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 250 replies
  • Subscribers 14 subscribers
  • Views 22428 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

ARE CENG AND IENG EQUAL IN STATUS

Nouman Abid Chuhan
Can we say that the CEng and IEng be considered equal titles in professional status or IEng is inferior than CEng.

As the Application Form for both CEng and IEng is same.
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Sparkingchip

    24 07 17

    Sirs,

    There are questions being asked
    which concern Professional Engineers of all categories and
    origins.

    The questions referred to in
    these blogs have been taken up by the President of
    IET.

    Ref member news is 44 April
    2017-03-25

    –P8 – From the President; -P8- R
    Spalding Council up date; _ P3 CEO.



    The IET was formed in 2006 taking
    many innovative ideals from IIE including the name Engineering
    & Technology. IIE was founded by amalgamation of PEIs with I
    Eng membership, promoting I Eng that met UK Spec to C Eng by the
    long-route). IET was meant to continue this procedure including all
    categories of Scientists, Technologists and Engineers.

    At the start of IET the objective
    was that all PEs in IET would be of equal status and that The IIE
    Mechanical members would have an equal say in the formation and
    running of IET.       What has
    happened?



    What I see is a drift to return
    to IEE by a small percentage of C Eng who do not have the
    experience of change, mobility or international engineering.
    E&T this month asks questions about the UK engineering future
    after :  1/ BREXIT, 2/ after the UK power crisis - now until
    2035.

    This means that Engineering will
    be called upon to resolve the problems caused by others. No
    politics, or other side tracking; we are concerned about the next
    generation of PEs in the UK and attached countries.



    Let’s get back to
    basics.

    IET was formed with a mandate, EC
    UK was created to try and organise professional engineering in the
    21st Century. You have quoted references and documents to support
    this argument. We are starting a new Technology Revolution, either
    we are in and prosper; or we are out and take pot
    luck.



    Scientists, Technologists &
    Professional Engineers, Technicians included, male & female;
    must have their say; now.


    ·        
    IET is managed by the CEO,
    respecting the IET statutes. He is unquestionable,  in all due
    respect he is FIET, BSc MBA, this is not EC UK C Eng UK Spec, I
    believe that he is C Eng by the older route which is not respected
    outside of the UK – (EU -LMD). IET decided that all C Eng not
    attaining M Eng before 2002 could keep their C Eng
    status.


    ·        
    The CEO is guided by IET Council,
    which is directed by the IET President (it is complicated to
    follow)


    ·        
    The President leads innovation
    and guides the advancement of IET.

    From a personal point of view
    which is also the case of many other IET members; I have been
    hindered in my career in the UK by C Eng (not IET) and ECUK
    stalwarts that refute change. The IET mandate called for,
    international, cross-technology advancements.

    Some of you will not agree and
    will start blogging again.



    Statistics show that there is a
    problem with PE recognition, registration within IET & other
    PEIs.

    I have asked questions on future
    power technology on an IET blog, three people have viewed that
    blog. This blog is monopolised by you who read it and many C Eng
    IEE stalwarts that do not accept change. There are not many of the
    now 168 000 members that view these blogs, imagine what would
    happen if everyone replied**** !



    IET made a survey; there were the
    same number of participants as last time 3% of members -so I
    imagine the results have no value.

    Statistical conclusion from
    figures from ECUK, IET membership & staff shows that  PEI
    members are not interested in PEIs as they are today, they have to
    be members to gain PE ECUK registration; I conclude that as in my
    case PEs join PEIs in the first instance to gain PE &
    Technician registration, and then get interested in the
    Institute.

    The statistics show the EC UK
    does not represent the majority of UK PEs and that the majority of
    PEs in the UK is of I Eng profile.

    IET has a poor record of I Eng
    activity and representation. Most of the IIE I Eng staff left IET
    soon after the amalgamation in 2006.



    So basically IET and ECUK is
    statistically a failure.



    The Mandate IIE to IET
    amalgamation

    THE FORMATION OF THE INSTITUTION
    OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY –A  proposal
    by

    IEE & IIE.  –exact
    extracts from the official document 2006

    The Vision ref
    1.1

    Interdisciplinary, global,
    Inclusive.

    (IIE was the UKs largest
    interdisciplinary PEI); now is the time 2006 for IEE to consider a
    bigger and more courageous step than has been necessary for some
    time! By joining IIE it will be possible to create a vibrant
    institution which is truly interdisciplinary, global and
    inclusive.

    JG - what went
    wrong?

    The international context was
    aimed at Engineers from the British PEs, PEs resident in the UK or
    UK registered PEs working anywhere in the world.  (not on
    Engineers & Technologists outside of these boundaries). No
    disrespect to our overseas members, but EC UK is UK based we need
    an identical separate register for PE registration for our overseas
    members.

    Imagine if my past Chinese
    colleagues and their associates registered, IET would have over 50
    million PEs registered with ECUK!

    THE IET’s objective was the
    advancing of Science, Technology and Engineering.

    The IET Board will be established
    on parity of representation from IEE & IET.

    The IET will develop new
    qualifications where necessary, particularly to meet the needs of
    interdisciplinary working.

    The IET will be a home for life
    for all professional engineers involved in the areas of Science,
    Engineering and Technology.



    IIE Appendix F proposed
    bye-laws



    IIE APPENDIX E

    3/ the object and purpose of the
    IET are to promote the general advancement of Science, Engineering
    & Technology and to facilitate the exchange of information and
    ideas on these subjects amongst the members of IET and
    otherwise.

    JG: It is not to rest in a
    restrained sector of electrical & IT
    Technologies.

    12/  Every member of IET
    shall be bound by this charter and bye-laws.

    1.2/Mission IET

    To be a 21st Century PEI advancing
    science engineering & technology 

    JG: This was the IIE objective ,(
    including Technicians, & Incorporated
    Engineers)

    2.1/ The IET will value all
    members equally.

    3.1/ One major growth area
    will be to meet the needs of members of the Mechanical sectors. IET
    will draw on and expand the existing services of IIE.

    JG:Tthis is in dire need of
    implementation.

    3.5/ IET will continue CPD of IIE
    & IEE through learned society activities, short courses &
    publications.

    3.4/  IET will develop new
    qualifications where necessary. IET will develop the effective
    procedure & clear routes that Professional Engineers need to
    gain qualifications.

    JG : This was a fine proposition
    which was soon abandoned . IET in the hands of voluntary advisors,
    electrical C Eng, not meeting UK Spec standards, has drifted into
    the old IEE PEI  with 19th century, restrictive,
    restrained practice and ideals. The ideas set in our respective
    mandates and published in IET documentation and the E&T are not
    upheld by the majority of PE voluntary advisors.

    You only need to read these blogs
    to see that there is considerable discontent. Read the mandates,
    look at the statistics and decide for yourselves if IET has
    respected its reason for creation, or has been taken back  by
    stalwarts refusing change and progress. IET is not electrical &
    IT it is     as  proclaimed in its rules
    & regulations which must be respected by all MIET.

     

    Appendix F

    JG : 91 rules,  1 – 24
    concern membership, 25 to 91 concern discipline and running of the
    IET.

    20/ transfer of a member from
    one category to another category of membership shall be by the
    board.

    Every candidate for transfer from
    one category shall be subject to the same requirements as someone
    trying to join the IET in that category of membership and shall be
    proposed and supported in the same way.

    JG This is not in compliance with
    ECUK.

    IET has the competence to
    register:     I Eng

     or BSc, MEng, PEs from IEng
    to CEng

    23/  The Board can make
    & publish regulations ----- for candidates seeking election to
    any grade of membership of IET

    JG : The Board can set CEng
    examinations or call on C&G CEng Examinations for the long
    route PEs not having the chance to pass by university only academic
    learning and examination.



    In “MEMBER NEWS IS 44 April
    2017,

    The President, Jeremy Watson CBE,
    FREng, C Eng, FIET, IET President has asked some important
    questions    .

    He has presented a serious
    reflection on IET and its future. It echoes what I and many have
    questioned in this blog.


    1.      
    He has visited Paris IET, (Paris
    IET up until recently was an IEE private French company run by C
    Eng IEE, an anomaly in IET) IET France is now in new
    hands.


    2.      
    He calls for collaboration
    through cross & inter-disciplinary working.


    3.      
    He calls for Technology that work
    in one sector to be applied in other domains.


    4.      
    He asks how to re-launch our
    Learned Society.


    5.      
    He asks that reports and
    publications be open to impartial evidence(No open lobbying such as
    Fusion).


    6.      
    He calls for collaboration with
    other PEIs. (this was the object of IET, I Mech E dropped out of
    our initial project)


    7.      
    He asked how learned societies
    might operate.



    The Head of IET Council, Richard
    Spalding C Eng, FIET echoes this quest with four basic objectives –
    Page 8.

    I ask, how can the 167 000
    MIETs reply and act on this call to go back to our basic
    objectives. It is not by bloging, it is not by voting as the
    majority (I Eng ) is not on the voting list.

    I am into retirement, I want to
    see all PEs not active, retire from ECUK at all grades and let the
    working PEs decide what future they need.

    I have been disappointed by what
    i have read from C engs who denigrate and abuse there position.
    Engineering needs young basically trained professional engineers to
    develop into experts and leaders, not to gain useless titles and
    close the doors on others.

    We have BREXIT and a Power
    shortage – let the dynamic younger generation in and get
    working.

    Regards to all

    J Gowman

     MIET Ingénieur
    recherche

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Sparkingchip

    24 07 17

    Sirs,

    There are questions being asked
    which concern Professional Engineers of all categories and
    origins.

    The questions referred to in
    these blogs have been taken up by the President of
    IET.

    Ref member news is 44 April
    2017-03-25

    –P8 – From the President; -P8- R
    Spalding Council up date; _ P3 CEO.



    The IET was formed in 2006 taking
    many innovative ideals from IIE including the name Engineering
    & Technology. IIE was founded by amalgamation of PEIs with I
    Eng membership, promoting I Eng that met UK Spec to C Eng by the
    long-route). IET was meant to continue this procedure including all
    categories of Scientists, Technologists and Engineers.

    At the start of IET the objective
    was that all PEs in IET would be of equal status and that The IIE
    Mechanical members would have an equal say in the formation and
    running of IET.       What has
    happened?



    What I see is a drift to return
    to IEE by a small percentage of C Eng who do not have the
    experience of change, mobility or international engineering.
    E&T this month asks questions about the UK engineering future
    after :  1/ BREXIT, 2/ after the UK power crisis - now until
    2035.

    This means that Engineering will
    be called upon to resolve the problems caused by others. No
    politics, or other side tracking; we are concerned about the next
    generation of PEs in the UK and attached countries.



    Let’s get back to
    basics.

    IET was formed with a mandate, EC
    UK was created to try and organise professional engineering in the
    21st Century. You have quoted references and documents to support
    this argument. We are starting a new Technology Revolution, either
    we are in and prosper; or we are out and take pot
    luck.



    Scientists, Technologists &
    Professional Engineers, Technicians included, male & female;
    must have their say; now.


    ·        
    IET is managed by the CEO,
    respecting the IET statutes. He is unquestionable,  in all due
    respect he is FIET, BSc MBA, this is not EC UK C Eng UK Spec, I
    believe that he is C Eng by the older route which is not respected
    outside of the UK – (EU -LMD). IET decided that all C Eng not
    attaining M Eng before 2002 could keep their C Eng
    status.


    ·        
    The CEO is guided by IET Council,
    which is directed by the IET President (it is complicated to
    follow)


    ·        
    The President leads innovation
    and guides the advancement of IET.

    From a personal point of view
    which is also the case of many other IET members; I have been
    hindered in my career in the UK by C Eng (not IET) and ECUK
    stalwarts that refute change. The IET mandate called for,
    international, cross-technology advancements.

    Some of you will not agree and
    will start blogging again.



    Statistics show that there is a
    problem with PE recognition, registration within IET & other
    PEIs.

    I have asked questions on future
    power technology on an IET blog, three people have viewed that
    blog. This blog is monopolised by you who read it and many C Eng
    IEE stalwarts that do not accept change. There are not many of the
    now 168 000 members that view these blogs, imagine what would
    happen if everyone replied**** !



    IET made a survey; there were the
    same number of participants as last time 3% of members -so I
    imagine the results have no value.

    Statistical conclusion from
    figures from ECUK, IET membership & staff shows that  PEI
    members are not interested in PEIs as they are today, they have to
    be members to gain PE ECUK registration; I conclude that as in my
    case PEs join PEIs in the first instance to gain PE &
    Technician registration, and then get interested in the
    Institute.

    The statistics show the EC UK
    does not represent the majority of UK PEs and that the majority of
    PEs in the UK is of I Eng profile.

    IET has a poor record of I Eng
    activity and representation. Most of the IIE I Eng staff left IET
    soon after the amalgamation in 2006.



    So basically IET and ECUK is
    statistically a failure.



    The Mandate IIE to IET
    amalgamation

    THE FORMATION OF THE INSTITUTION
    OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY –A  proposal
    by

    IEE & IIE.  –exact
    extracts from the official document 2006

    The Vision ref
    1.1

    Interdisciplinary, global,
    Inclusive.

    (IIE was the UKs largest
    interdisciplinary PEI); now is the time 2006 for IEE to consider a
    bigger and more courageous step than has been necessary for some
    time! By joining IIE it will be possible to create a vibrant
    institution which is truly interdisciplinary, global and
    inclusive.

    JG - what went
    wrong?

    The international context was
    aimed at Engineers from the British PEs, PEs resident in the UK or
    UK registered PEs working anywhere in the world.  (not on
    Engineers & Technologists outside of these boundaries). No
    disrespect to our overseas members, but EC UK is UK based we need
    an identical separate register for PE registration for our overseas
    members.

    Imagine if my past Chinese
    colleagues and their associates registered, IET would have over 50
    million PEs registered with ECUK!

    THE IET’s objective was the
    advancing of Science, Technology and Engineering.

    The IET Board will be established
    on parity of representation from IEE & IET.

    The IET will develop new
    qualifications where necessary, particularly to meet the needs of
    interdisciplinary working.

    The IET will be a home for life
    for all professional engineers involved in the areas of Science,
    Engineering and Technology.



    IIE Appendix F proposed
    bye-laws



    IIE APPENDIX E

    3/ the object and purpose of the
    IET are to promote the general advancement of Science, Engineering
    & Technology and to facilitate the exchange of information and
    ideas on these subjects amongst the members of IET and
    otherwise.

    JG: It is not to rest in a
    restrained sector of electrical & IT
    Technologies.

    12/  Every member of IET
    shall be bound by this charter and bye-laws.

    1.2/Mission IET

    To be a 21st Century PEI advancing
    science engineering & technology 

    JG: This was the IIE objective ,(
    including Technicians, & Incorporated
    Engineers)

    2.1/ The IET will value all
    members equally.

    3.1/ One major growth area
    will be to meet the needs of members of the Mechanical sectors. IET
    will draw on and expand the existing services of IIE.

    JG:Tthis is in dire need of
    implementation.

    3.5/ IET will continue CPD of IIE
    & IEE through learned society activities, short courses &
    publications.

    3.4/  IET will develop new
    qualifications where necessary. IET will develop the effective
    procedure & clear routes that Professional Engineers need to
    gain qualifications.

    JG : This was a fine proposition
    which was soon abandoned . IET in the hands of voluntary advisors,
    electrical C Eng, not meeting UK Spec standards, has drifted into
    the old IEE PEI  with 19th century, restrictive,
    restrained practice and ideals. The ideas set in our respective
    mandates and published in IET documentation and the E&T are not
    upheld by the majority of PE voluntary advisors.

    You only need to read these blogs
    to see that there is considerable discontent. Read the mandates,
    look at the statistics and decide for yourselves if IET has
    respected its reason for creation, or has been taken back  by
    stalwarts refusing change and progress. IET is not electrical &
    IT it is     as  proclaimed in its rules
    & regulations which must be respected by all MIET.

     

    Appendix F

    JG : 91 rules,  1 – 24
    concern membership, 25 to 91 concern discipline and running of the
    IET.

    20/ transfer of a member from
    one category to another category of membership shall be by the
    board.

    Every candidate for transfer from
    one category shall be subject to the same requirements as someone
    trying to join the IET in that category of membership and shall be
    proposed and supported in the same way.

    JG This is not in compliance with
    ECUK.

    IET has the competence to
    register:     I Eng

     or BSc, MEng, PEs from IEng
    to CEng

    23/  The Board can make
    & publish regulations ----- for candidates seeking election to
    any grade of membership of IET

    JG : The Board can set CEng
    examinations or call on C&G CEng Examinations for the long
    route PEs not having the chance to pass by university only academic
    learning and examination.



    In “MEMBER NEWS IS 44 April
    2017,

    The President, Jeremy Watson CBE,
    FREng, C Eng, FIET, IET President has asked some important
    questions    .

    He has presented a serious
    reflection on IET and its future. It echoes what I and many have
    questioned in this blog.


    1.      
    He has visited Paris IET, (Paris
    IET up until recently was an IEE private French company run by C
    Eng IEE, an anomaly in IET) IET France is now in new
    hands.


    2.      
    He calls for collaboration
    through cross & inter-disciplinary working.


    3.      
    He calls for Technology that work
    in one sector to be applied in other domains.


    4.      
    He asks how to re-launch our
    Learned Society.


    5.      
    He asks that reports and
    publications be open to impartial evidence(No open lobbying such as
    Fusion).


    6.      
    He calls for collaboration with
    other PEIs. (this was the object of IET, I Mech E dropped out of
    our initial project)


    7.      
    He asked how learned societies
    might operate.



    The Head of IET Council, Richard
    Spalding C Eng, FIET echoes this quest with four basic objectives –
    Page 8.

    I ask, how can the 167 000
    MIETs reply and act on this call to go back to our basic
    objectives. It is not by bloging, it is not by voting as the
    majority (I Eng ) is not on the voting list.

    I am into retirement, I want to
    see all PEs not active, retire from ECUK at all grades and let the
    working PEs decide what future they need.

    I have been disappointed by what
    i have read from C engs who denigrate and abuse there position.
    Engineering needs young basically trained professional engineers to
    develop into experts and leaders, not to gain useless titles and
    close the doors on others.

    We have BREXIT and a Power
    shortage – let the dynamic younger generation in and get
    working.

    Regards to all

    J Gowman

     MIET Ingénieur
    recherche

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member


    There are dedicated PEI's " Home" for different fields of Engineering.

    Mechanical Engineers have their Institution, IT has their BCS, Water Engineers have theirs etc.

    Whats left for Electrical and Electronics Engineers? IET. So no surprise that majority of EE's are IET members.


    The IIE was generic for all fields. Now IET is generic for all fields.  

    Its inclusive for Engineers who have multiple specializations or one. So in this aspect it mimics or continues the approach of IIE.


    I don't think there is any kind of issue with P.E recognition of CEng.

    The confusion is usually due to the international agreements that are focused on the education the degree and not the level of registration.

    If a person immigrates from UK to USA and they have EngC accredited (IET or similar) Engineering degree then usually based on Washington Accord and their experience most of the US States will allow that person to take FE and PE exams to get registered as Licensed P.E in USA.

    That person can be I.Eng, CEng or unregistered in UK.

    Same for Canada if you have appropriate Engineering degree you can take exams do additional requirements such as a year under P.Eng and get your P.Eng in Canada.

    IET has agreements with Australia Engineers as well.

    Again if you read the requirements the important part will be the degree.



  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Sparkingchip



    Posted on 26 March, 2017 at 11:18
    Europe/London

     




    Daniel
    Scott    :

    Could be a good idea, but how about trying to use a system similar
    to the old German system of Dipl.Ing (U) and Dipl.Ing (FH),
    engineer and technologist called a Dipl.Ing, but having to add
    their actual level of university (U or FH) after the
    Dipl.Ing.

    Chartered Engineer (ML) , Chartered Engineer (BL).  
    (ML) = Masters Level,  (BL) = Bachelors Level.  
    Only a suggestion, considering we tried to have the title
    Incorporated Engineer changed, quite a few years ago and
    failed.

     

    Daniel - the old system
    annotates the Diploma (ie the academic qualification)... in the UK
    we already do this as BSc/BEng (Bachelors) and MSc/MEng/MBA
    (Masters)


    Are you suggesting that a CEng(ML) is supperior to a CEng(BL) ???
    But we haven't yet reached agreement as to whether CEng is
    superiour to IEng ;-)

     


    Andrew & Daniel &
    all,



    In Germany and Europe,
    Professional Engineering qualifications and titles are given by
    academic examination.

    In the UK academic examination
    gives the title and level of attainment of a Professional
    E,ngineer.

    The UK peculiarity is that the
    tile C Eng, I Eng Technician is given by the ECUK registered
    Chartered Learned Societies ie IET.

    To be a member of a Learned
    Society one has to be nominated by a member, as with the Free
    Masons, the first trades’ guild. This tradition has been carried on
    in some PEIs.

    To be registered in the ECUK as
    IEng or CEng you have to be registered in your preferred PEI –
    IET.

    IET carries on this ridiculous
    tradition from IEE. 



    Peer reviews are carried out by
    people that are not up to UK-Spec, but have been active voluntary
    members of past PEIs.

    I questioned Mr Jon Prichard CEO
    ECUK on this practice, in a personal reply he stated:

    “Sponsorship
    Requirements

    This is not a requirement
    of the Engineering Council, but a reasonable requirement of the
    Institutions.”



    In my Institute that formed IET,
    we had no Peer review, or sponsorship for membership at any grade.
    This is conform with ECUK re    gulations.



    Now if the old CEng stalwarts
    want to recede into the 19th Century, IET is not
    going to be progressive.

    Someone on this blog has realised
    that the IEE Electrical and IT professional had sold out their
    PEI.

     IET is open to all
    Scientists, Technicians, Technologists and Engineers, of all
    competences and gender.



    Our Constitution states that all
    MIET of any sex or statute are equal within the
    IET.



    As for titles ,what about MIET
    (Tech or, BSc, or
     MEng)?

    For those not having the
    financial or geographical chance to attend full time academic
    education, our statutes allow for IET to create tutoring and
    examinations for each PE grade.



    If IET is not competent to do
    this with its worldwide 168000 ,membership and university
    professors then call on City & Guilds who have this facility
    open to all prospective PEs, to support the CPD of our
    members.



    Really; Electrical & IT
    professionals are welcome in IET but -



    IET is not an Electrical and
    Information-technology Institute.

    IET is the First cross boundary,
    progressive, 21st
    Century PEI, open to all at equal regards.

    Engineering is team work where
    every member is important.

    If there are those that want to
    be in an exclusive Electrical – IT society, let them do as we did
    30 years ago; go and make one of their own.



    Long live IET for all PEs and
    others.



    J Gowman MIET BSc, (MEng attained
    twice in two disciplines and languages, but not
    certified)

    I would not apply for C Eng now;
    it is not a qualification, it is a membership card
    only.

     

     

     

         
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                 
      

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Sparkingchip



    Posted on 26 March, 2017 at 11:18
    Europe/London

     




    Daniel
    Scott    :

    Could be a good idea, but how about trying to use a system similar
    to the old German system of Dipl.Ing (U) and Dipl.Ing (FH),
    engineer and technologist called a Dipl.Ing, but having to add
    their actual level of university (U or FH) after the
    Dipl.Ing.

    Chartered Engineer (ML) , Chartered Engineer (BL).  
    (ML) = Masters Level,  (BL) = Bachelors Level.  
    Only a suggestion, considering we tried to have the title
    Incorporated Engineer changed, quite a few years ago and
    failed.

     

    Daniel - the old system
    annotates the Diploma (ie the academic qualification)... in the UK
    we already do this as BSc/BEng (Bachelors) and MSc/MEng/MBA
    (Masters)


    Are you suggesting that a CEng(ML) is supperior to a CEng(BL) ???
    But we haven't yet reached agreement as to whether CEng is
    superiour to IEng ;-)

     


    Andrew & Daniel &
    all,



    In Germany and Europe,
    Professional Engineering qualifications and titles are given by
    academic examination.

    In the UK academic examination
    gives the title and level of attainment of a Professional
    E,ngineer.

    The UK peculiarity is that the
    tile C Eng, I Eng Technician is given by the ECUK registered
    Chartered Learned Societies ie IET.

    To be a member of a Learned
    Society one has to be nominated by a member, as with the Free
    Masons, the first trades’ guild. This tradition has been carried on
    in some PEIs.

    To be registered in the ECUK as
    IEng or CEng you have to be registered in your preferred PEI –
    IET.

    IET carries on this ridiculous
    tradition from IEE. 



    Peer reviews are carried out by
    people that are not up to UK-Spec, but have been active voluntary
    members of past PEIs.

    I questioned Mr Jon Prichard CEO
    ECUK on this practice, in a personal reply he stated:

    “Sponsorship
    Requirements

    This is not a requirement
    of the Engineering Council, but a reasonable requirement of the
    Institutions.”



    In my Institute that formed IET,
    we had no Peer review, or sponsorship for membership at any grade.
    This is conform with ECUK re    gulations.



    Now if the old CEng stalwarts
    want to recede into the 19th Century, IET is not
    going to be progressive.

    Someone on this blog has realised
    that the IEE Electrical and IT professional had sold out their
    PEI.

     IET is open to all
    Scientists, Technicians, Technologists and Engineers, of all
    competences and gender.



    Our Constitution states that all
    MIET of any sex or statute are equal within the
    IET.



    As for titles ,what about MIET
    (Tech or, BSc, or
     MEng)?

    For those not having the
    financial or geographical chance to attend full time academic
    education, our statutes allow for IET to create tutoring and
    examinations for each PE grade.



    If IET is not competent to do
    this with its worldwide 168000 ,membership and university
    professors then call on City & Guilds who have this facility
    open to all prospective PEs, to support the CPD of our
    members.



    Really; Electrical & IT
    professionals are welcome in IET but -



    IET is not an Electrical and
    Information-technology Institute.

    IET is the First cross boundary,
    progressive, 21st
    Century PEI, open to all at equal regards.

    Engineering is team work where
    every member is important.

    If there are those that want to
    be in an exclusive Electrical – IT society, let them do as we did
    30 years ago; go and make one of their own.



    Long live IET for all PEs and
    others.



    J Gowman MIET BSc, (MEng attained
    twice in two disciplines and languages, but not
    certified)

    I would not apply for C Eng now;
    it is not a qualification, it is a membership card
    only.

     

     

     

         
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                 
      

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Sparkingchip



    Posted on 26 March, 2017 at 11:18
    Europe/London

     




    Daniel
    Scott    :

    Could be a good idea, but how about trying to use a system similar
    to the old German system of Dipl.Ing (U) and Dipl.Ing (FH),
    engineer and technologist called a Dipl.Ing, but having to add
    their actual level of university (U or FH) after the
    Dipl.Ing.

    Chartered Engineer (ML) , Chartered Engineer (BL).  
    (ML) = Masters Level,  (BL) = Bachelors Level.  
    Only a suggestion, considering we tried to have the title
    Incorporated Engineer changed, quite a few years ago and
    failed.

     

    Daniel - the old system
    annotates the Diploma (ie the academic qualification)... in the UK
    we already do this as BSc/BEng (Bachelors) and MSc/MEng/MBA
    (Masters)


    Are you suggesting that a CEng(ML) is supperior to a CEng(BL) ???
    But we haven't yet reached agreement as to whether CEng is
    superiour to IEng ;-)

     


    Andrew & Daniel &
    all,



    In Germany and Europe,
    Professional Engineering qualifications and titles are given by
    academic examination.

    In the UK academic examination
    gives the title and level of attainment of a Professional
    E,ngineer.

    The UK peculiarity is that the
    tile C Eng, I Eng Technician is given by the ECUK registered
    Chartered Learned Societies ie IET.

    To be a member of a Learned
    Society one has to be nominated by a member, as with the Free
    Masons, the first trades’ guild. This tradition has been carried on
    in some PEIs.

    To be registered in the ECUK as
    IEng or CEng you have to be registered in your preferred PEI –
    IET.

    IET carries on this ridiculous
    tradition from IEE. 



    Peer reviews are carried out by
    people that are not up to UK-Spec, but have been active voluntary
    members of past PEIs.

    I questioned Mr Jon Prichard CEO
    ECUK on this practice, in a personal reply he stated:

    “Sponsorship
    Requirements

    This is not a requirement
    of the Engineering Council, but a reasonable requirement of the
    Institutions.”



    In my Institute that formed IET,
    we had no Peer review, or sponsorship for membership at any grade.
    This is conform with ECUK re    gulations.



    Now if the old CEng stalwarts
    want to recede into the 19th Century, IET is not
    going to be progressive.

    Someone on this blog has realised
    that the IEE Electrical and IT professional had sold out their
    PEI.

     IET is open to all
    Scientists, Technicians, Technologists and Engineers, of all
    competences and gender.



    Our Constitution states that all
    MIET of any sex or statute are equal within the
    IET.



    As for titles ,what about MIET
    (Tech or, BSc, or
     MEng)?

    For those not having the
    financial or geographical chance to attend full time academic
    education, our statutes allow for IET to create tutoring and
    examinations for each PE grade.



    If IET is not competent to do
    this with its worldwide 168000 ,membership and university
    professors then call on City & Guilds who have this facility
    open to all prospective PEs, to support the CPD of our
    members.



    Really; Electrical & IT
    professionals are welcome in IET but -



    IET is not an Electrical and
    Information-technology Institute.

    IET is the First cross boundary,
    progressive, 21st
    Century PEI, open to all at equal regards.

    Engineering is team work where
    every member is important.

    If there are those that want to
    be in an exclusive Electrical – IT society, let them do as we did
    30 years ago; go and make one of their own.



    Long live IET for all PEs and
    others.



    J Gowman MIET BSc, (MEng attained
    twice in two disciplines and languages, but not
    certified)

    I would not apply for C Eng now;
    it is not a qualification, it is a membership card
    only.

     

     

     

         
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                 
      

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Sparkingchip



    Posted on 26 March, 2017 at 11:18
    Europe/London

     




    Daniel
    Scott    :

    Could be a good idea, but how about trying to use a system similar
    to the old German system of Dipl.Ing (U) and Dipl.Ing (FH),
    engineer and technologist called a Dipl.Ing, but having to add
    their actual level of university (U or FH) after the
    Dipl.Ing.

    Chartered Engineer (ML) , Chartered Engineer (BL).  
    (ML) = Masters Level,  (BL) = Bachelors Level.  
    Only a suggestion, considering we tried to have the title
    Incorporated Engineer changed, quite a few years ago and
    failed.

     

    Daniel - the old system
    annotates the Diploma (ie the academic qualification)... in the UK
    we already do this as BSc/BEng (Bachelors) and MSc/MEng/MBA
    (Masters)


    Are you suggesting that a CEng(ML) is supperior to a CEng(BL) ???
    But we haven't yet reached agreement as to whether CEng is
    superiour to IEng ;-)

     


    Andrew & Daniel &
    all,



    In Germany and Europe,
    Professional Engineering qualifications and titles are given by
    academic examination.

    In the UK academic examination
    gives the title and level of attainment of a Professional
    E,ngineer.

    The UK peculiarity is that the
    tile C Eng, I Eng Technician is given by the ECUK registered
    Chartered Learned Societies ie IET.

    To be a member of a Learned
    Society one has to be nominated by a member, as with the Free
    Masons, the first trades’ guild. This tradition has been carried on
    in some PEIs.

    To be registered in the ECUK as
    IEng or CEng you have to be registered in your preferred PEI –
    IET.

    IET carries on this ridiculous
    tradition from IEE. 



    Peer reviews are carried out by
    people that are not up to UK-Spec, but have been active voluntary
    members of past PEIs.

    I questioned Mr Jon Prichard CEO
    ECUK on this practice, in a personal reply he stated:

    “Sponsorship
    Requirements

    This is not a requirement
    of the Engineering Council, but a reasonable requirement of the
    Institutions.”



    In my Institute that formed IET,
    we had no Peer review, or sponsorship for membership at any grade.
    This is conform with ECUK re    gulations.



    Now if the old CEng stalwarts
    want to recede into the 19th Century, IET is not
    going to be progressive.

    Someone on this blog has realised
    that the IEE Electrical and IT professional had sold out their
    PEI.

     IET is open to all
    Scientists, Technicians, Technologists and Engineers, of all
    competences and gender.



    Our Constitution states that all
    MIET of any sex or statute are equal within the
    IET.



    As for titles ,what about MIET
    (Tech or, BSc, or
     MEng)?

    For those not having the
    financial or geographical chance to attend full time academic
    education, our statutes allow for IET to create tutoring and
    examinations for each PE grade.



    If IET is not competent to do
    this with its worldwide 168000 ,membership and university
    professors then call on City & Guilds who have this facility
    open to all prospective PEs, to support the CPD of our
    members.



    Really; Electrical & IT
    professionals are welcome in IET but -



    IET is not an Electrical and
    Information-technology Institute.

    IET is the First cross boundary,
    progressive, 21st
    Century PEI, open to all at equal regards.

    Engineering is team work where
    every member is important.

    If there are those that want to
    be in an exclusive Electrical – IT society, let them do as we did
    30 years ago; go and make one of their own.



    Long live IET for all PEs and
    others.



    J Gowman MIET BSc, (MEng attained
    twice in two disciplines and languages, but not
    certified)

    I would not apply for C Eng now;
    it is not a qualification, it is a membership card
    only.

     

     

     

         
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                 
      

  • 0

    Andrew Banks:




    believe from my over 50 years in engineering (now retired), that trying to compare the work that I performed as an IEng compared to CEng's or EngTech's was of lesser importance than the other team members would be rediculous.



    I do not doubt it...


    When I was offered IEng (as being not of appropriate level for CEng) I was managing a team of 12 (I think) of whom all but two were CEng - I found that illogical.

     




    Hi Andrew,


    I don't see this as illogical at all (in principle, obviously I can't comment on your individual case). It's not about management levels, it's about technical responsibility, and particularly responsibility for innovation. So an engineering team can be run by an IEng who is responsible for the ensuring the right people are working on the right tasks at the right times, even though that person may not have the technical authority to (say) sign off a particular piece of work. After all, the most senior technical person is very likely to be reporting in turn to an MD or VP with a financial, business organisation or marketing background.


    Now, if someone is both managing and technically signing off the work of CEngs, I would expect that person to be eligible to be a CEng.


    People get very bogged down in this idea that organisational seniority and technical seniority are the same things - they absolutely are not.


    Cheers,


    Andy

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    Nicholai


    Your experience is anecdotal I don't think its the rule, others have different views and experiences.

    Here is an example of current job advert that in fact shows oposite of your ideas.

     Facility Design Authority (FDA)
    Engineer - C&I, Electrical, Mechanical Design
    Qualifications



    • ONC/OND in relevant engineering discipline

    • Accredited Honours degree from a recognised university (Desirable)

    • Professional membership of an engineering institution at IEng level (Desirable)



    General Dinamics  Chippenham

    Professional registration e.g. CEng. General Dynamics Mission Systems-UK (Broadband - Chippenham) is recruiting a LTE Systems Engineer on a permanent basis


     

    Jacobs

    Engineer - Highways     - (EU/000075)



     



    Essential Criteria

     
    • A degree in Civil Engineering

    • You should be nearing or gained CEng/IEng and MICE status or equivalent.

    • In depth knowledge of DMRB

    • Experience in the design and procurement of highway schemes.

    • Basic knowledge of project management and contractual issues.



    Systems Engineer - Permanent - Bristol 

    • Developing solutions to complex problems using SE Principles, Skills and Practice to achieve the necessary balance of performance, cost, time and risk.

    • Communicating complex concepts and solutions in a compelling and straightforward way, yet underpinned by a strong grasp of the detail

    • .....


     

    Key Skills:



    • Degree qualified in an Engineering/Mathematical, Software or Scientific Discipline or have equivalent experience. A relevant higher degree and/or professional qualification, e.g. CEng, would be an advantage.


    ........


  • 0
    In respect of the discussion between Moshe and Nicholai, A simple search on the IET jobs website on the keyword 'chartered' returns 144 jobs, the same search on the term 'incorporated' returns 7 jobs. When reading the text of the 7 'incorporated' jobs only 1 actually includes a description of IEng being a requirement by stating 'Applicants must have an accredited degree or equivalent in a relevant Engineering discipline and Incorporated Engineer status, as a minimum, preferably leading to Chartered Engineer status (Institution of Mechanical Engineers or Institution of Engineering and Technology'. I think this typical and indicative of the broader jobs market.


    ​On the wider subject of the independent report. I am surprised and delighted that at last someone is talking sense.

Community Rules & Guidelines