What are the real issues – without the NCIDQ and professional organization hype – involved in Interior Design Title Acts and Practice Acts that architects and contractors find troubling” How do we keep common sense in these Title and Practice Acts” Why doesn’t there seem to be one approach to all of this instead of state by state with resulting variance in what one can be called and what that title can actually do” Isn’t this sort of like what we had before” And, are there practicing designers who are actually against these acts”

(submitted by Sarah S.)

We are thrilled to hear your readers are interested in this subject. TAID would be glad to answer any and all questions. Unfortunately, there is way too much “bad or erroneous” information out there floating around. Let’s answer each question one by one”

(For additional answers to these questions, GO HERE.)

What are the real issues, without the NCIDQ and professional organization hype, involved in Interior Design Title Acts and Practice Acts that architects and contractors find troubling”

First, this is very hard for me to answer as I don”t really “know” what they find troubling (especially contractors). I have never met a contractor that had any issues with interior design registration. My guess as to why architects see it as “trouble” is that they see it as a possible loss of work for them. In other words, turf = income. Basically, the architects would like to be involved on all projects and sub-contract to interior designers; therefore, they get an amount off any work we do. Is this fair to the consumers or to interior designers” We do not want to practice architecture ” we just want to practice interior design. Should we be made to work under someone” Some find an easy way of looking at this as a comparison to other professionals. Does a dental hygienist have to work under a dentist in order to clean teeth” Or do we pay more for the dentist to look at our teeth after the hygienist cleans them”

How do we keep common sense in these Title and Practice Acts”

I would love to answer this but, quite frankly, I don”t know what they mean. I would say there is a lot of common sense in the Practice Act, and I would assume this person has not read the proposed legislation. If they are talking about legal terms, that is not something we can do anything about.

Why doesn’t there seem to be one approach to all of this instead of state by state with resulting variance in what one can be called and what that title can actually do”

We wish there was. Unfortunately each state operates differently; therefore, it has been assigned to the states. Having said that, most states filing interior design legislation use the model language provided by NCIDQ. This “model language” is based on current legislation in states that have title or practice acts. The reason there is model language is so that when we move from state to state or we do projects in different states we can be licensed in those states, which is called reciprocity.

Isn’t this sort of like what we had before”

Again, I would love to know what this person is really asking, but here is a guess. Is the Practice Act like what we have now” No. Currently we have a title act, which means that someone who is not registered with TBAE [Texas Board of Architectural Examiners] cannot use the title “interior designer;” however, they may do the work. Unfortunately, we have people that are not qualified doing work in regulated spaces that does not meet the governing jurisdictional laws and, therefore, they are endangering my health and life safety. The Practice Act will not affect anyone doing spaces that are not regulated.

And, are there practicing designers who are actually against these acts”

I cannot honestly answer this question based on any facts that I have. I do know that decorators were concerned that residential decorators would be unable to do what they do now. So I had a face-to-face meeting, and I have not heard anything from the decorators since I showed them the proposed language and explained the exemptions. Does this mean there are not some against the Practice Act” I cannot answer. I know that there are designers who think TBAE forced the $200.00 professional tax on them when it was really the legislators who were looking for dollars to balance the budget. I know there are designers who do not think we should be required to take continuing education classes each year. I also know a lot of people who have let their license be revoked because they do not do spaces that are regulated.