Honorary Fellowship

Wasn't the word "Engineer" derived from the first industrial revolution? To "engineer" a steam engine to do useful work. So shouldn't the title "Engineer" logically belong to those involved in the production of engines: Steam, Internal Combustion, Nuclear, and Electrical Motors? The rest should be referred to as "Applied Scientists" or "Technologists". It seems to me that organisations such as EC, FEANI, International Engineering Alliance, and other, are just in the business of protectionism - afterall, individual members pay to join them, and not industry or educational institutions (who give us the education and experience). Individual aspirations to become - or be described as "Engineer" is pure fantasy.

According to Google, "engineer" dates back to Middle English, and was "denoting a designer and constructor of fortifications and weapons".  Seige engines date back long before steam engines.

Are there any IEng, EngTech, MIET or TMIET members who have been elected HonFIET since the IET was formed?

Peter,

 

I was able to contact those responsible at Engineering Council myself. They have promptly responded asserting that they value all registrants and always try to include any on the awards list. Having exercised due diligence to identify any on the list this time, their search did not find any current IEng or Eng Tech registrants. They had included in any publicity 12 IEng and 1 Eng Tech recognised by honours over the last few years.  Perhaps you can check this out further and post a comment or correction if necessary. Although you agreed with me, I wouldn’t want to see an inaccurate allegation.      

 

As I hope I have made clear in my earlier comments, any criticism by me of Engineering Council is because that is where the buck must stop on those issues that have led to the problems described. The staff of Engineering Council have the difficult task of trying to serve everyone fairly, including the overwhelming majority of its registrants who are Chartered Engineers.  Like the staff of any organisation they can only implement the strategy and policy set out.  I am attempting to persuade the majority of moderate Chartered Engineers who care about the future of the profession, to eschew the snobbery of some backwards  looking activists, often with a narrow perspective. Hopefully we’ll find lots more Chartered Engineers on honours lists in future as we rebuild their numbers and emphasise how the engineering profession serves society rather than some of its own, at the expense of others.                   

Thanks for your reply Roy. The IET should really show membership and professional titles against HonFIET awards; otherwise how can anyone tell if certain catagories are being recognised? The other point is I was hoping you might comment on my previous thread to you - mistakenly addressed to Hamish - about TMIET(to MIET); MIET(to AFIET); and FIET remain unchanged? Too controversial?

Mehmood,

 
As you may gather from other posts, my focus is around professional registration, rather than IET membership categories. I’m sure those who govern and manage membership would be open-minded to any constructive suggestion. It seems from my perspective that we are trying to make MIET sufficiently demanding to have value in itself, but also inclusive of educated and experienced professionals.  I also hope that TMIET offers something distinctive and I haven’t personally picked up on any discontent about it, although I note that another major institution which used to be seen as rather “snooty” now makes registered Technicians “full members”.

 
In general, my view of all these type of issues is that; it is our collective duty to ensure that IET membership and where applicable professional registration via Engineering Council are positive and potentially career enhancing for all those who we seek to serve. 

 
The extent to which controversial views are tolerated, has obviously been changed by the internet. Years ago anything uncomfortable would just be ignored or “closed down” by those who controlled communication. You might be fortunate to get a “humbly beseech” type letter published in a journal, probably alongside several “disgusted of Tunbridge Wells” type missives bemoaning, lack of status, calculation errors, misuse of apostrophes , some members not wearing tiers in the dining room, other inappropriate dress etc.  As I see it you have every right to address controversial issues or criticise the institution, often including a dash of humour as you do.  The IET has to be “big enough” to “take this on the chin”.  However, this does create an obligation to respect others. At times I have myself been surprised about how tolerant of “free speech” the moderators of these forums have become.

 
If we put to one side personal “complaints” and grievances that inevitably arise, most critics have something to say because they care, each may have different experiences that colour their views , but they want things to be better.  To quote a recent fierce critic’s comments to me “I don’t hate the IET, I’m just disappointed that it hasn’t become what I hoped for”.  

 
Perhaps this is a “half-full v half-empty” argument? As I see it, bringing someone like Will.i.am into Honorary Fellowship , seems  symbolic of many of our other efforts to modernise and I would see that as positive, but others might take a different view.  It can be difficult in uncertain times to steer a forward course, but I don’t think that it is an option to retreat back into a seemingly safe but increasingly dated “establishment” mentality.  

Roy,

Thank you for your reply.

There were three things that led me to make my proposal: you previously expressed sometime ago - on another thread - a desire for TMIET members to move across to MIET, as recognition of their contribution to the industry. Secondly, a not recent BoT meeting (forgot which one) also indicated the same interest, though they scrapped the idea - possibly due to lack of willingness amongst MIET members? I was against it because I wanted to perserve MIET for Graduate level engineers. Thirdly, the recent HonFIET awarded to Will.I.Am.

My view is that if Will.I.Am can achieve recognition, then other celebs - with similar interests in E&T could as well. This can only happen because technology - previously available only in research labs - is becoming accessible to the wider public - Smartphone being the example.

So my argument is, why not recognise IET members - mainly MIET and TMIET - in the same way that Will.I.Am has been? That without scientists, engineers and technicians there to make these advance technological gadgets available to the public, celebs like Will.I.Am, wouldn't be here to use and promote E&T; Therefore IET members too should benefit from enhanced membership credentials, in recognition of their contribution to E&T.

In fact if the IET wanted to take it to the next level, why not create two presidents of the IET? You have the official President, and then you have the Honorary President - say elected for one year - who would represent the global face of the IET, promoting the IET and its interest in E&T around the world.

Now that would controversal!!

I have now tried two different browsers - Chrome and Samsung -and still can't get tabs, carriage return, and line feeds to work? All my text is coming out as one big parahgraph! Is anyone sending messages using Android smartphone? If so, which browser are you using?