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 84 replies
  • Subscribers 10 subscribers
  • Views 2112 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Time for licenced Engineers?

Former Community Member
Former Community Member
As a result of a discussion within a Linkedin group. I had originally raised the issue of the EC UK or IET legally licencing Engineers and had agreed to bring this discussion from Linkedin to the IET members in an appropriate community for a frank and open debate.

​The circumstances surrounding this discussion was the tragedy of Grenfell Towers and my personal observation that some of the alleged decision makers, had no technical qualifications to make decisions on public safety. I am wondering how far the inquiry will go to reveal that issue. 

​

As I currently work in Canada we do have an act of law governing the conduct of its licenced Engineers and this makes the Engineer have some higher degree of responsibility for public safety.


​Questions

1)    Given the impact of Grenfell, does EC(UK) have to now start considering licencing? What are the perceived hurdles to achieve this?

​2)    If not. What can we do within our profession to improve pubic safety with an objective to prevent another 'Grenfell' ?


I am ​Interested to get IET members responses.

Parents
  • 0

    Roy Pemberton:

     I don't think there can be much doubt that extension of the principle to engineering would produce similar benefits. Why should we be more ready to allow those who have not demonstrated their competence and professionalism to undertake safety or mission critical tasks in engineering than we are in medicine or law, when the impact is at least as wide sweeping?




    Oh, yes there can.  So far, nobody has presented any evidence that compulsory registration will benefit anybody but those registered and those doing the registration.  Just asserting that it is necessary doesn't make it so.


    People (on this forum and elsewhere) have been whingeing and moaning for many years about the lack of compulsory registration, and convinced nobody but themselves.

Reply
  • 0

    Roy Pemberton:

     I don't think there can be much doubt that extension of the principle to engineering would produce similar benefits. Why should we be more ready to allow those who have not demonstrated their competence and professionalism to undertake safety or mission critical tasks in engineering than we are in medicine or law, when the impact is at least as wide sweeping?




    Oh, yes there can.  So far, nobody has presented any evidence that compulsory registration will benefit anybody but those registered and those doing the registration.  Just asserting that it is necessary doesn't make it so.


    People (on this forum and elsewhere) have been whingeing and moaning for many years about the lack of compulsory registration, and convinced nobody but themselves.

Children
No Data

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines