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.

As you will see by my signature I've already "Self Styled", all perfectly legal and on my website I state "Until January 2016 I was a UK registered Chartered Engineer (CEng) and member of the Institution of Engineering Technology  (MIET).  I have since retired an no longer work or advise in a legally registered professional capacity."

 

In reality who has lost more?  I would say the EC and IET

Why not award a "Life Time Membership" to retired members of IET who maintained their membership in good standing for let's say for 15 years or more?

This way CPD for retired members can be optional and CEng designation to be kept.


In the US I saw licensed professionals who are licensed in their state and for some reason decided to do something else so their license can be is the state of "Active" or "Inactive"

"Probation" etc.  They are still using their professional designation and their status can be easily validated.  So maybe add status "Honored CEng ".

From my observations, the IET tend to respond more to CEng FIET than CEng MIET/MIET members. For Example: Many MIET members complained about being forced to do CPD; The IET did not respond. Then about 5 CEng FIET members complained about it on Letters section of E&T magazine last year; the IET responded that they can skip CPD if "not actively engaged". The latest news advertised an event at Savoy Place stating Will.i.am as HonFIET. Presumable this is a non paying membership grade. So we have retired long in service, dedicated CEng|IEng|EngTech FIET|MIET members being told to put up or shut up; and non-Engineering celebrities, like singer, song writer and record producer getting an HonFIET. What does this say about the IET politics? Retired CEng|IEng|EngTech MIET and FIET members, should be transferred across to HonMIET and HonFIET respectively with a greatly reduced or even small one off fee. I say fee as free may imply the rest of us having to pay higher fees to compensate. Makes sense don't you think?

Nicholas’s excellent response to my earlier post reminds me of what we potentially lose, which is “the long view”.

 

Perhaps an idea would be to require at least a nominal payment to maintain the spirit of the rules, but a “pay what you can afford” option? 

 

The comments illustrate how academic inflation excluded many otherwise competent professionals from CEng and led to the creation of Tech Eng/IEng as an option for them. Much earlier in my career, I worked for an HNC qualified CEng, later taking his equivalent job at another location. UK-SPEC and IET efforts to value work-based learning more fairly have opened the door again for some in mid-career, but for around thirty years, it was very difficult to gain Chartered recognition if you hadn’t got “the right degree” (usually as a teenage undergraduate student, but some part-time courses gradually emerged). Some of the negativity found in these forums comes from those who feel that “the ladder was pulled up”, although I accept that some may just be motivated by jealousy or reverse snobbery.  

 

Nicholas, I created a false dichotomy by implying that satisfying your request somehow had to compete with gaining younger registrants, it doesn’t! This “compare and contrast” is I think part of the problem. So often it seems that we can only offer a positive message about what we do by setting up a negative “Aunt Sally”.  A recent example comes to mind where a positive message that engineering can be conducted intellectually, in clean and safe environments by women as well as men , also contained a negative contrast with work requiring hard hats, perhaps carried out in more challenging conditions, sometimes even heaven forbid involving “oily rags”.  If it isn’t that then it’s the “Service Engineer” (possibly Eng Tech) or general repair person who gets disparaged.  Sadly, although not openly prevalent in the IET, even the professional IEng is used as an “Aunt Sally” or inferior pejorative by many in the CEng community.

 

Perhaps highly educated Engineers have been dealt a rather unfortunate hand, in that so many others can colloquially style themselves “engineers”.  There is no substantial confusion and sadly the snobbery is a sign of insecurity or weakness. I was talking to an American friend the other day who observed “you Brits seem to have mastered the art of winding-up and putting-down the other guy”.

 

Wouldn’t it be nice if those who had trained to become Engineers and Technicians (including formal study) could feel comfortable and take pride in “our” collective contribution to society, which has been and remains immense? Instead for example, I got a letter from a recently retired IEng who described how he was made very unwelcome ("black-balled") when a friend invited him to a Retired Chartered Engineer’s Luncheon Club.  Sadly it seems that he might have received very similar treatment at the hands of those who claim leadership of “professional engineering”. An unfortunate consequence of giving up CEng, or having never attained it (even if otherwise distinguished), is effectively to exclude yourself from “leadership” opportunities.      

 

Perhaps some of those with “the longer view” can help to develop a fresh (or refreshed) strategic leadership vision for engineering that is, modern, inclusive, attractive, representative and overwhelmingly positive. There are many examples of highly effective leadership from those beyond nominal “retirement” age in the wider world. I’m unclear if the Uff report which seemed to support some of the things I’m saying, will spark some useful progress?       

 

To return to Nicholas’s proposition, at the very least I think we (The IET) owe an explanation of “why not” if the issue has been considered. I take time to contribute in these forums to explain and also sometimes to “stick my neck out” with an alternative view. To return to my theme of a newer generation, deference is much less than it used to be and people can contribute ideas without standing for election to a committee or getting up a special petition. In my opinion this is ultimately a good thing which should be nurtured.  

 

As for the badge mentioned by Andy, I haven’t seen it yet, but in my "best effort” Yorkshire accent (enhanced slightly by one time residence in and a long connection with “God’s own county”)  “get down Shep!”.

 

Roy,

A very cogent and thoughtful post as usual.

In addition to being a member of the IET I am also a member of the IMarEST, which used to be IMarE (though I was a member of the IEE first!) Certainly in the days before they added "Science and Technology" to the title they had a policy of rewarding those who had been members for 45 years by waiving their fees from that point on, and I believe also paying their ECUK fees. The 45 year time meant that it was always retired members who benefitted and I felt it was a great way to honour their commitment, though sadly I will have about a decade of retirement before I reach the 45 years and I am also not sure if it is still in place. They even published photographs of members recieving their 45 year award in the monthly magazine.

My point in this is, can we find out what the other PEIs do for their long standing members - I think it has to be done on the basis of length of membership or it would seem a bit unfair that somebody who took up membership a couple of years before retirement got the same benefit as someone who was a committed member since the age of 20, so either a sliding scale or a fixed membership term would work.

Alasdair

Firstly, sorry a slight absence but I'm now receovering from my 5th failed eye surgery and sadly will now be "exit stage left only" if I don't want to crash out   I also means that with posturing (head down) computer use is a tad difficult.

 

We have seen some excellent ideas, suggestions, possibly problems regarding a coherent and sensible way of this little interesting challenge of CEng and IET position, requirements AND COST for members in retirement and I recognised the uproar that would be cause by someone joining/qualifying just before retirement and with no track record to speak of. The 45 years qualifying period example also presents a challange as the "job for life" has long since evapourated and companies are all too keen to cull the older more expensive assets often in the total miss belief that the younger ones are cheaper (a salary observation) and fail to take a account the money that could be saved or break even on with experience people on the job.  All a sign that the top managment and "£ figures" have lost the sight and trust of their management chain below them.  Once you hit 50 or 55 it can be curtains and getting another is not that easy.  You are either too experienced or too expensive and stacking supermarket shelves might not appeal and you will no longer be actively particiating and practising in the EC's mind.

 

Alasdair suuget a few post back that I start a new specific thread/topic.  I agree but now due my present medical position I'm not really going to be able do this properly as a lot of what has been posted would indeally need cutting/migrating from this topic acroos to the new.  If people think this is an issue that progress COULD? be made on with the EC / IET then I'm happy for the/a moderator to do the neccessry to do this.


I appollogise for typos etc. but one eye and head down it not conducive to expert post when you are not a touch typist.      

Hi Nicholas,


Really sorry to read your news, wishing you all the very best.


Andy