The Right to Earn a Living

............."Interior designing has almost no startup costs. Not so if you want to practice in Florida. State law mandates that anyone who wants to practice interior designing have six years of education and experience, including graduating from a state-approved interior design program and completing an apprenticeship under a state-licensed interior designer.

Then the applicant must pass a state-mandated licensing exam. The sole purpose of the law is to keep the outs out so the ins can charge monopoly prices."

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/08/03/the- ... ontPage%29

Yeah, this is becoming common - my daughter is in school for interior design; after she graduates she will have to work for a design firm for two years, take the test and get certified to work on her own. Lots of states are doing this now.

Actually there is a lot of positives to be said for such moves. They parallel the licensing and certification process seen in Germany for every level of technical employment. You do not get a bad carpenter, plumber, electrician, interior decorator, architect, etc. because all need to be certified, and spend an apprenticeship before going into business. Let's face it. Book learning differs from applied skills. You simply don't learn those applied skills in College. Oh, let I forget, my German nephew who does copper gutter work, not only needed to pass the associated technical metal working programs, but also complete training in how to set up a business, do books, invoices, etc. Again, a huge price to pay, but the results are extraordinary.

Obviously, I'm in favor of such developments. Whether Florida is doing them for altruistic concern for the public, protectionism or other reasons is another question. Nothing bad will come out of it regardless of the reasons it's being done. Hell, imagine what it would be like to have someone show up who really knew what they were doing. You would not have to worry about the car mechanic, carpenter, plumber, etc. being competent. What a novel idea!

I can see why you would want only to hire experienced, licensed people, but by barring entry to people who don't have the money to go to school or take low wages or no wages while they learn, you are increasing prices for everyone.

And so often, what is required is not really necessary. I have never been to beauty school but I can cut hair. Do you really need a 2 year degree and a license to do this?

You shouldn't need a license to do work that doesn't have a reasonable chance of harming the customer. Interior design is a form of artistry and should be treated as such, just as a watercolor artist or a photographer. A bad interior designer could have all the education in the world but have no common sense or a "good eye" for the business. Likewise, there are people who natually have an artistic eye. People who do bad work will be flushed from the business and those with determination and natural skill will succeed because of their reputation and not because of a piece of paper.

People without an education are not barred from achieving a master ranking. It's done through an apprenticeship.

Even artistic work will benefit from OJT. It is similar to learning about composition for photography. No it does not teach you how to be original in your work, but you certainly can learn an artistic eye. A piece of paper is merely an entry level to do things on your own. It does not come with guarantees for success or failure. What the buyer does get is a guarantee of fundamental competence, a factor not present in a free for all approach.

CriticalBill wrote: You shouldn't need a license to do work that doesn't have a reasonable chance of harming the customer. Interior design is a form of artistry and should be treated as such, just as a watercolor artist or a photographer. A bad interior designer could have all the education in the world but have no common sense or a "good eye" for the business. Likewise, there are people who natually have an artistic eye. People who do bad work will be flushed from the business and those with determination and natural skill will succeed because of their reputation and not because of a piece of paper.

Unfortunately, there a some interior designers that will approve moving an interior wall, not realizing that it is holding up the roof (I know a few.) There are even some that think glass is structural. That's probably the reason for requiring a license.

Rockdoc Franz wrote: Actually there is a lot of positives to be said for such moves. They parallel the licensing and certification process seen in Germany for every level of technical employment. You do not get a bad carpenter, plumber, electrician, interior decorator, architect, etc. because all need to be certified, and spend an apprenticeship before going into business. Let's face it. Book learning differs from applied skills. You simply don't learn those applied skills in College. Oh, let I forget, my German nephew who does copper gutter work, not only needed to pass the associated technical metal working programs, but also complete training in how to set up a business, do books, invoices, etc. Again, a huge price to pay, but the results are extraordinary.

Obviously, I'm in favor of such developments. Whether Florida is doing them for altruistic concern for the public, protectionism or other reasons is another question. Nothing bad will come out of it regardless of the reasons it's being done. Hell, imagine what it would be like to have someone show up who really knew what they were doing. You would not have to worry about the car mechanic, carpenter, plumber, etc. being competent. What a novel idea!

You position on this puzzles me. Why would you be just fine with licensing an interior designer (who at worst is going to do work you find ugly) but NOT fine with licensing someone to drive heavy farm equipment? If someone has to prove their competence in order to choose my draperies, why shouldn't they have to prove their competence before being allowed to operate potentially dangerous equipment?

Sorry, this just doesn't seem to be consistent.

AspenValley wrote:

Rockdoc Franz wrote: Actually there is a lot of positives to be said for such moves. They parallel the licensing and certification process seen in Germany for every level of technical employment. You do not get a bad carpenter, plumber, electrician, interior decorator, architect, etc. because all need to be certified, and spend an apprenticeship before going into business. Let's face it. Book learning differs from applied skills. You simply don't learn those applied skills in College. Oh, let I forget, my German nephew who does copper gutter work, not only needed to pass the associated technical metal working programs, but also complete training in how to set up a business, do books, invoices, etc. Again, a huge price to pay, but the results are extraordinary.

Obviously, I'm in favor of such developments. Whether Florida is doing them for altruistic concern for the public, protectionism or other reasons is another question. Nothing bad will come out of it regardless of the reasons it's being done. Hell, imagine what it would be like to have someone show up who really knew what they were doing. You would not have to worry about the car mechanic, carpenter, plumber, etc. being competent. What a novel idea!

You position on this puzzles me. Why would you be just fine with licensing an interior designer (who at worst is going to do work you find ugly) but NOT fine with licensing someone to drive heavy farm equipment? If someone has to prove their competence in order to choose my draperies, why shouldn't they have to prove their competence before being allowed to operate potentially dangerous equipment?

Sorry, this just doesn't seem to be consistent.

Professional trades are an issue of licensing for the sake of improved quality in work. This does not pertain to family farm hands, who get on the job training and undergo an apprenticeship from a certain point of view before entrusting them with equipment operation. It's as different as apples and oranges to my way of thinking. As Kate so astutely pointed out, there is far more to interior design than applying artistic talent. Hence it has a direct consequence on a client. Operation of farm equipment differs substantially from that consequence.

Rockdoc Franz wrote:

AspenValley wrote:

Rockdoc Franz wrote: Actually there is a lot of positives to be said for such moves. They parallel the licensing and certification process seen in Germany for every level of technical employment. You do not get a bad carpenter, plumber, electrician, interior decorator, architect, etc. because all need to be certified, and spend an apprenticeship before going into business. Let's face it. Book learning differs from applied skills. You simply don't learn those applied skills in College. Oh, let I forget, my German nephew who does copper gutter work, not only needed to pass the associated technical metal working programs, but also complete training in how to set up a business, do books, invoices, etc. Again, a huge price to pay, but the results are extraordinary.

Obviously, I'm in favor of such developments. Whether Florida is doing them for altruistic concern for the public, protectionism or other reasons is another question. Nothing bad will come out of it regardless of the reasons it's being done. Hell, imagine what it would be like to have someone show up who really knew what they were doing. You would not have to worry about the car mechanic, carpenter, plumber, etc. being competent. What a novel idea!

You position on this puzzles me. Why would you be just fine with licensing an interior designer (who at worst is going to do work you find ugly) but NOT fine with licensing someone to drive heavy farm equipment? If someone has to prove their competence in order to choose my draperies, why shouldn't they have to prove their competence before being allowed to operate potentially dangerous equipment?

Sorry, this just doesn't seem to be consistent.

Professional trades are an issue of licensing for the sake of improved quality in work. This does not pertain to family farm hands, who get on the job training and undergo an apprenticeship from a certain point of view before entrusting them with equipment operation. It's as different as apples and oranges to my way of thinking. As Kate so astutely pointed out, there is far more to interior design than applying artistic talent. Hence it has a direct consequence on a client. Operation of farm equipment differs substantially from that consequence.

Sorry, but that doesn't make sense. Why can't we just let interior designers get their knowledge from apprenticeships?