The RIBA doesn’t earn its keep

For 25+ years I paid two sets of fees: Arb because to call myself an architect I am required to do so; RIBA merely to be able to append the letters RIBA after my name. Unfortunately this is because many of the public believe (wrongly) that RIBA is actually our qualification.

Since 1985, when I qualified, neither organisation provided much that was tangible, or useful in promoting myself as an architect. Eventually I gave up with the RIBA, and very recently was seriously considering doing the same with Arb, which only protects the “title” of architect and not the “function”.

Now at last Arb is doing something tangible, useful and constructive to help architects. Frankly, what architects needed for years is a compact, efficient organisation, relevant to the needs of architects, all provided for a reasonable fee. The new Arb website looks clean, useful and relevant to architects’ needs. So why would any architect wish to pay extortionate RIBA fees for an organisation that has become fairly irrelevant?

Perhaps this is why the RIBA is crying “foul”. Personally I welcome the new Arb move. Maybe the rather tired “gentlemen’s club” called the RIBA should respond constructively, rather than petulantly, to this welcome development.

Fortunately I now live in Germany, where both the title and function of architects are valued, respected and protected. I think both Arb and the RIBA would do well to learn from the realities of architectural practice over here.

Keith Tomlinson
via bdonline

Kiss and make up

Another extraordinarily arrogant detachment from reality by the RIBA (News February 8). When is this internecine warfare going to cease? Promoting the profession is a joint obligation — so kiss and make up, for heaven’s sake.

As for “muscling in”, “stepping on toes”, “undermining”, and “overlapping roles”, what has the RIBA done to halt the accelerating erosion of the architect’s role in the design and construction process of projects large and small?

We are in danger of becoming a profession lorded over by project and design managers who will stand between an architect and client in a constructor-led procurement market and (ab)use architects as scapegoats and whipping boys on the cheap, whilst watering down design.

Oh dear, I must have blinked — we’re already here.

Michael Spicer
via bdonline

Not worth it

I am happy to pay to be on the Register of Architects (News February 8). When I lived and worked in Scotland I was very happy to be an RIAS-only member, since that organisation offers its members an excellent service; indeed I am happy to remain a paying member today.

I am only in the RIBA because successive London-based employers have paid the subscription for what I can only describe as a London-centric clique. It does next to nothing, in my view, to justify its cost.

Simon White
via bdonline