More Letters - Interns and the AIBC on Overtime
Reprinted e-mails with permission from the authors:From an Intern, 19 January 2007:
"I did get your email regarding proposals to establish an award to recognize ‘intern friendly’ firms. While I appreciate the intent I do think it is equally important to penalize firms who disobey the law. As you know, the AIBC aggressively prosecutes firms that sway outside the fee schedule. I think that the same should apply to firms that flaunt employment standard regulations."
From another Intern, 19 January 2007:
"I think if I were to suggest anything else it might be some kind of education requirement for employers. Like a one day seminar or something for Learning Units? There seems to be a lot of ignorance among the employers themselves about their obligations.....Increasing awareness about this issue among interns is a good idea too.
Or perhaps in the employer forms that the Interns have to submit to the aibc the employer can sign something that states they have read and understand the rules about compensation, spelling out the overtime rules? That way it's out there in the open."
From Michael Ernest, AIBC Director of Professional Practice, 19 January 2007
A letter from 3 November 2006 to Roisin O'Neill, AIBC Intern Coordinator:
"Our Practice Note 11 is the AIBC standard and is completely consistent with the prevailing BC law. In fact, as I believe you know, the contentof that Practice Note and its predecessor Directors Chair 10 was reviewed and accepted by the BC Employment Standard Branch ... from whom we also have written confirmation that Intern Architects DO have employment rights.
Only registered architects are excluded from the protection/rights of BC's employment law, at least insofar as it relates to the items under discussion.
(not incidentally, the foregoing is exactly what is taught, by lawyers specializing in employment law, in our "The Law and the Architect" course, mandatory for IAs and available to architects during several recent annual conferences since 1999/2000.)
Architects and their firms (as well as IAs) are expected to obey the law of the province and to adhere to AIBC standards. Anything else exposes them to not only legal/financial risk but also to disciplinary action.
The AIBC stands behind that and does not stand behind illegal and/or abusive treatment of staff. "
----------------------------------------
I asked Michael Ernest to comment about "disciplinary action." Here's his reply from 22 January 2007:
"my recollection is that there is precedent within the AIBC’s disciplinary system for the AIBC to have and to exercise discretion as to anonymity in publication of a case result; I know that has happened in at least one case involving an IA who was the complainant"
"I understand the issue. However, if no one comes forward, then there is no case to be made and any alleged illegal activity or abuse will continue. Disciplinary findings and their publication have several purposes, two of which are (i) stopping further infractions by the offending architect or firm; and (ii) sending a message to all other architect and firms."
posted by Lisa @ 12:33 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home