Honorary Fellowship

I have sparred with Mehmood in the past in these forums.  He can speak for himself, but my recollection is that many years ago he worked very hard to complete the notoriously tricky (especially if you weren't on a special course) CEI/Engineering Council Exams, then having been successful in all the Technical elements, he was failed (more than once) for the "Engineer in Society Essay".  At the time this was virtually the only option for the majority of people who didn't attend university to gain Chartered Engineer. There was a special procedure for persons over 35, but for "special" read "know the right people".  I don't know if  he feels cheated or just frustrated, but there are many others of a similar generation, who have historic grievances. 

 

As I have discovered this would probably include the a majority of older Incorporated Engineers.  My experience of the wider Engineering Council family is that if you are not a Chartered Engineer then you are considered  "inferior".  This manifests itself in casual snobbery, but is also institutionalised in many other ways. For example IIE influenced Engineering Council to describe its registrants as "different but equally valuable".  Surely a simple statement of principle and of basic respect for each? However with the loss of IIE, this was thrown out and subsequently the value of experienced Incorporated Engineers was downgraded by revised Engineering Council rules. IET did not have control of this, but was in part culpable. The counter-argument is that, it is a necessary part of our role to discriminate between different types of practitioners and to offer an attractive proposition to those who have reached a "terminal" standard of professionalism. Something which it seems experienced IEng members have failed to do after many decades. The principle of first "do no harm" wasn't followed, but this "achievement" has been lauded despite collateral damage. These may not be "life or death issues", but for those who have been negatively impacted by such actions, feelings of bitterness and recrimination may remain. For example a recent extensive contributor to these forums alleged that he was victimised and his career ruined by members of another institution and I think that he was probably some truth in it.    

 

Where I completely agree with David , is that  we have to move forward. The election of a new South African President reminds me of the idea of "Truth & Reconciliation Commission".  Is there some sort of symbolic way that we can acknowledge past grievances and go forward.  We are certainly making progress on sexism and racism, but have we made progress on "classism" or perhaps its more recent derivative "academic snobbery".  Engineering is one the professions that tends to enable social mobility more than some others such as Medicine, Law, Journalism and Academia. Is this something that we really value? I think that we should.  There still seems to be an obsession about the "low status" of Engineering relative to these other professions, which perhaps bothers most those who mix socially with those in more "exclusive" professions.  Most working Technicians and Engineers perhaps move in different circles and don't recognise this insecurity, although they will happily dis the semi-skilled repair person, who knows that they are not a trained professional , but its just colloquial use.    

 

I'm inclined to humour Mehmood, if he just wants to poke fun at the profession, there is a long tradition https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4QuSZ2Vvj4

 

The issue is much wider than the IET and I was hoping that the recent Uff report might enable the Major Institutions to make a decisive modernising move of the kind that the creation of the IET was perhaps intended to achieve. Time will tell!