RIAI Technologists Register

RITwing · 01-09-2014 9:55am

Glebee wrote: »

As an architect college said to me the RIAI is there to represent Architects. Full stop. As far as he was concerned it had never done anything for technicians and never wanted to and alot of that was down to snobbery he felt.. All techs should be on board the CIAT train and once and for all get somebody with technicians interest at heart.

For 30 years I have been hearing this mixed message.
Where else can ye go vs. this is an architects club.

Stop listening to them. Join CIAT.

TaraP · 02-09-2014 3:48pm

Regarding the standard, I can only speculate until it has been discussed further and then developed, and I can only comment from CIAT's point of view.

The common standard is for the whole AT profession. Anyone registering for the ATR would need to demonstrate all AT competences against this standard - not just those applicable for the AC/DC functions (as is for the building surveyor register).

Our register is for AC/DC, I can't comment on what RIAI's intentions are, but the agreed overall AT standard would need to be agreed and be the same.

CIAT is pushing for parity of the level of standard with other professions that are already recognised and therefore equal recognition for the AC/DC functions.

No6 · 04-09-2014 1:47pm

Some of us spend a lot of time worrying about the RIAI, I fear another exercise in exclusion coming up, so join the ATR if you havn't already!!!

RITwing · 04-09-2014 2:14pm

When the 2013 version of the regulations was introduced in March 2013, RIAI Director John Graby said that “The new Building Regulations – prepared by Minister Hogan and his Department – represent one of the most significant efforts to strengthen the country’s building control system since the introduction of the original Building Regulations over 20 years ago and they are to be commended on this”; and that “the 12-month implementation period announced by the Minister will give the Government and the country’s Local Authorities the time they need to get their inspection and monitoring systems operating effectively.”

source

The RIAI are not even representing architects well No6. They are being led by hurlers on the ditch.

Bazlyons · 05-09-2014 11:27am

Re: the RIAI Register of Technologists

Just got off the phone with John Graby asked him the following questions. (I’m paraphrasing the conversation but the essence is correct)

Me: If in time the RIAI Voluntary Register of Architectural Technologists achieves statutory recognition, will the RIAI deem Architectural Technologists on their register competent to act in the roles of Design Certifier and/or Assigned Certifier and specified under the BC(A)R?

John: It’s not within the gift of the RIAI to say that Technologists on their register are competent to act on as assigned and design certifiers. That determination will be made by the Department of the Environment.

Me: Ok but will the RIAI be making a case to the Department that Architectural Technologists on their register are competent to act in these roles?

John: There is no policy defined by the RIAI in relation to this yet.

I’ll be writing today to ensure my name does not appear on this sham register.

RITwing · 05-09-2014 11:35am

Bazlyons wrote: »

John: There is no policy defined by the RIAI in relation to this yet.

Oh yes there is.
But not one that favours AT's.
Some of us have been seeing this for decades.

sonnyblack · 05-09-2014 11:44am

Bazlyons wrote: »

Re: the RIAI Register of Technologists

Just got off the phone with John Graby asked him the following questions. (I’m paraphrasing the conversation but the essence is correct)

Me: If in time the RIAI Voluntary Register of Architectural Technologists achieves statutory recognition, will the RIAI deem Architectural Technologists on their register competent to act in the roles of Design Certifier and/or Assigned Certifier and specified under the BC(A)R?

John: It’s not within the gift of the RIAI to say that Technologists on their register are competent to act on as assigned and design certifiers. That determination will be made by the Department of the Environment.

Me: Ok but will the RIAI be making a case to the Department that Architectural Technologists on their register are competent to act in these roles?

John: There is no policy defined by the RIAI in relation to this yet.

I’ll be writing today to ensure my name does not appear on this sham register.

Baz, fair play to you. Talk about grabbing the bull by the horns. Compared to the 'can do' attitude of the CIAT, the RIAI's response is exactly as expected

RITwing · 05-09-2014 12:08pm

sonnyblack wrote: »

Baz, fair play to you.

X 1000

Bazlyons · 05-09-2014 3:01pm

[QUOTE It’s not within the gift of the RIAI to say that Technologists on their register are competent to act as assigned and design certifiers. That determination will be made by the Department of the Environment.[/QUOTE]

Re the above:
On the 18th Feb 2014 Big Phil said the following:

"Neither I nor my Department have any role in the assessment or validation of professional qualifications in this manner"

Now he was talking about admission onto the Architects and Building Surveyors Register but I can't imagine the Department will change their policy just to take time out to determine the competence of Technologists.

sonnyblack · 05-09-2014 3:30pm

Baz, This brings me back to a point I made a while ago regarding the CIAT conference in Cork. I clearly heard that the Department was engaging the RIAI as a checking body for CIAT's ATR register. The CIAT speaker said that this rankled a bit because CIAT did not feel that the RIAI were necessarily best qualified to undertake the role.

So what exactly is Mr Graby playing at? He must know that the RIAI will be involved in checking CIAT's register criteria. Somebody please tell me differently if you think I've got the wrong end of the stick by all means

Bazlyons · 05-09-2014 3:41pm

What i think this refers to is the RIAI are the body in charge of the Architect's Register and as such they will be checking the qualifications of anyone who is a member of the CIAT who wishes to be included on the Architects Register. (that same Dail answer I mentioned earlier refers to this specifically)

The RIAI will not be checking or approving the CIAT Register criteria. Both registers will operate independently if they get approval.
However they'll have to work together to agree equal standards for admission onto the registers. You can't have two different standards. If anything the CIAT admission criteria is a lot higher and it should be the other way around for checcking. To Joint the RIAI the cheque just had to clear.

In relation to what they're playing at, its just business as usual. String AT's along, collect the fees and keep anyone else out.

There seems to be no pro RIAI Tech voices on the forum.

I'd love to hear what they have to say.

No6 · 06-09-2014 10:44am

They are very quiet across all social media, facebook, linkedin, they must be all on holidays!! I am waiting for the DIT lecturers who are so pro RIAI they need a torch to make pronouncements about how wonderful the RIAI register is (when Launched) AT's will become registered ancillary certifiers as opposed to the unregistered ones they already!!

sonnyblack · 23-09-2014 3:56pm

I've been emailed a surveymonkey link to opt in to the RIAI Architectural Technoliogists Voluntary Register signed by Graby himself. Deadline 26th September.

'Surveymonkey' would be unpopular but not unsurprising choice of words. I'm going to opt in for the moment to see where it leads. Will report back

shane6977 · 23-09-2014 5:31pm

sonnyblack wrote: »

I've been emailed a surveymonkey link to opt in to the RIAI Architectural Technoliogists Voluntary Register signed by Graby himself. Deadline 26th September.

'Surveymonkey' would be unpopular but not unsurprising choice of words. I'm going to opt in for the moment to see where it leads. Will report back

I wouldn't opt in without first having confirmation from the RIAI that they will be proposing that AT's can perform the roles of design and assigned certifier. Without that confirmation from the RIAI, their register is worthless.

No6 · 02-10-2014 1:57pm

They kept that one quiet!!

Bazlyons · 08-10-2014 12:57pm

Opted out of RIAI register.
Was going to just ignore it but i didn't want them to think i forgot to return.
I wanted them to know for certain what i thought of their register.

No6 · 07-11-2014 12:23pm

I see from the BREGs blog on the RIAI EGM that the Architectural Technologist rep Darren Bergin has resigned from council along with a number of other council members. Not sure why but I am pretty sure it is to do with their persistant exclusion of AT's.

sydthebeat · 07-11-2014 2:50pm

No6 wrote: »

I see from the BREGs blog on the RIAI EGM that the Architectural Technologist rep Darren Bergin has resigned from council along with a number of other council members. Not sure why but I am pretty sure it is to do with their persistant exclusion of AT's.

well he was a 'seconder' of one of the motions that was defeated, so taht could have been a factor too.

i hope NO technician puts them self forward to replace him.

No6 · 08-11-2014 7:41am

sydthebeat wrote: »

well he was a 'seconder' of one of the motions that was defeated, so taht could have been a factor too.

i hope NO technician puts them self forward to replace him.

Their annual membership renewal is in January, I hope all AT's finally realise that there is no future for Architectural technology within the RIAI and vote with their feet and leave!! Continuing to pay a subscription to this organisation is giving them leeway to claim they reresent us when clearly they dont, never have and never will.

Bazlyons · 08-11-2014 10:29am

I understand that Darren Bergin resigned because of lack of progress and persistent lack of support for AT's within the RIAI. …so for the bleeding obvious.

I resigned this week as RIAI Tech by letter and returning their scroll to Robin Mandal.
Was going to let it just run out but decided that they should know I was leaving deliberately and was not just indifferent.
I do hope they can't get another AT member for the council but I suppose there's always some Architect wannabe out there.

Hairy mellon · 09-11-2014 3:01pm

at recent RIAI EGM speaker, supportive of SI.9 (and speaking against motion 1: revoke SI9), said it would put "clear blue water" between architect practices and technologist practices that were competing for the same work. The motion was defeated.

No6 · 11-11-2014 12:24pm

Its pretty clear to me even at this distance that the RIAI have not done to well representing their own members, they have never done well at representing AT members and I was one for a long time. They seem to be building a consensus in the middle ground but are loosing people along the way.

I suspect they mgiht get some tinkering around the edges of SI9 in next years review declare it a fantastic victory for Architects and then go and try and recover the ground they have lost to Engineers and Surveyors who don't seem to have the same issues with it as the Architects.

RITwing · 11-11-2014 1:49pm

No6 wrote: »

Engineers and Surveyors who don't seem to have the same issues with it as the Architects.

not so

Architects have been too craven to understand that if they lead a charge away from SI 9 that Engineers and Surveyors would follow them.

Hairy mellon · 11-11-2014 1:51pm

looks like there is at least one engineer who is on top of SI9 issues:

http://bregsforum.wordpress.com/2014/11/11/engineers-ireland-journal-jack-kavanagh-building-control-certification-to-sign-or-not-to-sign/

DOCARCH · 11-11-2014 3:33pm

Hairy mellon wrote: »

looks like there is at least one engineer who is on top of SI9 issues:

http://bregsforum.wordpress.com/2014/11/11/engineers-ireland-journal-jack-kavanagh-building-control-certification-to-sign-or-not-to-sign/

I think that is the first negative commentary I have seen from an engineer on SI9...maybe the lift is starting to reach the top floor!

RITwing · 11-11-2014 7:58pm

On the way home tonight I was listening to a Teachers Union official saying that "we will not accept" continuous assement as a component of Junior Cert qualification . Why - because students were entitled to better than that. He would not be budged easily brushing aside accusations of self service. 3rd party assesment was a vital component of confering certificates of education on the students. and for the sake of the students they are preapred to take industrial action.

Why cant architects grow stones like that ? For the sake of the homeowner ...

RIAI Technologists Register

Comments