Based on a document that highlights “the importance of preserving and strengthening the scope of the title in the profession of architect”, the Federation of Architectural Entities (FADEA) took the lead in the demand for uphold the twenty incumbencies established by ministerial resolutions.
The statement addresses critical issues related to the inherent rights and responsibilities to the practice of architecture “as well as the need to maintain high ethical and quality standards in the professional field.”
Making history, the General Incumbencies were established with the active participation of specialists appointed by the universities, councils and colleges, after many debates. This is expressed in the content of Ministerial Resolution 133/87 where 19 powers were established.
Subsequently, Ministerial Resolution 498/2006 was sanctioned, where the basic curricular contentsminimum workload, practical training, accreditation standards and in Annex V, and the 19 responsibilities contained in resolution 133/87, which added to Hygiene and safety constitute the 20 activities reserved for the title of Architect.
This allowed for more than 30 years accredit, guarantee and defend the profession before the State, before other disciplines and before society in general.
However, Ministerial Resolution 1254/2018, completely without consultation, establishes that “the scope of the titles is defined by each university institution” and that the activities reserved for the title of Architect “are a limited subset of the scope of the title (those that imply direct risk to the health, safety, rights, property or training of the inhabitants).”
Furthermore, in Ministerial Resolution 498/2006, Annex V (the 20 activities reserved for the title of Architect) is replaced by Annex XXII, composed of four points that, “in a confusing and incomplete manner, attempts to define the activities reserved for the professional.” says the FADEA document, which totally rejected this resolution based on different presentations and proposals.
However, although every effort was made to reach dialogue, there were never responses consistent with the demands.
In addition, it was reported that resolution 1254/2018 is being litigated in the Federal Court No. 2 of La Plata, in an action accompanied by all architectural entitiessince it affects rights and has direct consequences for the entire society.
According to the ministerial resolution of accreditation standards for the title of Architect that includes the aforementioned annex, the 32 national and private faculties of Architecture They will be able to define their study planscontents, workloads, scope of degrees and accrediting the courses.
If this happens – they say from FADEA -, the graduates will have gone through different contentsince we will not have the support of Resolution 133/87 or resolution 498/06.
This puts the future of the profession at serious risk. “We respect university autonomy, but let us not forget that our title is ‘national’‘and it is appropriate that we all have the same scope to practice our profession.’
“Therefore, we emphatically request that the 20 defined activities constitute the minimum floor for the development of study plans for all public and private architecture careers in the country. Also stating that the maximum degree of the title must be that of Architect in all faculties,” the document concludes.