Wednesday, June 17, 2009

My Own Argument

The Alabama Act was not very well written. The language it contained was extremely broad and open to wide interpretation. The retail exemption created a double standard in the Alabama interior design industry. A retail clerk who assisted a person in selecting a shower curtain was protected, for example. The same assistance, when provided by an unregistered person claiming to be an Interior Designer, was a crime. This confusing language resulted in the entire Act being invalidated by the Alabama Supreme Court. The basic requirements of certification and registration with the Board make sense and truly define Interior Design as a profession. These requirements include a college degree, work experience supervised by another registered Interior Designer and passage of the National Council for Interior Design Qualification (NCIDQ) test (Maclachlan, 2008) or a similar test. The Acts inclusion of certain decorating activities such as paint selection, flooring, furniture and throw pillows was ultimately its downfall. The Act failed to draw a clear distinction between an interior decorator and an Interior Designer. An Interior Designer meets certain basic characteristics of a professional. These include a college degree, a test, experience and a professional association with a code of ethics. Doctors, lawyers, accountants, architects, and interior designers share these common attributes. Many states throughout the country have ‘title statutes’. Unless an individual has met the licensing or certification requirements, they are prohibited from using that title. Members of the general public have certain expectations when they hire a doctor or an attorney (lawyer). It is a matter of public trust. Interior Designers need to work to educate the public and raise the awareness of the differences between a decorator and a designer. The difference is similar to the difference between a bookkeeper and an accountant or an attorney and a legal assistant. There are a number of professional organizations such as the NCIDQ and the American Society of Interior Designers (ASID) who lobby state legislators to enact title statutes throughout the country. ASID is currently monitoring licensing bills in the Michigan legislature such as “HB 4772 – providing for the licensure of interior designers” (ASID, 2008). The NCIDQ mission statement in part is to establish “standards of competence in the practice of interior design” (NCIDQ, 2009). Both Nevada and Illinois; “regulate the practice of interior design” (Neily, 2008). The Nevada Revised Statutes provides that “no person may practice: as a registered interior designer or use the title of registered interior designer in this state without having a certificate of registration issued to him pursuant to this chapter” (NRS 623.180 1 (c)). The statute further defines the practice as a registered interior designer as rendering services to "enhance the quality and function of an interior area of a structure designed for human habitation or occupancy.”(NRS 623.0225). Oklahoma also regulates the use of the Interior Designer title and does not allow individuals to “advertise themselves accurately as interior designers” (Hoberock, 2008), unless they are registered with the state. The statute is being challenged by three people who feel that it treats them unfairly. Successful lobbying in Colorado resulted in the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies statement that “there is no evidence of physical or financial harm being caused to…consumers by the unregulated practice of interior designers" (Neily, 2008). It is up to Interior Designers across the country to work together, creating a high regard and respect for the profession. This concerted effort may ultimately result in more states recognizing Interior Designers as true professionals.


All Work Cited

American Society of Interior Designers. October 7, 2008. June 17, 2009.
http://www.asid.org/legislation/legislation/.

Hoberock, Barbara. “Interior Design Licensing in Court”. World Capital Bureau. October 1, 2008. June 17, 2009. http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.

Maclachlan, Malcolm. “Center for Constitutional Government”. Gold Water Institute. May 1, 2008. June 14, 2009. www.goldwaterinstitute.org/AboutUs/ArticleView.aspx?id=2179

Nagorsky, Edward. “Alabama Supreme Court Invalidated Interior Design Practice Act”. National Kitchen & Bath Association. October 22, 2007. June 4, 2009. http://nkba.org/press_releases_20071022.aspx

National Council for Interior Design Qualification.2009. June 17, 2009. http://www.ncidq.org.

Neily, Clark. “Watch Out for That Pillow”. The Wall Street Journal. April 1, 2008. June 17, 2009. http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB120701341410579079.html.

Nevada Revised Statutes. http://leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-623.html#NRS623Sec0225.

Parker, Justice. Concurrent opinion. State of Alabama v. Lupo. Supreme Court of Alabama. October 12, 2007. June 13, 2009. http://www.lexisone.com/lxl/caselawsitemap/State-Courts-Alabama-100041-2-2007.html.

Smith, Justice. Majority opinion. State of Alabama v. Lupo. Supreme Court of Alabama. October 12, 2007. June 13, 2009.

No comments:

Post a Comment