IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: New Techician Council
Topic Summary: New Technician Council for Incorporated Engineers and Technicians
Created On: 11 April 2010 08:32 AM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
<< 1 2 3 4 Previous Next Last unread
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 13 April 2010 09:47 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Originally posted by: sbrown2

As somebody who is currently in the process of preparing for the I Eng interview process I hope you would forgive me for being maybe a little demorilised by this and some of the similar threads. But this is not the case as my academic background, B Eng Mining Electrical Engineer, just a mere ordinary degree only ever allowed me to aspire to this level of competency without additional study. Furthermore I remember, previous to completion of my studies, when lesser academic qualifications and a EC examination and not long out of studying you could be a C Eng (granted this was in the mining institute, but I am sure this is well regarded).

In my valued opinion a I Eng (Engineering Technologist would be my preferred choice) should be a valuble qualification within industry and people who seem to portray it in a negative manner ( are these mostly C Engs?!) should have the knowledge to clearly understand this and exploit this skills in a positive manner.

There are always those for and those against so what really matters is what value something has to you.

Regards.
 13 April 2010 09:52 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Originally posted by: pmiller2006

From my perspective it seems strange how the EC see the creation of the 'Technician Council' as a wholly positive thing for the profession. UKSpec defines IEng as a professional engineer so does it make sense for incorporated engineers to be included in an initiative to promote technician registration where aramsey admits we were peripheral to technician discussions. Has IEng been included to provide a progression route for higher technicians in improve the standing of technicians and make it a more attractive proposition? If so, we should grasp the initiative and try to open a dialogue directly with the new chairman of the technician council to ensure the benefit of our combined knowledge and experience are utilised to bring about positive change. Shall we jointly write a letter to Steve Holliday?

OK I will start.

Regards.

Dear Steve,
 13 April 2010 09:52 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



sbrown2

Posts: 97
Joined: 25 July 2008

Moving to the final point I have no problem making a decision when I have committed to some further reading and understanding.

Questions I would like answered:

What are the figures relating to C Eng, I Eng, EngTech within this institute or the proportions? If there is a shortage Engineers and Technicians where are the shortages and in what industry sectors? Maybe another thread.

Is the technician council a means of drawing in lots of Eng Tech and potentially I Eng before breaking up the skills and knowledge elements in various areas and then embarking on the dumbing down procedure akin to the "electrician/plumber in four weeks" scenario?

My view is that a well promoted technician council, proportionally, would bring in significantly more numbers to the institutes improving not only their revenue streams but benefit more EngTechs by bringing them into these communities.
I would agree that the I Eng topic was correctly added to the EngTech council debate as that is the logical progression. As is the progression from I Eng to C Eng, if people so desire.
I will restate that it is in my view that any professional status within this organisation is important and of note and that those of a higher professional status should be looking to promote the benefits of progression without degrading any levels below them.
 14 April 2010 12:08 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



basil.wallace

Posts: 220
Joined: 01 April 2006

Originally posted by: pmiller2006

From my perspective it seems strange how the EC see the creation of the 'Technician Council' as a wholly positive thing for the profession. UKSpec defines IEng as a professional engineer so does it make sense for incorporated engineers to be included in an initiative to promote technician registration where aramsey admits we were peripheral to technician discussions. Has IEng been included to provide a progression route for higher technicians in improve the standing of technicians and make it a more attractive proposition? If so, we should grasp the initiative and try to open a dialogue directly with the new chairman of the technician council to ensure the benefit of our combined knowledge and experience are utilised to bring about positive change. Shall we jointly write a letter to Steve Holliday?


It would be a good starting point if Steve Holliday of the technician council read all the discussion forums raised by the IET members concerning the current IEng title.

--------------------------------------------------
Basil Wallace PgDip EngTech MIET
 14 April 2010 07:41 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rar

Posts: 642
Joined: 30 August 2005

Near 40000 IEngs are members of the IET.
What is the opinion of the governance of the IET about?
May be accepted,passively,that the IEng MIET,a professional engineer, be reclassified as a technician?
 21 April 2010 08:28 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



myluckykk

Posts: 18
Joined: 03 April 2010

While EC wanting to promote and market IEng internationally, the inclusion of IEng, if so happen, to come under Technician Council will certainly put many potential registrants off. Don't get me wrong as I view registered EngTech as qualified people but the value should be created 'upwards'. By giving the benefits/recognition to IEng, potential and current holders, I hope it will remain under EC umbrella. Consideration should be given to those outside UK, who are paying fees as well for their qualifications, experience and knowledge formally assessed and wished to be recognised and valued. Voting as a way of democracy should be deployed before implementation hopefully.

-------------------------
Kah-King MSc. MIET
 21 April 2010 12:42 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rar

Posts: 642
Joined: 30 August 2005

What is the opinion of the IET about?
So far no word about!!!
 21 April 2010 01:22 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

The Technician Education Council (for runner to the BTEC) was introduced (by the Tory Government) in the late 70s as replacement for the ordinary national and higher national qualifications run by the Joint National Committee (IEE, IMechE, ICE). These new qualifications were designed to be more flexible in subject choice and able to meet the demands of industry for skilled Technicians and Technician Engineers.

It's somewhat of an irony that 30 years later the UK government have come full circle with the introduction of the Technician Council because of low numbers of highly skilled Technicians in the UK. I wouldn't be too excited about this one. Give it some years and it will all fall back into dereliction.

Edited: 21 April 2010 at 06:47 PM by mbirdi
 21 April 2010 05:24 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for aramsay.
aramsay

Posts: 88
Joined: 27 January 2002

Some confusion seems to have crept into the discussion about the relationship of IEng to the Technician Council. The Technician Council is intended to promote and raise the status of professional technicians. Registration for Engineering Technicians will continue to be through a licensed professional engineering institution - IET being one of these.

Incorporated Engineers are not technicians. The discussions surrounding the creation of the Technician Council have included the need to show that technicians are able to progress to higher professional status: in the case of engineering there are many examples of technicians who have reached IEng and CEng status.

Regarding IEng promotion, we are well into a marketing programme, which has commenced with a workshop with interested institutions, proceeded to creation of a working group to progress conclusions, and followed up with a fairly large-scale survey of IEng reactions and suggestions. Money has been budgeted to implement the findings. The Engineering Council is working closely with IET and others to try to achieve maximum impact with the forthcoming campaign.

-------------------------
aramsay
 21 April 2010 06:45 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

Originally posted by: aramsay
followed up with a fairly large-scale survey of IEng reactions and suggestions.

Presumably no one will take any notice of the outcome just like last time.

Money well spent.
 21 April 2010 11:38 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



danielscott

Posts: 461
Joined: 18 April 2003

Makes you wonder if persons on these working groups just show up to get a few days away from their other businesses and get a few free lunches and dinners.
 22 April 2010 09:12 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Originally posted by: aramsay
Some confusion seems to have crept into the discussion about the relationship of IEng to the Technician Council.

Intelligent people are already confused which says a lot about the new TC and its launch message!

In about another 10 years there will be another 'pet project'.


Regards.
 22 April 2010 09:24 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Originally posted by: pmiller2006
you are trying to sell IEng as a failed CEng.

Sums the problem up very well I think.

And those, in the EC, who originally allowed the marketing material wording which gave this impression think they are competent to sort things out!....lol lol lol lol lol.

Regards.
 22 April 2010 12:12 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for hamishbell.
hamishbell

Posts: 288
Joined: 11 September 2001

It was good to hear from Andrew Ramsay some real information to counter the negativity and cynicism that a small number of people are exhibiting. However, that attitude seems to be so engrained that even the normal courtesies to thank people for authoritive inputs, are forgotten.

The suggestion that volunteers only contribute in order to have lunch or dinner is particularly shameful; most volunteers make significant sacrifices of their own time, and disrupt their domestic arrangements, in addition to any time their company may allow. Again, they often receive little recognition of their efforts.

You may disagree with the outcome, but please recognize the contribution. If you do so disagree, then why not volunteer some positive comments for the guidance of those who are contributing. It would be encouraging and could have a useful result.

Regards
Hamish

-------------------------
Hamish V Bell, BSc, CEng, FIET, FCQI, CQP
2013 - 2016 Elected Council Member
2007 - 2010, Vice President and Trustee
 22 April 2010 12:46 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rar

Posts: 642
Joined: 30 August 2005

Originally posted by: aramsay

Some confusion seems to have crept into the discussion about the relationship of IEng to the Technician Council. The Technician Council is intended to promote and raise the status of professional technicians. Registration for Engineering Technicians will continue to be through a licensed professional engineering institution - IET being one of these.



Incorporated Engineers are not technicians.
Incorporated Engineers are not technicians. The discussions surrounding the creation of the Technician Council have included the need to show that technicians are able to progress to higher professional status: in the case of engineering there are many examples of technicians who have reached IEng and CEng status.



Regarding IEng promotion, we are well into a marketing programme, which has commenced with a workshop with interested institutions, proceeded to creation of a working group to progress conclusions, and followed up with a fairly large-scale survey of IEng reactions and suggestions. Money has been budgeted to implement the findings. The Engineering Council is working closely with IET and others to try to achieve maximum impact with the forthcoming campaign.
 22 April 2010 12:49 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rar

Posts: 642
Joined: 30 August 2005

Incorporated Engineers are not technicians.


aramsay,
but the IEngs are deemed "professional engineers" or "technologists"?

Edited: 22 April 2010 at 12:56 PM by rar
 22 April 2010 01:25 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

Originally posted by: hamishbell
However, that attitude seems to be so engrained that even the normal courtesies to thank people for authoritive inputs, are forgotten.

Well on my part I'd like to say I was unaware I replied to the Andrew Ramsay from the EC. Sometimes it becomes like a shooting match in here and unfortunately Andrew received criticism from friendly fire.
 22 April 2010 01:32 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



danielscott

Posts: 461
Joined: 18 April 2003

Originally posted by: hamishbell

It was good to hear from Andrew Ramsay some real information to counter the negativity and cynicism that a small number of people are exhibiting. However, that attitude seems to be so engrained that even the normal courtesies to thank people for authoritive inputs, are forgotten.



The suggestion that volunteers only contribute in order to have lunch or dinner is particularly shameful; most volunteers make significant sacrifices of their own time, and disrupt their domestic arrangements, in addition to any time their company may allow. Again, they often receive little recognition of their efforts.



You may disagree with the outcome, but please recognize the contribution. If you do so disagree, then why not volunteer some positive comments for the guidance of those who are contributing. It would be encouraging and could have a useful result.



Regards

Hamish



Hi Hamish,

I have recognised your input into many of the discussions on this Discussion Forum and all your efforts in our committies and I agree that I was probably being a bit negative with my comments.

Yes we can thank Mr Ramsey for his personal input, which over the years of the IET and previously the IIE, when the debates about IEng's were raging, was very little, unless it came second hand through someone else.

As the CEO of the Engineering Council it is he who gives direction to the Council into which way it should be heading, even though he might receive input from other knowledgable persons, he in my mind as the CEO makes the final decisions, doesn't he.?

Why are peoples comments on this particular discussion always considered negative.? Maybe this aggravation here will be worth it, as many of us who have responded to these same discussions a couple of years ago, are repeating what was said then and seemed to be ignored. Now we have just come full circle.

Regards to you Hamish and thank you again for many of your past and helpful comments.

Daniel
 22 April 2010 03:20 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Originally posted by: hamishbell
It was good to hear from Andrew Ramsay some real information to counter the negativity and cynicism that a small number of people are exhibiting. However, that attitude seems to be so engrained that even the normal courtesies to thank people for authoritive inputs, are forgotten.

Where's the thank you's from Mr Ramsey or did I miss them?
The suggestion that volunteers only contribute in order to have lunch or dinner is particularly shameful; most volunteers make significant sacrifices of their own time, and disrupt their domestic arrangements, in addition to any time their company may allow. Again, they often receive little recognition of their efforts.

Many of us volunteer in the forums, which is also a 'working group' and I for one thought I was going to get a free lunch.....d*mn you have dashed my hopes....
You may disagree with the outcome, but please recognize the contribution.

Two way street I think.

Regards
 23 April 2010 11:38 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Brian Robertson

Posts: 106
Joined: 01 April 2006

I am sure that if the current I.Engs were reduced to anything less than professional engineers in the UK it would be an infringement on their employment rights and could be challenged in the European court, especially if their employment status is put in a detrimental position and cannot sign drawings and certificates.


Personally I think the way I.Eng is treated is nothing less than a disgrace.

It is always smoke screens and mirrors.

There are loads of C.Engs less qualified than I.Engs, some have not even been to a University.

Oh but it was harder years ago and university standards have dropped, ye ye ye crap
IET » CEng, IEng, EngTech and other professional registration matters » New Techician Council

<< 1 2 3 4 Previous Next Last unread
Topic Tools Topic Tools
Statistics

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.