defects in the present system do Virtually all architects approached by the AJ last weck were exist and explained that the RIBA would welcome an indepen- unanimous in condemning the report. Only the New Architec- dent, objective review body to examine the fee scales and, if ture Movement welcomed the Monopolies Commission’s re- necessary, fix new levels. But he explained that the independent body suggested by the Commission was completely unaccept- able—first because its recommendation would not be manda- tory, and second because it would not necessarily contain representativesofclients’andarchitects’interests. ‘Costs of bureaucracy will rise: quality will fall’ Derbyshire pointed to the US where, he said, since publication of fee scales was outlawed, far more resources have had to be devoted to preparing and assessing fee tenders. Institute Secre- tary Patrick Harrison emphasised to the AJ that the report’s recommendations ‘will increase the costs of bureaucracy at a time when there is great public demand to reduce them’ and, as a result, ‘resources for architecture and design will be drastically increased at a time when the public is demanding greater quality’. Keith Ingham, chairman of the RIBA’s membership and public affairs committee, condemned the Commission’s ‘detached, unscrupulous, purely accountancy approach to architecture’ and pointed out that ‘the market place has pro- vided much of the worst aspects of our environment’. The dogmatism of the report, he thought, represents a wish to destroy the independent professional person—‘all professions must recognise this threat’. Prices secretary supports from. They can go above or below so long as it’s clear as well that the recommended scale is not a mandatory scale.” Fraser is completely inaccurate in suggesting that the Com- mission wanted either customers or producers to be represented on the independent review body. The report says: ‘We recom- mend that the committee should be small, consisting of a chair- man and three or four members, who should be appointed by the Government on a personal basis and not as representatives of either architects or users of architects’ services’. Thinking the unthinkable: going to the market place What will happen if the Government continues this hard line and insists on the fee scale being relaxed? Gordon Graham’s response is that “We shall not lose. There shall be no com- promise at all.’ But, ‘if at the end of it al we were forced into the market place, we would have to behave with all the ruthlessness of the market place’. He indicated that present restrictions on adver- tising and directorships might all go if the fee scale were lost. Architects condemn report: commendations. NAM, which claims to have over 200 names on its ‘contact list’, submitted evidence suggesting that the mandatory scales should be abolished and that there should be a recommended scale fixed by an independent body. Not sur- prisingly,NAMwasdelightedbythereport’sconclusions, claiming that ‘the central argument that the mandatory fee scale underpins the architect’s “assurances” of integrity, un- limited liability, competence, accountability, and altruism has been proved doubly false’. Bob Giles, chairman of the Salaried Architects Group, savagely attacked NAM’s stand, pointing out that, if the report’s con- clusions are enforced, ‘architectural workers, for whom NAM claims to speak, will be subject to even greater dangers of ‘ely NAM infavour Harrison being hired and fired than they are now’. architect has actually done. However, the RIBA considers that Gilesfearedthe‘Dutchauction’thatwouldresultifthefee architectshaveaspecialcasefortheretentionofthemandatory scales were to go: ‘quality will go out of the window’, he system under which they operate. We therefore examine, both said and pointed to Sweden where the fee scales were abolished generally and in relation to the particular provisions of the in the 1960s and the general standard of architecture fell scales themselves, the arguments it has put forward to support virtually overnight. Concern should not be limited to the private sector, said Giles. The public sector would have nothing to measure itself against, for ‘the fee scale is the only measure we have’. that case. The RIBA’s case for mandatory scales 224 The RIBA’s case for the retention of mandatory scales rests mainly on its view that their abandonment would lead to widespread fee-cutting, particularly in a recession, and that this would have damaging effects on the supply of architects’ services and on professional standards. The RIBA states that the profession of architecture is more exposed than are other professions to fee-cutting because of the severity of fluctuations in the demand for its services and the strength of the client relative to that of the architect. It refers to the length of the period of the project (and therefore of the relationship between client and architect) and the difficulty of defining at the outset the amount of work which the project will entail for the archi- tect as additional distinctive features of architects’ work. SCALA rejectsreport ‘It is wrong for the Monopolies Commission to so badly ignore the RIBA recommendations,’ says Raymond Horswell, presi- dent of SCALA and Southend Borough architect. He ‘totally rejected’ the findings of the Commission and fully supports the RIBA statement. ‘Asa local authority architect particularly, I uphold the mandatory fee scale for it gives something to measure the value of work against. In a free situation it would be very difficult to decide if one was getting value for money.’ After SCALA’s next meeting, on 1 December, Horswell feels sure that he will be sending a letter of support from SCALA to the RIBA, as well as informing the Local Authorities Associ- ation of SCALA’s opposition. Official reaction from ARCUK has been hostile. Senior officers of the council have considered the report and con- clude that the Commission’s findings ‘are at variance with the evidence with which itwas presented’. The ARCUK view is that since the bulk of official clients support the fixed fee sys- tem, it is illogical to overturn it. The report will be discussed at ARCUK’s next council meeting in December, but in the meantime they stress that the code of conduct remains in force and that fee cutting remains own professional staff to handle much of their work, but they banned. Surveyors attacked too The Monopolies Commission report on surveyors’ fees* was published at the same time as the one on architects. It recom- mends that surveyors (including quantity surveyors) should be able to quote fees freely and compete on the basis of fees, but that recommended fee scales should be permitted provided that they were determined by an independent committee (which might be the same committee which would determine the architects’ scale). “Surveyors” services. Monopolies and Mergers Commission. HMSO £2-85. What the report said We give below extracts from key sections of the report. Paragraph numbers are those of the original. The bold emphasis isours. 223 Architects are alone among the major professions in having mandatory fee scales.! These scales are supported by rules in architects’ Codes of Professional Conduct which prevent com- petition on the basis of fees. There are obvious reasons why such a system is open to criticism. It reduces the incentive for architects to minimise their costs; for the architect who, by innovation or increased efficiency, does succeed in reducing his costs cannot seck to enlarge his practice by reducing his fees. The absence of competitive pressure on fees means that clients may pay more for architects’ services than they would if archi- tects’ fees were subject to normal negotiation. Furthermore, because it is difficult to provide in a scale for the differences of cost and complication between particular jobs, the client may in many cases pay a fee which is disproportionately large or disproportionately small in relation to the work which the "Appendix 13 of the Commission's general Ecport on professional services indicated that, other than archi only the Insti ists and the I. of Landscape Architects stipulated mandatory salegi tend not to vary the size of their staff in response to short-term fluctuations in their total requirements. The amount of work which in these circumstances is commissioned from architects in private practice tends to fluctuate more than total demand. 226 The RIBA has not submitted to us statistical comparisons between fluctuations in the demand for architects’ services and those for the services of other professions and we doubt whether it is practicable to make such comparisons. It is clear, however, that the demand for architects’ services has fluctuated materi- ally and that since 1970 architects in private practice have experienced extreme conditions of both boom and slump. We accept that the fluctuations in the demand for the services of architects in private practice are more severe than those suffered by most professions. 227 The RIBA suggests that it is in the public interest that architects as a body should be paid enough to ensure that in periods when the demand for their services is at its peak there should be sufficient architects in private practice to come some- where near meeting that demand adequately. It contends that mandatory scales mitigate the effects of recession on the earn- ings of architects and hence on the supply of architects and that this is in the public interest. It also cites the general discussion in paragraphs 131 and 132 of this Commission’s report on pro- fessional services in support of its case. 228 The RIBA explains the apprehended adverse effect of removing the mandatory scales as follows. The price of archi- tects’ services has virtually no effect on decisions whether or not to proceed with building projects. Price competition between architects in a recession would not therefore have the effect of obtaining more business for the profession as a whole, but would merely reduce its earnings. In the absence of mandatory scales fee-cutting would become widespread and fees would be forced down to unremunerative levels. As a consequence, many "We refer to the value of new commissions received because figures for the whole of architects’ activity are not available. The Architects’ Journal 16 November 1977 943 Fluctuations in the demand for architects’ services 225 The amount of work available for architects is closely linked to the fluctuating level of activity in the construction industry. Although exact comparison cannot be made, the work of architects in private practice, measured in terms of the quarterly value of new commissions® received by them, appears to fluctuate even more than the level of activity of the con- struction industry. . . . One reason for this is that many large public and private users of architects’ services employ their The Architects’ Journal 16 November 1977 roCy LeCTS Commission recession would be necessary to induce firms to expand their capacity, especially to meet levels of peak demand. 233 The RIBA’s contention turns on the assumption that the mandatory system of fees serves to limit the outflow of archi- tects and other personnel during recessions. As the mandatory system cannot increase the amount of work available for archi- tects during recession, it follows that the argument implies more unused capacity in architects’ practices at such times than would otherwise occur. 234 We do not overlook the argument that, if architects’ earn- ings were to fluctuate not only because of the fluctuations in the work load, but also because of fluctuations in the level of fees per job, students of the present quality might become less more architects would be forced out of business or would reduce staff on a larger scale than they would with a mandatory system of fee scales in force. This process would leave private practices with insufficient capacity to meet demand when it willing to seek to enter the profession at the present gencral recovered and excessive fees would then ensue. 229 The RIBA suggests that, in the longer term, greater fluctu- ations in architects’ earnings arising from the abandonment of mandatory scales would, by making the profession more risky, 235 In the light of these considerations we have formed the result in a decline in the number of students wishing to enter it. view that fluctuations in the demand for architects’ services are If this were to happen the cost of architects’ services would tend not a justification for mandatory scales of charges. to rise because fewer architects would qualify. A related point made was that the quality of the service provided would fall 236 The exceptionally heavy fall in the demand for architects’ because students of poorer quality would be accepted and services which has occurred since 1973 may not be part of a ‘ial qualifying standards presumably reduced to maintain numbers. typical cycle to which our arguments and those of the RIBA relate. The fal in the amount of work available to architects in private practice has been prolonged as well as severe and at the time of our report no recovery is in sight. This fall may repre- sent more than simply an unusually severe but temporary cyclical reduction in demand. It may include also the effect of areductionindemandofconsiderablylongerduration.Should this prove to be the case, we do not underestimate the difficul- ties faced by the profession. We note that a mandatory scale can do little or nothing to mitigate such difficulties. 231 In the absence of a mandatory system, we think that fee- cutting would take place in a recession on a wider scale than it does with a mandatory system in force, though it is difficult to estimate the extent and severity of the fee-cutting that might occur.Itwoulddependpartlyonthenatureandextentofthe pressure put on firms to cut their fees and in this connection the attitude of public sector clients might be particularly in- fluential. It would depend also on the willingness of firms to reduce fees on individual projects in order to secure a desired share of the available work. Many firms might be reluctant to part with key personnel or to disband well-tried design teams and might well be willing to take on some work at low fees if removal of the present mandatory system would lead to fee- they thought that the fall in demand was temporary. Such firms cutting the frequent disparity in bargaining strength between would tend to regard the salaries of key staff as a fixed cost in the architect and his client. We conceive this point to apply this situation and this attitude, to the extent that it prevailed, | in greater or lesser degree at all times, but to be perhaps of would predispose them to accept lower fees rather than lose the opportunity of additional work. We do not therefore exclude the possibility that fee-cutting in a recession might be deep and widespread, as the RIBA fears. 232 Even if fee-cutting in a recession were widespread and severe, and as a consequence more architects went out of busi- ness and more salaried staff were laid off than would otherwise be the case, we do not think it would have a serious effect on the capacity of private practices to cope with a subsequent return to a high level of demand for their services. The capacity of the architectural profession as a whole to supply architects’ services is determined primarily by the number of architects who are qualified to supply them, and this is unlikely to change much in the four to five years of the typical post-war construc- tioncycle.Architectswhoinarecessionbecameunemployedor took up employment outside their profession would be unlikely to be lost to the profession permanently, but would be attracted back into it when and to the extent that demand recovered. Similar considerations apply to the movement of other person- nel out of and back into architects’ practices. We acknowledge, however, that if as a result of fee-cutting more qualified employees were laid off and design teams disbanded in a recession, private practices might be slower to expand their staffs and individuals more reluctant to start new practices when demand began to recover. Temporary shortages of capa- city might occur, If so, higher fees than those charged in the greater significance in a recession. irch 238 We accept that architects deal with clients who, in terms of their size and resources, are often much more powerful than they are. Such clients would include public sector bodies, large institutions, and other large commercial or industrial concerns. Moreover, such clients will often, though not invariably, be concerned with large projects in respect of which a great deal may be at stake for the architect. 240 The proportion of firms heavily dependent on large pro- jects appears to be fairly small. Our survey indicates that less than one-third of architects’ practices are dependent as to 50 per cent of their fee income on projects costing £100 000 or more and only about 11 per cent are similarly dependent on projectscosting£750000ormore.TheRIBAreferredtothe case of small local firms struggling (unprofitably) with about 100 current jobs, all small. This evidence suggests that many architects handle relatively small projects for which the clients are also likely to be small. It seems to us that the firms most vulnerable to client pressures are those smaller firms which are heavily dependent on one or two large clients whose busi- ness might easily be transferred. We do not know how many firms are in this situation, but they must be a small minority. 241 However, we do not accept that disparity in size between architect and client necessarily governs their relative bargaining level of fees. However, we do not attach weight to this argu- ment. Presumably potential entrants to the profession are well aware that earnings are already subject to wide fluctuations. i The power of the client 237 The RIBA gives as another reason for its expectation that strengths. The strength of the professional firm will depend 246 It is possible that in some respects architects provide a not only on its size but also on its reputation and the amount higher standard of service than some clients would be willing andattractivenessofalternativeworkavailabletoit.Itisa topayforiftheyhadthechoice.Wescenoreasonwhyclients characteristic of other professions, not bound to a mandatory fee system, that practitioners are often small relative to their clients. i The mandatory system and the quality of service 242 The RIBA believes that if fees are cut, the quality of the service provided by architects will fal. It does not claim that al architects now attain the same high degree of conscientious- should not be free to pay a smaller fee for what they know to be a lesser service nor why the architect should not be free to offer it. iv Wider responsibilities of the architect 247 The RIBA states that the architect’s client has an assurance under the present fee scale system that his best interests will always be the architect’s dominant consideration, but it refers also to responsibilities of the architect going beyond those to his client, in particular responsibilities to the eventual users of the projected building and to the community at large for the general quality of the environment. It seems to us that these wider responsibilities may involve the architect in conflict with his client. For example, the client may be concerned to exploit the development of a particular site so that it yields the maxi- ness or the same level of professional competence in carrying out their duties. Human differences alone make it inevitable that they do not. It does claim, however, that architects gener- ally set out to protect their clients’ interests and that if fees were cut architects would be tempted to carry out their work less conscientiously. They could do so, the RIBA suggests, by spending less time on working out the best solution to a par- ticular design problem, or by making fewer production draw- mum commercial return or he may insist on cheap materials ings or by cutting corners in other ways without their clients being aware that their interests were being protected less con- scientiously. However, this fall in the quality of the service provided by architects, even though it would not be noticed at first, would be damaging to the interest both of the clients and of the public at large. Eventually the fall in standards brought about by the squeeze on architects’ remuneration would be on fees) for architects to reconcile client interests with the recognised and there would be greater awareness of the need to pay architects adequately; but it would not be easy to raise standards once they had fallen. wider public interest ‘since the interest of the public could have no place in a close bargain struck between architect and client’. In our view, architects’ existing Conditions of Engage- ment form part of a commercial contract between architect and client. We do not accept that the architect’s motives for wishing to influence his client or his ability to persuade him would be in any way affected if negotiation on fees between architect and client were permitted. It seems to us that, irrespective of the existence of mandatory scales, the architect, if he is in con- 243 We do not think that any of these consequences would ensuc. Contrary to the RIBA’s view we think that the more powerful and sophisticated clients, who often haye architects in their employ, would quickly detect any falling off in the architects’ diligence and that the architect would be deterred fromcuttingcornersbyfearofsuchdetectionandbytherisks flictwithaclient,hasthechoiceonlyofacceptinghisinstruc- to his reputation that would be involved. The smaller and less tions or refusing them. Architects may feel less able to with- sophisticated client would be less well equipped to detect tech- nical shortcomings in his architect’s performance, but we think most clients are able to make an effective general assessment of the way the architect goes about his business and that archi- tects are conscious of this. For example, the client would soon know if building work was being held up through failure by the architect to provide promptly the production drawings which the builder required. stand distasteful pressures from clients or prospective clients when work is scarce, but we do not believe that the mandatory system helps them to resist such pressures at any time. 244 The RIBA has emphasised that although architects at such practices would offend not only against professional but present do not compete with cne another in terms of price they also against personal standards of integrity in the architect. do compete keenly in terms of the quality of the service which We are disinclined to believe that architects’ standards of theyoffer.Althoughnon-commercialmotivessuchaspridein integrityaresofragile. professional skill are no doubt present in competition between architects, desire for success in business must provide a strong motive. Competition in quality of service would be almost pointless in business terms if architects’ clients were unable to recognise and appreciate quality of service when it was supplied. 245 We do not believe that competition in terms of quality of service would disappear if price competition also were permit- ted or that clients would press for lower fees irrespective of the nature of the project or cease to pay regard to firms’ reputation and experience. We would expect the client always to be con- cerned with obtaining value for money in his choice of archi- tect, but not always to choose the cheapest. As the RIBA has pointed out, the architect can save his client far more moncy than could be saved by cheese-paring on his fees. An estab- lished reputation for competence and reliability might well become even more important to the individual firm than it is now if competition in fees were permitted. v Length of the period of the project 249 Architects’ commissions can extend over a very long period. A period of nine to 10 years for large projects was mentioned to us as not unusual and sometimes the period is even longer. We were told that even a fairly small building is unlikely under the present system of legislative control to be completed in less than two years. Once an architect has been engaged on a project, termination of his contract may give rise to much in- convenience and expense, It is important therefore that before a project is embarked upon there should be agreement between the architect and his client on the conditions of his engage- ment including his fees. 250 The RIBA claims for its mandatory fee system that this has the convenience for architect and client that both know in advance how the architect’s fee is to be calculated. There is no need for possibly lengthy negotiations or costly estimating and no call or scope for fee comparisons between one architect and another. ‘The Architects’ Journal 16 Novernber 1977 945 and methods of construction regardless of the effects on the users of the building or the building’s impact on its surround- ings; and such attitudes may be offensive to the architect’s sense of civic responsibility. The RIBA states that it would be ‘particularly difficult’ under the conditions of a commercial contract (that is to say, a contract reached after a negotiation 248 Another danger foreseen by the RIBA is that malpractices which were outlawed in the last century might re-emerge. It thinks it possible that, in the context of fee-cutting, some archi- tects may seek to recoup themselves by accepting payments corruptly from suppliers and contractors. It seems to us that 946 The Architects’ Journal 16 November 1977 Aechitveny’ Servions OS eC Commission 260 The various forms of competition to which qualified architects are subject test the appropriateness of the general level of RIBA’s scales only to a limited extent; and as tests they are no substitute for price competition between qualified architects in private practice. i Relationship of scales to architects’ costs 261 The RIBA suggests that, if fees were too high in relation to costs, the scales would in the long term be eroded by price- cutting, both overt and secret. It claims that it is testimony to the sound basis of the fee scales that they are so widely upheld in practice, even during recessions. 262 We doubt whether this conclusion can be drawn from the fact of wide adherence to the scales. The obvious explanation for adherence to the scales is that they are mandatory, and have been formally mandatory since 1945. 270 The RIBA said that there may be imperfections in its present scales of charges and said that it would be happy to sec—indeed wished to see—an independent review body set up if we reported in favour of a mandatory fee scale. It believed that a detailed investigation of several hundred projects of different sizes and types would be necessary in order to deter- mine what further differentiation in the scales, if any, would be appropriate. We decided not to carry out such an investiga- tion ourselves. Conclustons on the mandatory system 271 We are not persuaded that architects have any special case for the retention of their mandatory system of charges whichcanoutweightheinherentdisadvantagesofthatsystem (see paragraph 223). We do not accept the RIBA’s contentions that fluctuations in the demand for architects’ services, or the power of the client, or the need to sustain the quality of archi- tects’ services justify it. The features which we have criticised of the structure and detail of the scales may be remediable to some extent, but they illustrate the undesirable results which are likely to occur when a mandatory system is used. 272 WE CONCLUDE THAT THE ARCHITECTS’ SYS- TEM OF MANDATORY SCALES TOGETHER WITH RULES WHICH PREVENT COMPETITION FOR BUSINESS ON THE BASIS OF FEES OPERATES AGAINST THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND SHOULD BE BROUGHT TO AN END. 273 If the mandatory system is terminated, there remains the question whether the existence of scales on a non-mandatory basis would perform a useful purpose. We therefore go on to consider whether the issue of scales on a recommended basis would be justified: and, if so, whether an independent review body (such as that suggested by the RIBA for the determina- tion of mandatory scales) would be necessary to determine such 251 The RIBA considers it to be of great importance that the relationship of trust between the client and his architect which has to be sustained over a long period should not be put at risk by argument about the fees to be paid. It visualises that the mandatory scale system puts fees, in a sense, into a separate compartment removing them as a possible source of conflict between client and architect so that the latter can concentrate on looking after his client’s interests at all times without regard to his own. 252 In our view, the RIBA exaggerates the difficulties which might arise from negotiation on fees, Assuming the mandatory scale of charges were to be replaced by a recommended scale, the architect and his client would continue to be free to agree upon whatever conditions of engagement formed the basis for the recommended scale. If departure from a recommended scale of fees were agreed, this might involve no more than an agreement to apply an ad valorem percentage different from that specified in a recommended scale. In neither of these caseswouldtherebeanydifficultyinestablishingattheoutset, as now, the conditions of the architect’s employment including the method by which his remuneration would be calculated. It would, of course, be open to both client and architect in the absence of mandatory scales to propose and agree upon either a fee or a method of calculating the fee which differed from the present ad valorem method of charging and to vary other con- ditions of his engagement. The provisions and effects of the scales A The general level of the scales 254 The RIBA contends that architects’ earnings are not exces- sive in relation to those of other professions, that the scales would not survive if they were seriously out of line with com- petitive prices on a long-term basis and that architects in private practice are subject to price competition from other suppliers of architects’ services. sone “7 iArchitects’ earnings relative to those of other professions 255 With regard to the first of these contentions, the RIBA study... indicates some of the difficulties of making com- recommended scales. parisons and drawing conclusions from such comparisons be- tween earnings in different professions as can be made. We accept that the available evidence does not suggest that archi- tects’ incomes are high relative to those of other professions but does suggest that they are particularly subject to fluctua- clients. The RIBA’s existing Conditions of Engagement have tions. However, such comparisons of earnings with other pro- fessions are in our view of little value simply because different professions do different types of work, operate in different markets and are subject to a variety of rules. Even if useful comparisons of professional incomes could be made, no con- clusion could be drawn from them as to the appropriateness of the general level of the architects’ fee scales. Unless archi- tects’ fees are tested in the market it is impossible to judge whether there are too many architects or too few or whether architects’ costs are higher than they should be. the merit of setting out in detail the duties and responsibilities which the architect assumes in return for his fee. They provide a useful standard for regulating the relations between the parties but we see no reason why those duties and responsibili- ties should not be modified by agreement between the archi- tect and his client to suit particular circumstances. 277 We are impressed by the evidence that users of architects’ services favouring the abolition of scales are far fewer than those favouring their retention, though many of those who want Recommended scales 275 We think it likely that the issue of recommended scales would have some effect on the behaviour of architects and scales consider that they should be subject to negotiation to Suit particular circumstances. None of the public authorities whom we consulted favoured the abolition of scales even though there were some criticisms of the existing system. For our part, we appreciate the administrative convenience and economy for public bodies of having available published scales which, if they are considered to be appropriate in the generality of cases, may offer an acceptable basis for fixing charges for individual projects and so avoid the possibility of difficult or contentious negotiations. A large majority of those private sector users of architects’ services who expressed a positive view one way or another also considered that scales should be retained. 278 We consider that, on balance, architects’ scales on a recom- mended basis would not operate against the public interest pro- vided that, first, the rules of the ARCUK, the RIBA and other professional associations are amended so as to permit architects freely to quote a fee in competition with other architects, and, second, certain conditions as to their determination are fulfilled, to which we now turn. Determination of recommended scales 279 Some important users of architects’ services favoured the Setting up of an independent body for the determination of recommended scales. This was advocated by several public authorities who gave evidence to us, including the principal Government departments concerned with construction pro- grammes, the County Councils Association, the Greater Lon- don Council and the Inner London Education Authority. The Government departments did not consider it satisfactory for them to negotiate general fee scales on their own with the professional associations, and for this reason preferred the scales to be determined independently. are free to settle fees without reference to the scales and that an architect may quote a fee in competition with other architects. 283 We recommend that the committee should be small, con- sisting of a chairman and three or four members, who should be appointed by the Government on a personal basis and not as representatives of either architects or users of architects’ ser- vices. We suggest that the same committee might also con- veniently determine recommended scales of fees for surveyors’ services to the extent recommended in our report on the supply of surveyors’ services. The Architects’ Journal 16 November 1977 947 IV Recommendations 280 It seems to us that the setting up of an independent com- mittee to determine recommended scales is not without pos- sible drawbacks. An independent committee might be expected to give greater authority to the recommended scales than they would have without the backing of such a committce. Clients might for this reason be less inclined to negotiate with archi- tects the fees they would pay or to seek competitive quotations. Thus the issue of recommended fee scales by an independent committee might serve to limit competition more than the issue of similar scales by the RIBA and other architects’ associations. Furthermore, the work of the committee would inevitably involve expense. 281 On the other hand, we think it against the public interest that recommended scales should be determined by architects. However conscientiously their professional associations prepare the scales, it is difficult for them to give as much consideration to the interests of others as they do to their own. Moreover, as we have already pointed out, recommended scales limit to some extent the operation of competitive forces. For this reason we think it is necessary to ensure that clients’ interests are explicitly taken into account in the determination of the scales. We think that the scales would be likely to be improved by an independent committee, although there are bound to be serious difficulties in the construction of a scale of fees designed to be related to the differences in the costs, skills and respons- ibility necessarily involved in the various categories of work. 284 We cannot foresee the extent to which recommended scales would be used, whether merely to provide guidance or to deter- mine the fee charged, after the removal of the restrictions on fee competition. If it should turn out after a period, say five years, that recommended scales were not widely used, the case for retaining the committee should be reviewed, 282 On balance we consider that if recommended scales of fees for architects’ services are not to operate against the public interest they should be determined by an independent com- mittee. Furthermore, in order to mitigate any adverse effect which the existence of such scales might have on competition, we recommend that all documents in which scales are published should state prominently that the scales are not binding in vii Until the independent committee which we recommend has been set up and has had time to determine scales, the publica- tions of the existing scales by the RIBA and other architects? associations (and associations of architects and members of other professions) should be permitted provided that: relation to any particular transaction, that architects and clients a the scales are not mandatory; and b al documents in which the scales are published state promin- ently that the scales are not binding in relation to any particular transaction, that architects and clients are free to settle fees without reference to the scales and that an architect may quote a fee in competition with other architects. 286 iThe requirement of the ARCUK Code of Professional Conduct that an architect shall not contract with his client except on the basis of Conditions of Engagement andascale of charges published by one of its constitutent bodies should be abolished. li The rules of the 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 busi- ness on the basis of fees. ii The RIBA and other associations of architects (and associations of architects and members of other professions) should cease to require architects to comply with scales of charges for the supply of architects’ services. iv The rules of the RIBA and other associations of architects (and the rules of associations of architects and members of other professions) should be amended so as to permit an archi- tect freely to quote a fee in competition with other architects and so as not to prevent competition for business on the basis of fees. v The publication by the RIBA and other associations of architects (and associations of architects and members of other Professions) of scales of charges for architects’ services should be permitted provided that: a they are not mandatory; b they have been determined by an independent committee; and ¢ all documents in which the scales are published state promin- ently that the scales are not binding in relation to any particular transaction, that architects and clients are free to settle fees without reference to the scales and that an architect may quote a fee in competition with other architects. vi The committee referred to in recommendation (v) should consist of a chairman and three or four members appointed by the Government on a personal basis and not as representatives of architects or clients. The same committee might conveniently perform similar duties in relation to recommended scales of charges for surveyors’ services to the extent recommended in our report on the supply of surveyors’ services, 948 The Architects’ Journal 16 November 1977 NEWS Shore carves up Chancellor’s £400 million The building industry will get a £181 million boost in 1979-80 on top of the £400 million promised in the Chancellor’s mini budget for 1978-79. This was made clear by Environment Secretary Peter Shore in the Commons last week. The newly revealed cash would, said Shore, keep construction programmes working at a steady level. English housing will receive about half the Chancellor’s £400 million. Shore said: ‘This will enable housing authorities and housing associations to restore some of the cuts that had to be made in 1976 and put the housing capital programme back on to a rising trend’. He told Labour MP Dr Edmund Marshall in a written reply that the increases will halt the decline in the construction programme and give scope for modest in- Creases in some sectors in 1978/79. Most of the increases will affect building, but civil engineering will benefit from in- creased expenditure on roads and some other environmental services. Local authorities will undertake most of the work and allocations to them will be worked out by the DOE in accordance with normal procedures. No charges for building regs Shore said that of the sum, £5 million is to go to the British Waterways Board to ‘undertake urgent repair and mainten- ance work’. A further £4 million will go to the urban pro- gramme. He said that in order to assist the construction indus- try ‘I have also decided not—repeat not—to introduce any scheme for imposing charges for building regulation applica- tions in 1978/79. This will mean that English and Welsh local authorities will forgo an estimated £13 million and I shall be allowing local authorities an additional £13 million out of the £400 million to count as relevant expenditure for the purpose of the rate support grant settlement which I shall be making shortly.” The money will go to: housing, £150 million; other environmental services, £33 500 000; health and personal ser- vices, £37 million; transport, £23 million; education, £26 mil- lion; defence and trade, £8 million each; Home Office, £5 million; Property Services Agency, £3 500 000; Lord Chan- cellor’s Department, £3 million; employment and other pub- lic services, £1 million each; energy, £700 000; and agricul- ture, fisheries, food and forestry, £300 000. The Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ircland secretaries will each receive £76 million. Which leaves £24 million yet to be allocated. Shore said it is available for other purposes and future announcements will be made. Help for Tyneside and London Two new inner city areas will be getting extra government help toward solving urban problems. Announcing the latest of the Government’s partnership schemes last week, environment secretary Peter Shore named Newecastle/Gateshead and Hackney/Islington, bringing the total of such schemes to seven. In each of these areas, central government agencies will be working with the local authorities on long term plans to reverse the effects of inner city decay. Tyneside and Hackney/Islington will be getting an immediate £5 million each for construction work in this and the next financial years. Another £1 million will go to all the partnership areas next year for schemes to improve the environment which can be set in hand, while inner area programmes are being prepared. nevertheless merit special help. These local authorities will be getting powers to make loans and declare Industrial Improve- ment Areas as set out in the Inner cities White Paper. Up to £25 million will be available for these areas under the urban aid programme from 1979 onward. Another 15 areas have been identified as having inner urban problems which, while not justifying partnership treatment, bricks. Prohibitive price of public .s. .ase.a participation The rising costs of expert advice may make the public inquiry system break down, says the Town & Country Planning Assoc- lation in a paper published last weck.* The Association detects a growing imbalance at planning inquiries between public authorities or commercial interests with unlimited cash and ordinary members of the public who find that even putting a simple case can cost thousands of pounds. ‘Something must be done to make it easier for people to exercise their right to participate’, says David Lock, author of the paper. He suggests that a tax on planning applications could provide the money to help participants in inquiries, in the same way that legal aid operates in the courts. Alterna- tively, a national professional assistance fund could be estab- lished to help pay for the expert advice needed. The TCPA are inviting further comments and suggestions on the subject from professional bodies and activist groups. *Planning inquiries; paying for participation The Town & Country Planning Association, 30p In brief Register of buildings for handicapped people A national register of buildings designed or adapted for handi- capped and disabled people is to be set up by the Centre on Environment for the Handicapped (CEH). The centre needs information on day centres, schools, hostels, group homes, housing or other projects (especially small ones, which might slip through the net), particularly where human needs, as well as physical, have been considered. Wolfson College, Cambridge, which was opened by the Queen last week, was designed by Michael Mennim of Ferry & Mennim, architects and surveyors of York. The central block tsfaced instone and tsflanked by two courtyards, themselves surrounded by residential accommodation, clad in facing ARABcust WELonue*s BUTOFFICER HOW CAN WE BE A MONOPOLY Y 7? E ONLY REPRESENT A SIXTH OF THE WHOLE PROFESSION ./ Readers who have information about suitable buildings are asked to contact Ros Purcell, Research Officer, CEH (126 s Diary 17 November Future events Green Belt management illus- Albert Street, London, NW1 7NF (01-267 6111 ext 264). A Brain research—implications for trated talk by Alan Hall, author selection of successful schemes will be published when the the designer lecture by Dr Colin of the Bollin Valley Management survey concludes in 1979. Blakemore, fellow of Downing Study, at the TCPA, 17 Carlton College, Cambridge, in the Cord- House Terrace, London SWI, at ingley Lecture Theatre, Univer- 18.30. Details: Sarah Gostling Top architect jailed for fraud sity of Manchester School of at the TCPA (01-930 8903). Strathclyde’s director of architectural services, Graham Ing- Architecture, at 13.00. (061-273 13 December ham, began a one year jail sentence for fraud last week. Ingham, formerly Lanarkshire county architect, was found guilty of defrauding Lanark County Council of £600. He had used council workmen to repair fire damage at his Bothwell home while the men were being paid by the council. He was also convicted of submitting false claims for fire damage to his insurance company, and of defrauding Crudens Ltd. But Ing- ham was cleared of corruption charges. 3333.) courses at the Institute of Ad- Housing strategies and housing vanced Architectural Studies. Come backCorb,alisforgiven Reg Freeson was in a mellow mood at last week’s Institute of Housing Management conference in Brighton. In a burst of generosity, the minister refrained from pushing al the blame land Place, London WIN 4AD, King’s Manor, York, YO1 2EP for the tower block disaster on architects. Housing managers and even his own department were just as much to blame. But now that official policy is to keep densities below 70 ppa, Freeson is concerned that the attack on high rise has gone too far. Properly managed, there is no reason why they should be difficult to let to people without children. Government housing forum goes at 18.15, Free (01-580 5533). 13-17 March 1978 Air conditioning and energy con- servation conference organised by the Chartered Institution of The London Housing Action Group has been disbanded, it was discuss SPAB’s attitudes towards announced last week. Environment minister Ernest Armstrong, its chairman, has decided that, in his department’s words, ‘the group’s continued existence as a forum for non-partisan dis- cussion on housing problems is no longer necessary’. restoration and repair of old for fees received before 1 Janu- buildings. (See articles in next ary 1978. Details: CICC Ltd, week’s AJ.) At the RIBA, 66 PO Box 2, West PDO, Notting- Portland Place, London W1, at ham, NG8 2TZ (0602 282257). 10.45. Entrance fee £2; lunch £2. 20-21 April 1978 The Architects’ Journal 16 November 1977 22 November investment programmes mecting of the TCPA, speaker Alex Henney of the DOE Housing Policy Review, at 17 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1, at 18.30. Admission 20p. (01-930 8903.) Course A, for architects and building control officers, covers recent and proposed changes to the regulations. Course B, for architects only, covers applica- tions of the current regula- tions to buildings with public access. Fee for each course, in- cluding full board, £69-£75. De- tails: David Rymer, Secretary, 22 November RIBA inaugural address of Presi- dent Gordon Graham at 66 Port- IAAS, University of York, 26 November All-day seminar on the Philos- ophy of repair, sponsored by the Society for the Protection of Building Services, the Royal In- Ancient Buildings (SPAB). Speakers, who include Prof Baker, Bob Organ, Niall Phillips, Donald Insall, Paul Simon, will stitution of Chartered Surveyors and the Institute of Refrigera- tion, at Nottingham University. Registration fee £70, accom- modation £16, reduction of £8 Building Regulations two short Al PR MINIM linge The Architects’ Journal 16 November 1977 Amtico.The last word GA19 AMIICO. The unmistakable touch of Amtico Amtico, 22 Hanover Square, London W1A 1BS. Tel: 01-629 6258. For additional information—use the inquiry form at the back of the journal 77 AMTICO, in floor tiles The last word in any flooring specification shouldbe Amtico. Because Amtico tiles give that unmistakable finishing touch. The touch that lasts. Amtico tiles are tough and beautiful. Only Amtico etch moulds from original materials, grind individual tile edges, and hand finish deep grouted patterns. And now, the best vinyl tiles havea distribution system to match. It will cover the length and breadth of the country. Depots in Bristol, Coventry, London, Manchester and Sheffield and distribution points in Aberdeen, Belfast, Glasgow, Hythe and Southampton, mean that when you need us you'll find us. Right at your fingertips. So, ifyou're specifying floors, specify Amtico. The tile that does justice to your designs. 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 16-Nov-77