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

If one feel that my question is a bit sarcastic I would like to apologize and I don’t have any ill feeling toward anyone.


Again, I agreed on what Andy said “wider value that the IET offers to the engineering community”.


I think residence in UK is very lucky because there is no conversion like we do outside UK. In Malaysia I have to multiply 5 to 6 time my country currency to pay my membership as well as the professional fee to IET. Why I pay? Because of the value that IET deliver to the engineering community no just in UK but outside UK.


Another point I would like to make is management and planning both budget and development. The moment when you want to apply for any membership and professional registration, you already plan for the budget for years to come and sustaining it whether you pay it or company pay it and how to fully utilise the professional registration both in and outside (Mentoring, Volunteering and etc) your career. If not why go through so much effort to get the professional registration and at the end just let go like that and feel the registration bring no value. I don’t intend to insult anyone here with this statement but to refresh the commitment to support the work and value that IET bring to the engineering community as a whole and look at the bigger picture by paying the fee at least.   

If one feel that my question is a bit sarcastic I would like to apologize and I don’t have any ill feeling toward anyone.

I certainly didn't. I thought it was a good post!

Well there has been some great response to this.  I was one who originally raised the retired status and retaining CEng at mininal cost to the EC and IET (letter published etc. in IET News).  For me (and others at the time) the benefits for both organisations, the public awareness of professional engineering registration and hopefully the good we and the good new young enginners will hopefully do for society were undeniable.  A  *fully* retired engineer not using IET assets/facilities, consuming hard copy magazines, etc. is just a rank and number kept on file. 


Other professions, like the forces allow ranks of Captain (Army) and above to still use the title Captain Joe Blogs.  In normal life most just go by Joe Blogs but when they talk to schools, or give lectures or just more generally address the public they use and get addressed as Captain Joe Blogs.  This signifies the "been there, done that, survived that" and in general terms just raises the professions status and if nothing else becomes a talking point from which a lot more interest/good can flow.  I envisaged the same sort of benefits to be gained from some form of Chartered Engineer retired status.   


I did then and still do now believe both the EC and all the professional engineering bodies are losing out on something that could do long term good for minimal cost. 

 

Probably time to "move on" on this particual thread as the original question has been answered, which without the further detail supporting the question I personally felt there was some similarity/quest to the cost of maintinging CEng in retirement.  Not all retired, previoulsy CEng/IET can justify the expense so they end up "walking away" which is so sad after a long life in engineering and paying all those fees over 30+ / 40+ years.

By Andy Miller: a search of these forums will show that there are members who are unhappy with various aspects of the IET, which range from extremes of not feeling they get value for money through to actively disagreeing with IET policies and not wishing to be associated with them. (And, of course, some people simply need to keep the cost down to manage their budgets.) -----------------------------------------------------Appologies if this format comes out odd. I'm replying from my phone. You shared the same sentiments a few years back. What changed your mind? Perhaps a new job and/or new role as volunteer mentor?

If it was possible to be CEng direct through EC I would certainly consider it if it was cheaper, I expect most registered members would. Just as I regularly consider my various charity donations / memberships, my pension scheme, my car insurance etc etc (all for varying reasons) - even if 99% of the time I don't make any consequent changes. What I'd decide to ultimately do would have to be a personal decision at the time. But I can't see that situation arising so I don't really bother thinking about it - at the moment, working in safety consultancy, holding CEng is very useful. As I've said oft times before, in the very unlikely case that I were to move back into the music industry I'd have to weigh the facts and make an appropriate decision at the time.

Not sure that helps much, but it's late and my Android device is behaving very oddly. I think - as I always have - that everyone has to make their own judgement on the value of membership and registration at the time. And if too many people think it doesn't add value the IET and other institutes need to consider why. 

Cheers, Andy

Hi Andy

 

Thanks for the suggestion of starting aa new thread covering "Retired Register Status" but in I doubt much will be gained. 


We had the "Legalities of awarded CEng" where I originally wrote (as it was relevant) about maintain CEng in retirement and the associated good points for the profession and the bad points at the cost involved.

 

We also had the "Retired Members Sub" thread where expense was the issue and people walking away and the associated loss for the profession etc.

 

We also had the "Retired Members Subscriptions Increases" again covering the same. 

 

A couple of the posts I wrote [ https://communities.theiet.org/discussions/viewtopic/795/19286?post_id=94524#p94524 ] and [ https://communities.theiet.org/discussions/viewtopic/795/19286?post_id=95054#p95054 ] just about covered all "intricacies" (can't think of a better word) of this thorny subject for the EC and IET.  Add the two threads mentioned above and I think there has been discussion, coverage and no movement on the EC's and IET's positions.  I got then, and still do, the impression that their is no offical interest by the EC and IET.

 

So many have walked already and more will when they find in retirement that for them "holding on" in retirement is just not financially sensible, if not viable any more for *fully* retired members.


As you will know I took my decision to leave a hang up my CEng and MIET clothing back in 2015 and to be honest for me it was a very sad but good decision.

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.