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

Wow Roy - dare I say a well meant, thoughtful reply and I have no issue at all with you using my words as a reference or other point.  This is by nature a public forum and if you post, comment, etc then you are by definination and action on the stage to be questioned, challenged, praised or damned.

 

I totally agree that attraction, encouragment, traind and development of our young engineers is a "society" responsibility.  If it were not for the efforts and encouragment the then IERE and IEE I would possibly not have gone down the Chartered route.  I also know many a fine engineer, even better than me, who did not go down the chartered route and were just as respected with some progressing higher and earning more than me and never saw or needed to get chartered.  This is an interesting and very common problem / issue with so called professional engineering etc. here in the UK.


Moving back to the original suggestion that the EC and IET (other) professional bodies are hurting themselves (IMHO) by putting previously respected retired members who flew the flag for so many years into a "financial" decision dilema is dare I say a crass and self damaging position.


You say there are more chratered engineers over 90 than under 35.  I won't reference your other stats. that describe and ageing chartered community.

 

Tackling the lack of new entrants is an issue but losing highly experienced members at the end of their careers is in itself a self defeating business plan.


I don't want to cause/raise another interesting observation but before I graduated the then IERE/IEE had but a simple HNC/HND educational qualification requirement.  When I came along it was BSc.  A little later BSc Hons and gues what we are now in the Masters and above regime.  Suffice to say we have many excelent current/retired engineers with HNC/HND or pure practical approved qualifications.  In my era I had, dare I say great smart theoretical/academic students who failed to know the hot end of a soldering iron from the other.  Given a real practical engineering excerise all they could produce was theoretically accurate waffle with no physical outcome.

 

My reference to other professions retaining some "credentials" or their retired members from their pervious profession was just a general referance to the fact that there are precidences and thus opprtunities for the likes of the EC and IET (other) to at lease SERIOUSLY look at what hey might gain for minimal cost.

 

This is not an issue about time and effort back into the profession.  I've done this (to some exten).  The issue is that for me, and others, financially (for what ever reason) we have to abandon the hard won so called "professional status" and as a result feel abandoned, no longer "qualified" to speak about the engineering profession with any backing or recognition by the EC/IET/other organisations.  To rub salt into the wound there is (from this side of the fence) a veiled suggestion that after a successful career in engineering we should be proud to "give back" and "support" without question and at our own personal expense when it make no finacial sense.  You would not as a practicing professional workingon a commercial project do it and if you did you would be sacked.

 

You say "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."  Well I do.  However given a possibly immature or young audience would you listen/respect "Nicholas Bailey" or "Roy Bowdler CEng FIET MIET ........

 

Finally.  You have already eluded to the vast numbers of retired engineers.  A few in retirement do actively engage in encouraging the professon can still afford to maintain their professional fees and post nominals.  Others do nothing but still pay and retain their post nominals. Many can not justify the fees and thought would like to "engage" just feel what is the point as we have been abandoned and forgotten. 

 

I'm taking, yet  again, time to raise this ugly subject (having walked away some time ago) and am still puzzled that the basic idea, even validty, of an all inclusive post retirement recognition and the benefits that could bring for everybody (institutions, society, aspiring engineers and retired individuals) is just ignored for a minimal cost and bit of pro-active resonance from tose that have the scope and capability to at least possibly, just possibly think outside of the immediate cash box.


As for all those retired Chartered Engineers doing no CPD (as is required by the EC where they stated that CEng is reserved for those activeley engaged in the profession and are fully compliant with current CPD requirements for CEng) then maybe their CEng should be removed and their FIET/MIET status changed to simply RFIET/RMIET and no legal right to use CEng.  

 

If I'm wrong and out of my tree then fine.

Wow Roy - dare I say a well meant, thoughtful reply and I have no issue at all with you using my words as a reference or other point.  This is by nature a public forum and if you post, comment, etc then you are by definination and action on the stage to be questioned, challenged, praised or damned.

 

I totally agree that attraction, encouragment, traind and development of our young engineers is a "society" responsibility.  If it were not for the efforts and encouragment the then IERE and IEE I would possibly not have gone down the Chartered route.  I also know many a fine engineer, even better than me, who did not go down the chartered route and were just as respected with some progressing higher and earning more than me and never saw or needed to get chartered.  This is an interesting and very common problem / issue with so called professional engineering etc. here in the UK.


Moving back to the original suggestion that the EC and IET (other) professional bodies are hurting themselves (IMHO) by putting previously respected retired members who flew the flag for so many years into a "financial" decision dilema is dare I say a crass and self damaging position.


You say there are more chratered engineers over 90 than under 35.  I won't reference your other stats. that describe and ageing chartered community.

 

Tackling the lack of new entrants is an issue but losing highly experienced members at the end of their careers is in itself a self defeating business plan.


I don't want to cause/raise another interesting observation but before I graduated the then IERE/IEE had but a simple HNC/HND educational qualification requirement.  When I came along it was BSc.  A little later BSc Hons and gues what we are now in the Masters and above regime.  Suffice to say we have many excelent current/retired engineers with HNC/HND or pure practical approved qualifications.  In my era I had, dare I say great smart theoretical/academic students who failed to know the hot end of a soldering iron from the other.  Given a real practical engineering excerise all they could produce was theoretically accurate waffle with no physical outcome.

 

My reference to other professions retaining some "credentials" or their retired members from their pervious profession was just a general referance to the fact that there are precidences and thus opprtunities for the likes of the EC and IET (other) to at lease SERIOUSLY look at what hey might gain for minimal cost.

 

This is not an issue about time and effort back into the profession.  I've done this (to some exten).  The issue is that for me, and others, financially (for what ever reason) we have to abandon the hard won so called "professional status" and as a result feel abandoned, no longer "qualified" to speak about the engineering profession with any backing or recognition by the EC/IET/other organisations.  To rub salt into the wound there is (from this side of the fence) a veiled suggestion that after a successful career in engineering we should be proud to "give back" and "support" without question and at our own personal expense when it make no finacial sense.  You would not as a practicing professional workingon a commercial project do it and if you did you would be sacked.

 

You say "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."  Well I do.  However given a possibly immature or young audience would you listen/respect "Nicholas Bailey" or "Roy Bowdler CEng FIET MIET ........

 

Finally.  You have already eluded to the vast numbers of retired engineers.  A few in retirement do actively engage in encouraging the professon can still afford to maintain their professional fees and post nominals.  Others do nothing but still pay and retain their post nominals. Many can not justify the fees and thought would like to "engage" just feel what is the point as we have been abandoned and forgotten. 

 

I'm taking, yet  again, time to raise this ugly subject (having walked away some time ago) and am still puzzled that the basic idea, even validty, of an all inclusive post retirement recognition and the benefits that could bring for everybody (institutions, society, aspiring engineers and retired individuals) is just ignored for a minimal cost and bit of pro-active resonance from tose that have the scope and capability to at least possibly, just possibly think outside of the immediate cash box.


As for all those retired Chartered Engineers doing no CPD (as is required by the EC where they stated that CEng is reserved for those activeley engaged in the profession and are fully compliant with current CPD requirements for CEng) then maybe their CEng should be removed and their FIET/MIET status changed to simply RFIET/RMIET and no legal right to use CEng.  

 

If I'm wrong and out of my tree then fine.