I was part of the negotiations for the collective agreement in the architectural design sector. Am I proud of the outcome? Not particularly.
Do I believe the result was the best that could be achieved through negotiations and ultimately through the National Conciliator’s proposal? Absolutely.
Architects stand out among private sector professionals with lower salary increases. The general guideline set by the technology industry for the three-year period had a total cost impact of 7.8%, while architects had to settle for 5.8%.
This means approximately €5,000 in additional earnings for a median-salaried architect during the contract period.
According to the 2024 labor market survey by TEK (Academic Engineers and Architects in Finland), the salary gap between engineers and architects in expert roles in the private sector is €645 per month in favor of engineers.
This understandably raises frustration and questions. Are architects not valued? Are the negotiators incompetent? Are architects pushovers compared to engineers?
When negotiating salary increases and working conditions for a sector, the parties first assess employment levels, companies’ ability to pay, and future outlooks. In the architectural design sector, all of these are in historically poor shape—perhaps the worst since the early 1990s recession.
This time, the employer side had neither the willingness nor the capacity to agree to salary increases in line with the general guideline. No negotiation skill can change that.
The only thing that can change the situation is if architects themselves have the will and strength to push for better increases. This was the first time there was real determination.
Architects responded to YTN’s survey indicating they were ready to take industrial action to secure a salary solution that protects purchasing power. There was enough strength to issue a strike warning, and the labor dispute was transferred to the National Conciliator. The final result was not a negotiated agreement but a settlement proposal approved by the unions.
If architects channel their frustration into joining unions, engaging with employment terms, and electing employee representatives, they will have more leverage in the future. Ideally, we’ll have a normal negotiation round next time, where the sector’s situation allows for a negotiated agreement.
What’s the benefit of the agreement and the union?
If the fallback option of the collective agreement is applied, the monthly salary of an architect earning the median salary (according to the Confederation of Finnish Industries EK’s statistics) will rise from €4,761 to €5,042 over the three-year agreement period.
This means approximately €5,000 in additional earnings for a median-salaried architect during the contract period.
With the technology industry’s percentages, the amount would be higher, but the general increase percentages are the same for architects as for others. This helps ensure long-term salary development and purchasing power in the sector, despite the challenging situation.
Architects have been covered by a collective agreement since the end of 2009. Initially, it was a linkage agreement with the design sector, and since 2013, architects have had their own agreement.
The union’s negotiation efforts and the agreement have clearly benefited architects. For example, according to EK’s statistics, from 2010 to 2024, the average salary for architects has increased by 36.3%. The most relevant comparison group—senior salaried employees in the design and consulting sector—saw a 27.1% increase.
The collective agreement includes much more than just salary increases. For the average architect, it’s worth about €6,000 annually. If you’d like to hear more, feel free to contact me—I’d be happy to come and explain it to you and your colleagues.
How can architects change this situation?
The main reason architects earn less than other TEK members in the private sector is that architectural firms tend to underprice their services, especially during downturns.
Although the generally binding collective agreement helps prevent wage-based competition between firms, it seems that firms are competing for fewer projects with underpriced offers.
Engineering firms don’t undercut salaries in the same way. Responsible architectural firms suffer because some players undercut prices. This is not something that can be fixed at the union negotiation table. Architects must value their own work more.
Let me also remind you that the salary increases in the collective agreement are only plan B. The primary way to agree on salaries is through local agreements. So, if your architectural firm is performing well despite the general gloom in the sector, you can locally agree on increases that exceed the technology industry’s guideline.
Happy negotiating – don’t be pushovers!
