RIAI Technologists Register

TaraP

So, anyone that joins the register can simply be a registrant if they don't want to be a Chartered Member of CIAT for whatever reason.

If they do want to become Chartered, they have a couple more things to do including the professional interview and there would be a further fee to align it to others seeking Chartered status. The process to join the register is based on the existing Professional Assessment process to achieve MCIAT.

The problem is, unless application forms are being filled in and returned then we don't know how many are applying. Once people apply we can get the ball rolling and get people assessed and on the register very quickly.

Glebee

Im currently looking at getting my paperwork in order to progress to MCIAT. Its just trying to organise yourself to actually do it...

Bazlyons

The RIAI issued an email on Friday in relation to their own voluntary AT register.

Quote:

"As you will know from a previous circulation, the RIAI intends to set up a Voluntary Register of Architectural Technologists. There is a commitment from the DECLG to advance a Statutory Register for Architectural Technologists but this RIAI Register, at this time, does not have a Statutory basis.

In order to satisfy Date Protection issue, you have a choice of either:
1. Showing the full address held by the RIAI as above or as you may wish to see it corrected or
2. Simply showing your Region ie: Dublin 2, Tipperary etc.

I would be grateful if you could respond by 8th September at the latest. If no response is received, it will be assumed that you have no objection to your full address being shown on the Voluntary Register. The RIAI sees the Voluntary Register as an important step in reinforcing the role of Architectural Technologists"

End Quote

There is no mention of whether persons on their AT register will be eligible to act in the DC/AC Roles so i sent John Graby the following clarification question:

"Dear john,
Before my name is included on the RIAI Voluntary Register of Architectural Technologists I need the following clarified in relation to the RIAI’s policy.

In time if 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 as specified under the BC(A)R,

I’d appreciate clarification of this matter at your earliest convenience,"

I'll keep you posted of his response.

BAZ

PS i'm not joining it either way just wanted to see what the Royal's would say. CIAT all the way.

sonnyblack

Excellent idea baz. What are the bets about whether he'll respond. Guaranteed he won't. Ciat all the way indeed.

sydthebeat

Very sneaky to only be offering an "opt out" rather than an "opt in" .....

Bazlyons

par for the course i'd suggest

Glebee

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.

sonnyblack

One thing I don't understand about the proposed RIAI register. TaraP, you might be able to enlighten me. If both the CIAT and RIAI registers are are meant to operate to the same standard, does this mean that the RIAI register would have to propose AT's as AC & DC similar to CIAT? Otherwise both registers are surely not operating to the same standards.

Bazlyons

I imagine they would be operating to the same standards for acceptance onto the register. but if the RIAI one doesnt allow AT to act in the the DC/ AC roles then it's redundant.

I would urge all AT's to support the CIAT one or explain to the rest of us why they see the RIAI as a better option.

RITwing

sonnyblack the RIAI are being disengenuous. They are at the DOE to frustrate the advancement of AT's.
They wish us to particpate as ancilliary certifiers only.

In return for a DOE confered favoured status under SI 9 the RIAI are playing ball with an official policy to "work with" SI 9 and avoid political embaressment to the govt. No fight for better buildings sadly and no regard for the wider societal and economic costs of inadaquet building standards.

Architects should lead the way morally in seeking better for our society and in fairness many individual architects do just that.
But the RIAI does not. Do not seek fairness or justice for society in general or AT's in particular in any of it's actions.

.

RITwing

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

sonnyblack wrote: »

Baz, fair play to you.

X 1000

Bazlyons

[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

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

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

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

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

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

They kept that one quiet!!

Bazlyons

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

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

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

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

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.