New movements are demanding binding industry-wide improvements to working conditions. We’re on board with a new article series starting with a large survey – take part!
Working overtime, at night and at weekends; uncertain career paths and internships for graduates; minimum holidays and retail industry pay levels – for generations, working conditions ranging from dubious to precarious have been a part of the architect’s profession that everyone is expected to take for granted. Newcomers learn to embrace self-exploitation while still at university. The silverbacks of the discipline preach that architecture is a vocation, not a profession. “I do not work for money”, says Peter Zumthor. “If you want an easy life, don’t be an architect “, said Zaha Hadid. And Rem Koolhaas is proudly on record as saying “The work in S, M, L, XL was almost suicidal”.
However, the ideal of the great “author-architect” is not the only thing that has started to teeter in recent years. Working conditions within the system are coming under fire too. Young architects in particular see themselves increasingly as employee “architectural workers” and are demanding fair pay, regular working hours, secure pensions and co-determination rights. Unions and activist groups are being set up internationally, from the German “Architekt*innengewerkschaft” and Italy’s “unione lavoratrici e lavoratori in architettura” to “Architectural Workers United” in the USA and the two British organisations “Section of Architectural Workers “ and “Future Architects Front”. RIBA, the Royal Institute of British Architects, has been conducting comprehensive surveys for several years and addresses industry-wide injustices. Staying in Britain, in 2021, the “Architects’ Journal” highlighted horrifying data: 48 percent of new entrants to the profession were paid less than the Real Living Wage. Nine out of ten junior staff received no compensation for overtime. Eight percent of respondents had no employment contract.
These injustices seem to be deeply rooted in the workplace culture of the profession. Accordingly, groups worldwide are demanding the same improvements, albeit to varying degrees and with different levels of urgency. Furthermore, almost all movements acknowledge fair conditions in architectural production as key for the transformation to a more socially and environmentally sustainable architecture. In this context, the transition has less to do with technocentric CO₂ optimisation than with a systemic shift to a non-extractive, democratically negotiated construction industry in which all stakeholders – big investors, construction workers and cleaners alike – maximise public benefit rather than profits. That, at least, is the goal.
Joint survey for transparent discourse
Post-Marxist transition in the construction industry and industrial action by architects? Switzerland is taking its usual restrained approach to social challenges, but things are happening nonetheless. “Kontextur”, a digital magazine based in Leipzig, Berlin and Zurich, has been collecting data on pay structures in architectural practices since 2019 and is creating a space for discussions of fees, working conditions and the balance of power. Since 2021, the “( non- )Swiss architects” collective has been publishing facts, surveys and results, as well as the real-life experiences of employees, many of whom come from a migrant background. The “Architektur Basel” group has presented the results of surveys on working conditions in architecture, since when it has been campaigning for a collective labour agreement for north-western Switzerland. EPFL Professor Charlotte Malterre-Barthes is investigating conditions in architectural production throughout the world at the RIOT research and design laboratory. Her latest book, “On Architecture and Work”, was published this summer. Long overdue, a discussion that is a fixture over after-work drinks is now moving into the public arena.
We will be taking up this discussion in a series entitled “Working conditions and architecture”, which will run from autumn 2025 to summer 2026. Working with the stakeholders mentioned above, we will not be starting with statements and accusations, but with questions: Why is the debate around fair working conditions gathering momentum internationally right now? What are the structural and cultural factors behind this status quo? And above all: What is the situation as regards working conditions in Switzerland? The informative value of most surveys and data tends to be anecdotal because of low participant numbers. The most recent SIA pay survey is almost ten years old and provides no information on holiday and overtime arrangements or non-mandatory pension provision. Important and soft issues – stress levels, appreciation, communication and transparency, co-determination or opportunities for participation in the company – are hardly addressed at all. To ensure a reliable foundation for discussion, we are therefore jointly launching our “Architecture and Labour 2025” survey.
External and self-inflicted pressures
Working conditions in architecture are partly attributable to external factors, key among them the low remuneration for architectural services. Take for example architectural design competitions. These are a major business development tool for young entrants to the profession, but are nevertheless a loss maker, even for established practices. Even frequent winners have to shoulder countless hours of unpaid work that they have to cross-finance through ongoing projects. In turn, the lack of mandatory industry-wide hourly rates fuels price competition among competitors in designer selection procedures. And then there is the design effort, which is rising in line with the growing complexity of construction projects, processes and requirements, while fees have barely increased in years. Furthermore, many practices complain that the number of projects being delayed or cancelled is growing, making it difficult to schedule resources and staff. As a result, pay is stagnating even in successful practices. Even executive-level staff are poorly paid – at least in comparison with their workload, responsibility and the remuneration on offer in other sectors, including related industries.
Secondly, there are self-inflicted reasons. More than a few architectural practices are chaotic and inefficient, a state of affairs that is certainly in keeping with the profession’s traditional view of architecture as art. While still students, the strongest designers tend to neglect elective courses associated with construction management, contracts and HR and business issues. These same architects then go on to learn and practise their management skills on a lackadaisical, ad hoc basis. A practice and its employees are often a means to the end of personal authorship. In the words of Mario Botta, “If there’s one thing I can’t do, it’s organise”. Or Valerio Olgiati: “When I really consider what I enjoy most as an architect, it’s being able to think endlessly about projects”.
The result is not only low pay, but also a lack of opportunities for co-determination, participation and development, or to assume responsibility. Although architects generally find their work fulfilling and relevant, a lot of experienced people are departing the profession, leaving young collages to shoulder responsibility for major projects. The result is a vicious circle.
Survey: Time to listen
There are no easy answers to this state of affairs, no black-and-white truths about good and evil, victims and perpetrators. Ever more architectural practices that set out to deliver high-quality work also want to be good employers. They have had enough of losing their most experienced staff to clients and government offices where part-time positions of responsibility are often more readily available and the pay is better. More recently established practices in particular are giving greater thought to ownership and participation arrangements, pay and business transparency, alternative management models and flexible employment conditions. After all, the way an architectural practice operates is not set in stone.
Nevertheless, the series revolves around the employee perspective. This is firstly because the SIA industry association tends to represent practices rather than their employees. Similarly, the BSA is an association of practice managers who are respected for the quality of their architecture. The second reason is that employees’ voices are rarely heard in the media, even though good architecture is generally known to be a team effort. It is therefore appropriate for once not to focus on practice owners. It is time to listen to everyone.
Want to join the discussion? Take part in our survey or contact us: Deborah Fehlmann, Palle Petersen. The survey runs until the end of October.
Talking about working conditions
Working conditions are a sore point in architecture, particularly among those in a position of employment. Although various stakeholders are highlighting injustices and demanding change, they get little attention from industry associations and the media. The issue is one that affects the entire sector and shapes public perceptions of the architectural profession. By conducting a survey and publishing a series of articles between autumn 2025 and spring 2026, Hochparterre hopes to stimulate a broad discussion of it. It will do so in conjunction with the following partners:
Architektur Basel is a collective of architectural practitioners who have been commentating on building developments in and around Basel since 2015. At the end of 2022, it conducted a survey of working conditions, which Hochparterre evaluated and published see “ Normality or scandal ? “, Hochparterre 4 / 2023. In the series, the collective will report on its efforts to introduce a regional collective labour agreement of the type in place in the canton of Vaud.
Kontextur is an independent platform that exists at the interface between architecture, construction culture and society. The people behind it have been curating interviews, essays and a podcast since 2019. They respond to empty spaces in the architectural discourse and work with their community to produce content on topics that include pay structures and working conditions. In the series, they will be putting the survey results into the context of macroeconomic developments and analysing the shift in the life perspectives of architectural practitioners, their understanding of their role and their self-image.
Charlotte Malterre-Barthes is an urban designer and professor at EPFL, where she investigates the relationship between resource consumption, the built environment and the intersectional conditions of architectural production at the RIOT research and design laboratory. While at ETH Zurich, she was a co-founder of the Parity Group, campaigning for equal opportunities and against the abuse of power. In the series, she will present alternative business forms for architectural practices and show how business models influence architecture.
( non- )Swiss Architects is a collective of employees with or without migrant backgrounds. It has been campaigning for better working conditions since 2021. The collective posts facts, survey results, demands and anonymous real-life experiences on Instagram. It also organises events in and around Zurich. In the series, it will be telling the story of one of its members, who, after graduating, began an internship in a well known Swiss practice and soon got the uncomfortable feeling that they were the victim of exploitation and discrimination.
