Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 77 replies
  • Subscribers 17 subscribers
  • Views 7268 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Time to Knock IEng on the Head

Peter Miller
IEng registration in terminal decline
Parents
  • 0

    Simon Barker:

    Personally, I don't have an issue with a three-tier system, provided that the first two tiers have recognition for what they are.  At the present, only CEng has any real recognition, and there seems to be a vocal minority of CEng registrants who would like to not only keep it that way, but ensure that only CEng has any value at all.  If a CEng is the only sort of "real" engineer, and an IEng is just an engineer's assistant, then IEng isn't worth having.




    Simon,

    As one of what I hope is the majority of CEng registrants who want to see better recognition for IEng, I have to say that I fully support your comments. I recognise the need for engineers carrying out different roles and do not see IEng as a challenge to my position but rather a complement to what I am doing. I am happy to push for the 'equal but different' which I have long been an advocate for, or even the three tier system, whichever will actually gain recognition for those who have sought the peer review to show their professionalism and competence. I am just frustrated by the fact that so few employers even seem to be aware of IEng, never mind give it recognition.

    My view is that the world needs greater numbers of IEng than CEng, and the fact that the numbers are in fact reversed is due to the lack of value accorded to IEng discouraging people from applying.

    Alasdair

Reply
  • 0

    Simon Barker:

    Personally, I don't have an issue with a three-tier system, provided that the first two tiers have recognition for what they are.  At the present, only CEng has any real recognition, and there seems to be a vocal minority of CEng registrants who would like to not only keep it that way, but ensure that only CEng has any value at all.  If a CEng is the only sort of "real" engineer, and an IEng is just an engineer's assistant, then IEng isn't worth having.




    Simon,

    As one of what I hope is the majority of CEng registrants who want to see better recognition for IEng, I have to say that I fully support your comments. I recognise the need for engineers carrying out different roles and do not see IEng as a challenge to my position but rather a complement to what I am doing. I am happy to push for the 'equal but different' which I have long been an advocate for, or even the three tier system, whichever will actually gain recognition for those who have sought the peer review to show their professionalism and competence. I am just frustrated by the fact that so few employers even seem to be aware of IEng, never mind give it recognition.

    My view is that the world needs greater numbers of IEng than CEng, and the fact that the numbers are in fact reversed is due to the lack of value accorded to IEng discouraging people from applying.

    Alasdair

Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines