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 112 replies
  • Subscribers 15 subscribers
  • Views 7010 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

U.K. ENGINEERING 2016 REPORT

Former Community Member
Former Community Member
​I have noted in another discussion, several comments of my own, but there seems to be a lack of interest or it takes too long to read and digest the report.

​Apart from Roy's original comments and direction to be able to read the report, it would be great to find out if IMechE, ICE and the IET have had any official comments on the report and if not, when can we expect any.?


​Daniel


P.S. Just had to get away from CEng v IEng status discussion.
Parents
No Data
Reply
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Legh Richardson

     Mark Curtis
    -     Thus Andy, by definition,
    as someone who is a generalist with specialist skills, you could be
    considered a Neo-Generalist (personally, I see it as a good
    thing).

    J Gowman : personally I
    see this as arrogant.

    Andy Millar
    -
    Interesting post. My
    previous employer tried to create separate career paths for
    specialists and generalists, to ensure the essential specialists
    felt they had a way forward in their career and were not forced
    down the generalist route. Too early yet to see how well this
    worked, I'm still in touch with them so will watch with
    interest.

    I'm definitely a generalist
    with a few (rather obscure) deeply specialist niches.

    And it's not much off-topic:
    I have seen several times in my experience that specialist
    engineers find it tougher filling in the application for CEng/IEng
    than generalists.

    The way UKSpec is worded
    can seem to favour generalists if it's not read
    carefully.

    J Gowman - Most CEng do not
    meet UKSpec; CEng need experience in sales, management as well as a
    MEng. The person best fitting UKSpec is the General Manager of an
    Engineering MSE. CEng is a certificate for this year’s work only.
    Not a certificate for
    life.

    Andy Millar
    -     I can't disagree with
    you, but I think that just emphasises the fact the Prof Luff is
    correct to say it (very much) isn't sorted out by the efforts that
    have been made so far,

    and it needs to be looked
    at again.

    J Gowman – in a recent
    contract, I set up Engineering “Surveillance” the question was how
    to check a perfect system that had been checked and approved at 12
    stages from design to construction, all within proven IT
    systems.

    My solution was not to
    choose the same IT systems, to do it by hand with a different team.
    Result – catastrophic and confidential.

    We need to do the same
    with CEng and IEng registration and ECUK
    intervention.

    ECUK is run by CEngs,
    Professional Registration is governed by CEngs,     you can not review a
    system using the system – it’s so obvious.


    The
    U.K. ENGINEERING 2016
    REPORT     in Professional registration
    matters      has to be reviewed
    by non PEI non CEng. Responsible professionals. Why not academic
    experts.


     


    Secondly our PEI wanted
    to amalgamate with all PEIs to form a single umbrella grouping the
    entire specialist engineering PEIs as chapters or independent
    groups.


    IET did this in its first
    years with specialist interest groups, then the IEE Electricals
    CEngs reverted to what IET is now.     Not a generalist
    Institute    .


     


    Peter Miller -
    Andy, I would agree with
    your view that IEng and Engtech should not be merged if I thought
    that IEng would be promoted. History has shown us that it will
    not.


    J Gowman – Peter I would
    go further,if this merger takes place I would advise all IEng to
    leave IET and find a better suited PEI that protects their
    interests.


     


    IET was meant to
    be :     A group who promote
    science, engineering and technology, encourage people to enter the
    profession and provide opportunities to share and develop knowledge
    and network, at all levels and gender.

    IET Cannot accept any
    proposition that denigrates the Technician and Professional
    Engineer. They are two different professions.


     


    See Assistant engineer
    below.


    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    I have done my bit in
    engineering, I will pass on what I can to the following
    generations.



    (>1980) Mr Ian M
    Barnes  -  Honorary Fellow of the IIE, established a
    small PEI dedicated to HNC type apprentice trained professional
    engineers, I was called upon to assist at Birdcage Walk. I helped
    as best I could.  I was a Professional Engineer, changing from
    aeronautical to nuclear engineering by distance BA courses in
    Mathematics & Technology. I was already an established engineer
    – a generalist, I was also leading the design & construction of
    the first non military, nuclear, gas reprocessing
    plant.



    All UK Civil service
    scientists and technologists were Professional Technologists PTO at
    that time.



    Our minority PEI was the
    foundation of IET and our basic aims were integrated into the IET,
    we went on to amalgamate and gain UK Royal Charter, then we
    registered our members who met UK Spec as Chartered Engineers. This
    all ended in 2006 when IET was formed.

    Having taken CPD studies
    in electronics, computing, vacuum technology and nuclear physics, I
    would consider myself already a generalist.

    My BA in Science made me
    a specialist in Special Techniques, a
    generalist in alternative process plant
    .

    I have since had two
    monographs
    validated to Master
    Degree.



    So as an I Eng (retired) I would
    consider myself a competent generalist.

    I was a registered Full
    Technician     C&G 293 pt 1, 2, 3, & endorsements, with
    apprenticeship training at the start of my career
    1972.

    I would never have accepted
    I Eng as being equal to a registered Technician

    I would consider my I Eng to
    be worth and equal to any CEng specialist.

    I am a leading Specialist in
    Special Techniques, in     Engineering
    “Surveillance”     and in DAD. (I suppose to the CEng
    engineering experts this means nothing, it is not electrical or IT,
    but it does include electrical & IT).



    DAD and Special
    Techniques     means nothing to a
    specialist Electrical CEng, so just call me a generalist in alternative
    power plant and special industrial plant.



    The IET states
    :


    ·        
    The IET is the
    Professional Home for Life Registered for engineers and
    technicians.


    ·        
    We'll support you at
    every stage of your professional journey.


    ·        
    Working to engineer a better
    world


    ·        
    Inspiring the next
    generation of engineers and technicians


    ·        
    Informing the wider
    engineering community


    ·        
    Influencing government and
    standards to advance society

     

     So either we
    protect and stand up for our members or we revert to a specialist
    Electrical IT CEng PEI.



    IET has to be above this CEng battle and restrictive club, we have
    a huge potential of PEs outside who can develop into experts in
    unthinkable domains. We should help them be PE registered, who
    cares about titles.

    Get them in; get them
    started, on the ladder of continuing knowledge.

     

    Keep & respect
    Technicians, value and respect IEng

     

    IET has to be open to all
    cultures, sciences and technologies

    IET is not an electrical
    – IT PEI.

    IET is multi disciplinary, calling on all competences, genders and
    experiences.


    Assistant Engineer – not
    a Technician, not an IEng.

    Assistant engineer is a
    profession in France taught in Universities to a level equivalent
    to HND.

    I have employed two Assistant engineers,
    neither wanted the responsibility or the constraints of being a
    Professional engineer.

    One was a Russian Girl who
    liked making things but did not want to compromise future family
    life, the other wanted flexibility and time for other activities
    outside of work.

    They were capable of
    handling any IT system within the company, could carry out
    mathematics and modelling to HND level, and were competent in
    sales, QA,  buying, document writing etc. They were at hand to
    alleviate the routine tasks of the Project engineer.

    A technician could not carry
    out their tasks. They were a time saver, why ask an engineer to do
    routine work when others could do it quicker at a lesser charge. It
    was an equal compromise productive. The senior engineers called my
    Assistant engineers
    all sorts of insulting terms until my projects began to lead all
    others. The company Director made Assistant engineer a must in
    the company.

    The UK should face up to
    change and not be conservative and Luddite.

    Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



    How can anyone justify being
    a member of an institute that cannot respect its members of all
    grades, origins and genders.


    John Gowman, BA
    MIET




Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines