1. Whoever was a Psychologist before the creation of the association naturally continues to be so afterwards?No. The Portuguese Psychologists’ Association (“Ordem dos Psicólogos Portugueses”) instead of applying the new regime of title attribution and access to the profession to those that would complete their studies after its creation, decided to apply it also to those that already existed, necessarily in a retroactive way, according to article 84th of the Law 57/2008.
Thus, only those accepted as effective members were allowed to maintain the previously acquired title, according to article 50 of the same Law. Consequently, the titles were removed for the rest of the colleagues.
2. But... weren’t all Psychologists accepted as effective members? No. Only those that had Job opportunities, in specific areas, during at least 18 months, and that were able to prove it, were accepted as effective members. All those that did not have such opportunities were punished. Of over 14.500 registered until February 15th 2010, only 47% (6.834) were accepted and could participate in the first elections (even though the overwhelming majority would not, given the occurred abstention).
Many colleagues registered in one of the 3 options available in the register webpage without even realizing their implications, since they didn’t carefully analyze the legislation. Of these three options, the “trainee member” and “professional recognition” categories don’t even exist in the statutes.
3. But... maybe only those that didn’t prove adequate qualifications, or those with the new 3 years “licenciatura” (replacing the bachelor degree), or even those without an on-the-job training, were the ones not accepted?No. Colleagues in the same course (“licenciatura” pré-Bologna or the two cycles post-Bologna), entered if with proofs of having had work, were rejected if without work in certain areas (even though they had paid the same registration fee).
The on-the-job training as a part of the course, two semesters in duration and doubly supervised (in the working place and at the university) was not taken into account for anything, just the on-the-job training experiences organized elsewhere, like by the IEFP (Employment Office).
However, and paradoxically, those that have accomplished the former have the right to a 6 months discount on the new compulsory on-the-job training organized by the association, since they “just” have to do more 12 months, as opposed to those that did not have an on-the-job training by the university, that have to do 18 months (art. 52 of the statutes). One must not mistake the characteristics in both experiences, however, since nowhere is predicted that the association’s on-the-job training is equivalent in quality to the university’s one or even to those organized by the IEFP, that it is free or paid by the trainee (as usual, it’s a secret of the gods). Anyway, the Psychologist not accepted as effective is already prohibited from practicing and applying for jobs in Psychology.
The difference is not in having been supervised or not, because the work proved by those accepted as effective members may have been only autonomous. Quoting an honorable professor, “experience can be little more than accumulated errors”.
As for the adequate qualifications, it was established a differentiation among colleagues of the same course based on having completed it before or after a specific date: 12/31/2007. Those that finished after that date have to plead the association for a new recognition of its validity, additional to the one already given by the university in the exercise of its autonomous competencies (art. 2 of Regulation 505/2009).
4. But... what the official institutions had granted in light of the previous law has no validity? Yes. In fact, both the titles attributed by universities (under the Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education) and the Psychologist professional licenses (regulated since 1972, attributed by the Work Regulation Authority, under the Ministry of Labor and Social Services), as key elements in the regulation of the profession that lasted for 40 years, were invalidated.
5. But... is that possible according to the fundamental Law?No. Article 18 of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic exists precisely to avoid the retroactive restriction of rights, liberties and guarantees with a clear harm to the citizens. If it didn’t exist or was not applied, we would be in a society where nothing could be taken seriously, for sooner or later what was acquired would be removed or invalidated. However, the recent tendency has been precisely that, which is very worrisome: one invalidates, so that after payment of a certain amount, that which was already possessed before, is again recovered.
6. But... wasn’t the law that creates the association and publishes its statutes analyzed in light of the Constitution?No. The substitute text of the Parliament’s Labor and Social Security Committee, that unified both existing bills, gathered a favorable opinion in 2005 by the Committee of Constitutional Subjects, Rights, Liberties and Guarantees, but precisely the element of professional practice was removed in such a text, being enough for entrance in the association the possession of “a graduation in higher education that integrates acknowledged theoretical and practical training in the area of Psychology”, and also the text did not enable any retroactive and restrictive application.
In 2008, immediately before it was published, a new substitute text appeared in which it is reintroduced the element of professional practice and is enabled a retroactive and restrictive application. This new text was not analyzed by the Parliament’s Committee on Constitutional Subjects, Rights, Liberties and Guarantees.
7. But... isn’t there something in the recent Law, Portuguese or European, that forces this measure?No. In the Portuguese law, the Professional Public Associations’ Regime (Law 6/2008) appeared in 2008 and in its guiding principles for the entry requisites (art. 21), the verification of professional abilities through subjection to an on-the-job training or a probation period is not obligatory; but more importantly, it does not foresee that such requisite imposition is to be applied retroactively to those that already had access to the profession at the time of the Associations’ creation.
At the European level, what does exist is simply the Europsy certificate, issued by EFPA, an organization that unites psychologists’ associations and of which the Portuguese Psychologists’ Syndicate is a member. This certificate intends to enable recognition of qualifications in different European countries and its requisites are 5 years of academic training and 1 year of supervised practice, elements that have been given in a simultaneous and integrated form, in Portugal, through the higher education courses with on-the-job training included. The qualification provided by these is not merely academic, but also and above all professional, and they were structured for that purpose. On the other hand, the preparation obtained by the majority of those who are now effective members of the association is in fact equivalent to the one obtained by the majority of those who were disqualified by their colleagues that created this entity.
8. But... then why did they do it this way?In the absence of answers, a possible explanation can be put forward given the definition of “professional associations called ‘Ordens’” by
Infopedia: The professional associations called “Ordens” (orders) have a function of restricting access to the profession that they put in action every time there’s an excess of candidates to practice. They can in this manner serve as a disguised solution to the excesses of training. Given that training has been proven to be an excellent business, having been multiplied the Psychology courses (being there demand and, above all, buying power), and given that the Portuguese society has no places for the professionals it qualifies, the “Ordem” can feel tempted not only to replace the State in functions the later does not delegate in the former (for instance, deliberating on requisites and restrictions to professional practice that go beyond those pertaining to the deontological code), but also to replace the free market in the choice of the professionals, imposing obstacles to their maintenance in the field that can just be overcome if professionals have the economic power to face them. The social selection implied here thus becomes a feasible mechanism, besides the fact that these associations are potentially lucrative entities, as there are already examples. One of the imperceptible consequences is the maintenance of a large number of professionals unemployed or in areas quite different from their qualifications, being worsened the dissatisfaction and disorganization of the social fabric. The use of trainees’ work has been a concern also amply debated in some areas. It must be underlined, however, that it is the first time the creation of a professional association, like this one and in this country, removes acquired rights, such as the title and access to the profession already legally credited.
Send by e-mail
