Is it possible to remain a CEng if IET membership is ended?

There are two issues here, the membership proposition of The IET and the registration proposition of Engineering Council. The IET should and I think does listen to its members and is governed by them. The suggestion of free membership and perhaps also removing of the Engineering Council fee for retired CEng has probably at some stage been considered. My personal view is that if incentives were to be offered, then the young should have first priority. I would much prefer that everyone entering the profession as an Apprentice or Student feels equally welcomed and is nurtured by the IET towards professional recognition.

 

The current situation is that the average age of an Engineer on The Engineering Council register is late 50s. There are more Chartered Engineers over 90 than under 30 and more over 80 than under 35. The registration category benchmarked at Bachelors Level (IEng) has under 15% of the registered Engineers aged under 40, only improving slightly by the 55-65 age group.  Over the last 10 years the youngest average age for new registrants was briefly 30 for Eng Tech.   

 

I’m not retired, but I’m over 40 years into career. I have great admiration for the generation who preceded me for some of their technical achievements, especially as university attendance was so much rarer. However, we also have to accept our legacy and the image of engineering that we have created for prospective and upcoming Engineers and Technicians. Perhaps there are fewer of them, but they don’t seem to be warming to the “role model” offered by their parents and grandparents?

 

The impression that many have of professional engineering, or at least the bodies that represent it, is one of being primarily concerned with academic pedantry, exclusivity and relative status. This isn’t very attractive to most of them, although some manage to imbibe snobbish attitudes, or at least a sense of entitlement from somewhere at an early stage. Perhaps this is passed down the generations and is accepted because they have direct no experience of working closely with more practical Engineers or Technicians? Perhaps it is all just a misunderstanding?     

 

Nicholas mentioned the tradition of retired commissioned officers retaining their rank title. Wasn’t “Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells” also “Col (Retd)”? Retired military personnel of non-commissioned rank of course do not enjoy this privilege and according to a military discussion forum that I checked, Army Captain is also doubtful. It seems that this might be used by some retired officers still acting within the military administration environment, but otherwise apart from Captain Mark Phillips “He continued to style himself Captain Mark Phillips; retired cavalry captains are (unusually) allowed to use this honorific rank, if their job had mostly involved horses.”, the last sighting seems to have been Captain Peacock from TVs “Are You Being Served”. Coincidentally, active service personnel of senior non-commissioned or (Army) Captain rank who chose to register are most commonly IEng.   

 

I’m sorry Nicholas for using your comments to make what I think is a very important point. I wouldn’t personally object to you or anyone earning a “free pass” through long and especially ongoing service.  Many retired members are delighted to put both time and money back, being in a fortunate position to do so. I don’t think that there is anything to be gained by taking away something that has been earned, unless it has been abused.  However, because in the words of Privy Council “the title is to inform not aggrandise” some form of ongoing “supervision” should exist. Unfortunately in the past this obligation has been largely ignored and even now is regarded by many as an irritating bureaucratic nuisance, rather than an essential element of commitment.

 

I’m not speaking on behalf of the IET here, but I have no problem with someone styling themselves “Retired Chartered Engineer”. This doesn’t have the potential to mislead anyone and surely doesn’t reduce the respect that any sensible person holds you in.  

 

To retired members who want to “represent the profession”, I hope that they recognise their obligation to do so in a modern and inclusive way. If what you say or do, discourages a young women, or someone who hasn’t developed a love of mathematics, had great academic success so far, or is “working class”, from becoming a professional engineer or technician then this is a disservice. There are many examples both within our institution and the wider profession who demonstrate how engineering benefits society by enabling social mobility and offering good careers to a wide range of different people.

There are two issues here, the membership proposition of The IET and the registration proposition of Engineering Council. The IET should and I think does listen to its members and is governed by them. The suggestion of free membership and perhaps also removing of the Engineering Council fee for retired CEng has probably at some stage been considered. My personal view is that if incentives were to be offered, then the young should have first priority. I would much prefer that everyone entering the profession as an Apprentice or Student feels equally welcomed and is nurtured by the IET towards professional recognition.

 

The current situation is that the average age of an Engineer on The Engineering Council register is late 50s. There are more Chartered Engineers over 90 than under 30 and more over 80 than under 35. The registration category benchmarked at Bachelors Level (IEng) has under 15% of the registered Engineers aged under 40, only improving slightly by the 55-65 age group.  Over the last 10 years the youngest average age for new registrants was briefly 30 for Eng Tech.   

 

I’m not retired, but I’m over 40 years into career. I have great admiration for the generation who preceded me for some of their technical achievements, especially as university attendance was so much rarer. However, we also have to accept our legacy and the image of engineering that we have created for prospective and upcoming Engineers and Technicians. Perhaps there are fewer of them, but they don’t seem to be warming to the “role model” offered by their parents and grandparents?

 

The impression that many have of professional engineering, or at least the bodies that represent it, is one of being primarily concerned with academic pedantry, exclusivity and relative status. This isn’t very attractive to most of them, although some manage to imbibe snobbish attitudes, or at least a sense of entitlement from somewhere at an early stage. Perhaps this is passed down the generations and is accepted because they have direct no experience of working closely with more practical Engineers or Technicians? Perhaps it is all just a misunderstanding?     

 

Nicholas mentioned the tradition of retired commissioned officers retaining their rank title. Wasn’t “Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells” also “Col (Retd)”? Retired military personnel of non-commissioned rank of course do not enjoy this privilege and according to a military discussion forum that I checked, Army Captain is also doubtful. It seems that this might be used by some retired officers still acting within the military administration environment, but otherwise apart from Captain Mark Phillips “He continued to style himself Captain Mark Phillips; retired cavalry captains are (unusually) allowed to use this honorific rank, if their job had mostly involved horses.”, the last sighting seems to have been Captain Peacock from TVs “Are You Being Served”. Coincidentally, active service personnel of senior non-commissioned or (Army) Captain rank who chose to register are most commonly IEng.   

 

I’m sorry Nicholas for using your comments to make what I think is a very important point. I wouldn’t personally object to you or anyone earning a “free pass” through long and especially ongoing service.  Many retired members are delighted to put both time and money back, being in a fortunate position to do so. I don’t think that there is anything to be gained by taking away something that has been earned, unless it has been abused.  However, because in the words of Privy Council “the title is to inform not aggrandise” some form of ongoing “supervision” should exist. Unfortunately in the past this obligation has been largely ignored and even now is regarded by many as an irritating bureaucratic nuisance, rather than an essential element of commitment.

 

I’m not speaking on behalf of the IET here, but I have no problem with someone styling themselves “Retired Chartered Engineer”. This doesn’t have the potential to mislead anyone and surely doesn’t reduce the respect that any sensible person holds you in.  

 

To retired members who want to “represent the profession”, I hope that they recognise their obligation to do so in a modern and inclusive way. If what you say or do, discourages a young women, or someone who hasn’t developed a love of mathematics, had great academic success so far, or is “working class”, from becoming a professional engineer or technician then this is a disservice. There are many examples both within our institution and the wider profession who demonstrate how engineering benefits society by enabling social mobility and offering good careers to a wide range of different people.