ATI CPD

Crank Stain

Is anyone effected by and have an opinion of the decision by Accounting Technicians Ireland to bring in a requirement for members to attend ATI approved CPD from 2018? The requirement will be 8 hours in 2018 and will rise to 15 thereafter.

Failing to comply with the CPD requirement can result in your removal from the register of members.

There hasn’t been a CPD requirement previously for ATI members and the news broke unannounced as soon as the memberships for 2018 were paid.
Unlike other professional accountancy qualifications there isn’t a legal requirement to be a member to work in a role that an accounting technicians are typically employed in, and its not usually a requirement of an employer that an employee is an ATI member.

The majority of members don’t work in situations where employer sponsored professional memberships and CPD are the norm.

This means that a lot of ATI’s are funding their own membership and will have to fund their own CPD as their employers don’t contribute.

The membership is currently €175 pa, but if you include the cost of CPD this could rise to €700 or more depending on the CPD you do.

This seems a bit rich when there isn’t a requirement to be a member to work in the field.

I have nothing against keeping my skills up to date, as I do this anyway, however the level of investment the ATI expects members to fund to maintain a level 6 qualification seems excessive when the majority of members earn less that the CSO annual industrial average wage.

Am I being unreasonable?

jcon1913

Crank Stain wrote: »

Is anyone effected by and have an opinion of the decision by Accounting Technicians Ireland to bring in a requirement for members to attend ATI approved CPD from 2018? The requirement will be 8 hours in 2018 and will rise to 15 thereafter.

Failing to comply with the CPD requirement can result in your removal from the register of members.

There hasn’t been a CPD requirement previously for ATI members and the news broke unannounced as soon as the memberships for 2018 were paid.
Unlike other professional accountancy qualifications there isn’t a legal requirement to be a member to work in a role that an accounting technicians are typically employed in, and its not usually a requirement of an employer that an employee is an ATI member.

The majority of members don’t work in situations where employer sponsored professional memberships and CPD are the norm.

This means that a lot of ATI’s are funding their own membership and will have to fund their own CPD as their employers don’t contribute.

The membership is currently €175 pa, but if you include the cost of CPD this could rise to €700 or more depending on the CPD you do.

This seems a bit rich when there isn’t a requirement to be a member to work in the field.

I have nothing against keeping my skills up to date, as I do this anyway, however the level of investment the ATI expects members to fund to maintain a level 6 qualification seems excessive when the majority of members earn less that the CSO annual industrial average wage.

Am I being unreasonable?

Average CPD for accountants costs €15-30 per hour. Also factor in unpaid leave/ giving up your weekend. Not sure where ATI will be in this scale.

But I think its safe to say its what my granny used to call 'a racket'.

L.Jenkins

No offence, but I don't see what the issue is. As a trainee Accountant I understand I will have to keep up with any changes in Taxation, IFRS, Vat, Company Law, Employment Law etc and most of what I mentioned, will change on an annual basis.

Even Electricians as an example, have to attend conferences annually, outlining any changes in how things are done.

jcon1913

L.Jenkins wrote: »

No offence, but I don't see what the issue is. As a trainee Accountant I understand I will have to keep up with any changes in Taxation, IFRS, Vat, Company Law, Employment Law etc and most of what I mentioned, will change on an annual basis.

Even Electricians as an example, have to attend conferences annually, outlining any changes in how things are done.

70 hours @ €30 per hour = €2,100 at the expensive end of the market + time off from work = racket.

To be fair you can get better value if you shop around.

Just for comparison solicitors need 16 hours per annun.

Another symptom of accountants trying to be the best boy in the class instead of pushing back against costly regulations.

tanit

jcon1913 wrote: »

70 hours @ €30 per hour = €2,100 at the expensive end of the market + time off from work = racket.

To be fair you can get better value if you shop around.

Just for comparison solicitors need 16 hours per annun.

Another symptom of accountants trying to be the best boy in the class instead of pushing back against costly regulations.

The 30 Euros per hour are at the high end of CPD. Even for Chartered or CPA you can find approved CPD for much, much less money. Without having to think too much ATI Munster organizes an event every year that counts for 6 hrs and costs 15 Euros total for members and yes it counts for CPD for Chartered and CPA. And all bodies offer a certain amount for free or next to free to members.

Also the 70 hours is for Chartered Accountants not for ATI. This first year is going to be 8 hours and they say about increasing that to 15 in the future along with having a significant amount of it for free (I think this year everything is provided for free). I doubt they will increase those hours above the 15 limit as it makes no sense for ATI. It does make sense 70 hours for Certified and Chartered Accountants and my guess is that they have a significant amount of those hours for free as I remember a partner in my previous place doing something online the last week before going on Christmas break last year in the CAI website to complete the quota for the year.

I'm not saying they are not profitting from the CPD requirements but definitely not the way it appears above. And the reality is that CPD is needed at certain levels you need to keep up to date and you need to know what you are doing. If people would naturally do it there wouldn't be any professional requirement for it. But the reality is that some people pass the exams, they never keep themselves up to date at all and them it happens what it happens.

Also in case everyone forgot people got really mad about the salaries some people were getting in places like Anglo and the like and they were not exactly doing a "great job". You need to show that you are trying to do the job the right way.

jcon1913

tanit wrote: »

The 30 Euros per hour are at the high end of CPD. Even for Chartered or CPA you can find approved CPD for much, much less money. Without having to think too much ATI Munster organizes an event every year that counts for 6 hrs and costs 15 Euros total for members and yes it counts for CPD for Chartered and CPA. And all bodies offer a certain amount for free or next to free to members.

Also the 70 hours is for Chartered Accountants not for ATI. This first year is going to be 8 hours and they say about increasing that to 15 in the future along with having a significant amount of it for free (I think this year everything is provided for free). I doubt they will increase those hours above the 15 limit as it makes no sense for ATI. It does make sense 70 hours for Certified and Chartered Accountants and my guess is that they have a significant amount of those hours for free as I remember a partner in my previous place doing something online the last week before going on Christmas break last year in the CAI website to complete the quota for the year.

I'm not saying they are not profitting from the CPD requirements but definitely not the way it appears above. And the reality is that CPD is needed at certain levels you need to keep up to date and you need to know what you are doing. If people would naturally do it there wouldn't be any professional requirement for it. But the reality is that some people pass the exams, they never keep themselves up to date at all and them it happens what it happens.

Also in case everyone forgot people got really mad about the salaries some people were getting in places like Anglo and the like and they were not exactly doing a "great job". You need to show that you are trying to do the job the right way.

Some good points there. Most in the banks that made poor decisions were not accountants.

You are right ATI only need 8 hours and this could cost as little as €15 per year

I stand by my point - accountants do 70 hours per year, solicitors 15. Now why is that do you think?

tanit

jcon1913 wrote: »

Some good points there. Most in the banks that made poor decisions were not accountants.

You are rught ATI only need 8 hours and this could cost as little as €15 per year

I stand by my point - accountants do 70 hours per year, solicitors 15. Now why is that do you think?

To be honest with you the problem is not accountants doing 70 hours but solicitors not doing enough. I speak from dealing with solicitors only a little and they definitely need more CPD and more ethics training. And add doctors to that list it's outrageous when you are actually more up to date with medical research than them and I'm not talking cutting edge treatments but every day issues. And it's ridiculous when they refer you to the consultant and the consultant backs you up not them.

70 hours might be a bit high but I stand by what I say some people pass the exams and they believe they are set for life without doing anything else. At a certain level you should accept that you need to keep up to date and you need to do your best to stay at that level and you should do that training without a professional body telling you do it or get out. But some people don't do it and we end up here.

Avatar MIA

Depends, do you want the ATI qualification to be considered professional?

Crank Stain wrote: »

Unlike other professional accountancy qualifications there isn’t a legal requirement to be a member to work in a role that an accounting technicians are typically employed in, and its not usually a requirement of an employer that an employee is an ATI member.

Very few accountants work as registered auditors, and are not representative of accountants in general.

jcon1913

tanit wrote: »

To be honest with you the problem is not accountants doing 70 hours but solicitors not doing enough. I speak from dealing with solicitors only a little and they definitely need more CPD and more ethics training. And add doctors to that list it's outrageous when you are actually more up to date with medical research than them and I'm not talking cutting edge treatments but every day issues. And it's ridiculous when they refer you to the consultant and the consultant backs you up not them.

70 hours might be a bit high but I stand by what I say some people pass the exams and they believe they are set for life without doing anything else. At a certain level you should accept that you need to keep up to date and you need to do your best to stay at that level and you should do that training without a professional body telling you do it or get out. But some people don't do it and we end up here.

My point is that solicitors are way better at controlling things for themselves than accountants, not arguing with most of your excellent points.

tanit

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Depends, do you want the ATI qualification to be considered professional?




Very few accountants work as registered auditors, and are not representative of accountants in general.

ATI is professional. But as Crank said there is no legal requirement to be ATI qualified to be working at that level but there is a legal requirement for accountants to be certified accountants if they are signing accounts. It's not just auditors that need to be registered, accountants need to be registered if they need to sign company accounts regardless of them being auditors or not.

Avatar MIA

tanit wrote: »

It's not just auditors that need to be registered, accountants need to be registered if they need to sign company accounts regardless of them being auditors or not.

Haven't worked in practice in years - What legal requirement (apart from body regulations) is there that accountants be registered?

tanit

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Haven't worked in practice in years - What legal requirement (apart from body regulations) is there that accountants be registered?

As far as I know the only ones that can sign the accounts of companies in the Republic are registered/certified accountants they also have unlimited liability and it's the reason why accountants are always in partnerships and never in limited companies unlike auditors or tax advisors. CIMA accountants can sign accounts but they cannot sign auditors reports as they are not part of the bodies allowed for auditing purposes.

The situation is different in the continent and in the UK as far as I know there is no legal requirement to be a registered/certified accountant to sign accounts

Avatar MIA

tanit wrote: »

As far as I know the only ones that can sign the accounts of companies in the Republic are registered/certified accountants they also have unlimited liability and it's the reason why accountants are always in partnerships and never in limited companies unlike auditors or tax advisors. CIMA accountants can sign accounts but they cannot sign auditors reports as they are not part of the bodies allowed for auditing purposes.

The situation is different in the continent and in the UK as far as I know there is no legal requirement to be a registered/certified accountant to sign accounts

My understanding is that the Directors sign off the accounts. If a company falls into the criteria (turnover, # of employees, etc.) that requires them to be audited then they need to be prepared by registered auditors and then signed off by the directors.

Other than that I think they could be prepared by anyone. I may be wrong, but would like to see something stating otherwise.

Separately, a lot of accountants work outside practice or like myself no longer even work as accountants, but still benefit from being registered accountants. It was only a matter of time before the ATI members had to sign up to CPD because it makes sense that anyone puts themselves out to be professional are shown to be keeping up to date with their profession and not basing their professionalism on exams passed 10 years ago.

BUT, it is a money racket by the professional bodies. :pac:

tanit

Avatar MIA wrote: »

My understanding is that the Directors sign off the accountants. If a company falls into the criteria (turnover, # of employees, etc.) that requires them to be audited then they need to be prepared by registered auditors and then signed off by the directors.

Other than that I think they could be prepared by anyone. I may be wrong, but would like to see something stating otherwise.

Separately, a lot of accountants work outside practice or like myself no longer even work as accountants, but still benefit from being registered accountants. It was only a matter of time before the ATI members had to sign up to CPD because it makes sense that anyone puts themselves out to be professional are shown to be keeping up to date with their profession and not basing their professionalism on exams passed 10 years ago.

BUT, it is a money racket by the professional bodies. :pac:

To be honest with you I cannot find anything online regarding the obligaton of an accountant to be registered/certified. And I would certainly appreaciate if someone tells if I'm right or wrong because this is not the first time I have this conversation and it's starting to annoy me that I cannot find anything and I might be putting my foot in my mouth.

But regarding CPD even though they do make money with it and I have no doubt about it, the reality is that many people pass the exams and forget everything relating to keeping up to date. It should be something that people do without having to be reminded at certain professional/educational levels.

That the professional bodies want to distance themselves from universities and set up the CPD requirement in order to be seen as more proactive does make sense. But it does make sense if you notice that there are a bunch of people in your profession and their are lowering/damaging the image of everyone else in the profession just because they are not doing what they are supposed to be doing.