Why Chartered Electrical Engineer (CEE) can not be used anymore?
Why IET don't want to reinstate this title?

I'm not a spokesman for the IET, but...

The obvious problem is the change of name. The IET is no longer just for electrical engineers. So awarding the Chartered Electrical Engineer to members would mean that they must either:-
1. Award it to some members, but not to others, or
2. Award it to all members, even ones who aren't electrical engineers.

Neither option seems very satisfactory.

-------------------------
S P Barker BSc PhD MIET

Is that possible for IET to come out with new set of application structure to meet the CEE requirement so that people who work in electrical section/Electrical Engineer can apply for CEE.

Regards,
YungYaw Lai
BEng(Hons) GCGI HNDip IEng MIET MIEEE

There is a difference between CEE and CEng. CEE represents a professional qualification, because the title states one is an expert on matters to do with electrical engineering. CEng represents a professional title, because it states that one is an expert on everything to do with engineering. In other words, one can be an expert in everything and nothing at the same time.

Many CEngs would be annoyed at new entrants being awarded CEE status as it would undermine their meaningless CEng status.

This cannot be true, otherwise institutions like CIBSE would not continue to award "Chartered Building Services Engineer" (to name but one example).

The issue for IET (and IEE before it) can be seen far more plainly. Most members of the IEE, when IEE stopped awarding "Chartered Electrical Engineer" were not, in fact, "Electrical Engineers", and they were astonished to be able to gain a title that did not really cover their areas of expertise. Since "CEng" was awarded IN ADDITION TO "Chartered Electrical Engineer", it was decided to drop the latter completely, in lieu of the former.

In other words, it simply reflects the direction that the profession formerly known as "Electrical Engineering" has taken in our modern world.

What remains in the UK, unfortunately, is a vacuum for people who do want to be identified as "Electrical Engineers".

Is it so much of a problem, though? I believe other countries manage very well with a single engineering institution, leaving individuals to manage their specialism for themselves?

The assertion that "CEng" was something "different" to "Chartered Electrical Engineer" is a little off-the-wall, as the criteria and process was the same for both (I was awarded both). "CEE . . . states one is an expert on matters to do with electrical engineering" is definitely nonsense.


Further, "CEng represents a professional title, because it states that one is an expert on everything to do with engineering" is also nonsense, and should more correctly read "CEng . . . . demonstrates that an individual has achieved a level of competence in the art and science of engineering, exemplified by achievement of defined competences."



I must close by saying that, whilst mbirdi may believe that the title, style and qualifications of CEng / Chartered Engineer are useless, others disagree most strongly.

-------------------------
Eur Ing Graham Kenyon CEng MIET

YungYaw Lai: Can you explain why you think CEE would be useful to the world of engineering?

I have just noticed that there is a (rather old) certificate behind me which states that I am a Chartered Electrical Engineer: I've workd in and/or managed electronics engineering, software engineering, safety engineering, mechanical engineering, and production engineering but never electrical engineering! But when I became chartered through the IEE you were CEE whatever your actual discipline was (in my case at that time it was electronics). I agree with Graham that there is a vacuum for those who want to be identified (by Charter) as electrical engineers, but I'm not at all clear who that identification would benefit? Any field of engineering is so wide that that even dividing into electrical / electronic / mechanical / systems etc doesn't mean that that person is going to be an expert in all areas in that field, so to find out if someone is working at Chartered level in a particular area you have to go back to their CV anyway.

I suppose the counter argument would be that it does give an indication of their specialism, I'm just struggling to see who (as an employer or customer) would use this?

-------------------------
Andy Millar CEng MIET MCMI

http://www.linkedin.com/in/millarandy

Andy, agree with what you've said, but maybe would add that what the field of what we used to call "Electrical Engineering" say 60+ years ago, has really taken off and is now so large, that it has branched into not only "Electrical (Power) Engineering", "Electrical (Building Services) Engineering", "Automotive Electrical Engineering" etc., but also many of the other fields that the IET encompasses, and more . . . in other words, the simple term "Electrical Engineer" could be said to be no longer relevant to the modern world of Engineering ?

-------------------------
Eur Ing Graham Kenyon CEng MIET

I understand where you are coming but just out of curiosity are you aware of why they didn't go for Chartered / Incorporated Member of the IET ot CMIET / IMIET?

A few organisations I have come across seem to have gone down that route of creating the Chartered membership positions etc.

I believe that the IMechE also offer just CEng and IEng now along with the other registrations so what is there that differentiates between the 2 organisations other than the IMechE / IET letters?

Kind regards

Donald Lane

As I understand there isn't supposed to be any difference: if you're a mechanical engineer I believe the idea is you can pick whichever of the two institutions you prefer (e.g. which has the best magazine); the registration is identical.

-------------------------
Andy Millar CEng MIET MCMI

http://www.linkedin.com/in/millarandy

I am aware the IEE merged with the Institution of Manufacturing systems Engineers (formally known as Production engineers) to form the revised IEE and thus all chartered members briefly received the CEE title before it was stopped after the IET was formed. It meant that for that brief period, Manufacturing Systems engineers had CEE titles and MIEE memberships. My comment above was a sarcastic nonsense remark, to highlight the fact it was the IET making the nonsense decision in awarding CEE and MIEE to Manufacturing engineers who felt un-comfortable with it.


It is right and proper for you to defend your status and I respect that. My opinions come from the fact that I see anomalies in this award particularly from the IET that has moved away from it's traditional roots of electrical engineering.

My argument being that if engineers have different academic qualifications to their job experiences and occupy more managerial roles than technical ones, in the modern 21st century world of rapid engineering and technical advancement, in addition to not having indemnity insurance because engineers are mainly employee based than working independently, then CEng is pretty much a waste of time. This is even more so with regards to retired engineers who retain their CEng titles. It is a nonsense to accept that retired engineers, who are getting more out of touch by the day, can decide if practicing engineers are good enough to join the IET and register as CEng.

To put it simply, the best engineers and technicians in the UK are the ones who are practicing their craft and getting paid to do it as opposed to retired CEng members of the IET members who are no longer in the loop of current practice.

Edited: 28 March 2013 at 06:19 PM by mbirdi

Let's stop there. The IEE stopped awarding CEE in 2002 well before IET was formed. I know this because I was admitted to CEng / CEE in, I believe, the last tranche of Engineers to be awarded both by IET, and much later voted on the formation of IET during the merger with IIE (which was in itself a formerly-amalgamated organisation).
which makes the forst portion of this a little suspect. However, the "nonsense bit" I think I already covered in my post - not just "Manufacturing Engineers", but other "electrically/electronically-related" professionals: I believe the term "Electrical Engineer" has in itself sort of become out-dated, as I explained.

I will let current, practicing, Members, who are PRAs and involved in the process, reply to this.



Few, I suspect, would argue that.

-------------------------
Eur Ing Graham Kenyon CEng MIET