Our centre charges £2500 PV for the Experienced Worker Qualification!  Plus the 2391, plus the 18th, plus the AM2E. I am the assessor. Last candidate I visited 6 times on site, all at least half-day sessions, and had 4 Zoom remote assessments. Good candidate or bad, the assessment is comprehensive, it does not rely on secondhand declarations from so-called expert witnesses. If you are not a level 3 electrician able to demonstrate the scheme requirements, you won’t get through. I believe that I am serving our industry as it should be served. The candidates respect that. 

I've no doubt of the integrity in your assessment of candidates. It's the process and cost to an experienced worker that is the sore point amongst my peers.

It shouldn't cost over £3,000 and 6-12 months for an experienced worker to get the NVQ in order to access a scheme. It is a huge reason why works are not being notified, or as in my area, someone registered taking cash to notify work.

It may be a system that works, but that doesn't mean it is fit for purpose.

My major concern is the gatekeeping with regards to legacy NVQ3 qualifications. I completed an apprenticeship, gained an NVQ3 in installation and commissioning, including a PEO NVQ2 which covered electrical, a BTEC level 3 including electrical design, amongst other relevant topics. However it is no longer accepted on the scheme. Half of the apprentices from my organisation used this qualification to become electricians at the time, where as the other half (myself included) worked on fire, data and security systems (including electrical wiring systems)

I'm not eligible for a scheme with this core competence, yet there are electricians with the same qualifications currently on a scheme.

I completely understand the issue with the 6 week sparks courses that have been ruled out, but seems ridiculous at a time where there is a huge shortage of registered electricians that they do not consider despite being adequately qualified.

I've no doubt of the integrity in your assessment of candidates. It's the process and cost to an experienced worker that is the sore point amongst my peers.

It shouldn't cost over £3,000 and 6-12 months for an experienced worker to get the NVQ in order to access a scheme. It is a huge reason why works are not being notified, or as in my area, someone registered taking cash to notify work.

It may be a system that works, but that doesn't mean it is fit for purpose.

My major concern is the gatekeeping with regards to legacy NVQ3 qualifications. I completed an apprenticeship, gained an NVQ3 in installation and commissioning, including a PEO NVQ2 which covered electrical, a BTEC level 3 including electrical design, amongst other relevant topics. However it is no longer accepted on the scheme. Half of the apprentices from my organisation used this qualification to become electricians at the time, where as the other half (myself included) worked on fire, data and security systems (including electrical wiring systems)

I'm not eligible for a scheme with this core competence, yet there are electricians with the same qualifications currently on a scheme.

I completely understand the issue with the 6 week sparks courses that have been ruled out, but seems ridiculous at a time where there is a huge shortage of registered electricians that they do not consider despite being adequately qualified.

Luke Marshall said:

It shouldn't cost over £3,000 and 6-12 months for an experienced worker to get the NVQ in order to access a scheme. It is a huge reason why works are not being notified, or as in my area, someone registered taking cash to notify work.

This is a fair point, which should at least be considered.

Just because later requirements (need to avoid the term "qualification" as I'm not sure AM2x is a "qualification" in the same vein that CEng, IEng, EngTech are no longer permitted to be called "qualifications") have been invented, doesn't mean someone stopped being considered "competent".

New driving test requirements didn't stop existing drivers having entitlement to drive certain vehicle types removed from their license ... or are we now considering CPCS a "license to practice"? If so, this is not really enshrined in legislation in the same manner as driving (or other "license to") ...

In this case, as a major consideration, it unfairly penalises new startup smaller companies or, more importantly, newly self-employed individuals who were yesterday "competent" to work for someone else.

Hear hear Graham

Given the new EAS requires the QS to have electrician competencies why is that? The QS in even smallish companies does not do installation work so why do they need to be an electrician? Given the job title is Qualified Supervisor should they not have supervisory experience rather than the ability to erect an installation?

I would go the gas safe route with an individual licence to practice for electricians. The IET is fully signed up to Dame Judith Hacket's individual competency model. You can see the IET electrician competency conference on You Tube over 2 videos and see Dame Judith speak.

The AM2 is an end point assessment to try to ensure the NVQ has not been completed fraudulently. 

For me, the QS should be suitably qualified in the discipline they are signing off on. 

Just as some don’t deem electricians engineers (a view I disagree with), engineers are not necessarily electricians. 

Neil Bridgeman said:

The AM2 is an end point assessment to try to ensure the NVQ has not been completed fraudulently. 

That's interesting. AQA-accredited qualifications are being completed fraudulently? Perhaps that needs to be addressed. Certainly wrong that, if you didn't have NVQ (and "grandfather rights" now expended) that you have to pay to get AQA-accredited NVQ3, and then some other "assessment" because the AQA-accredited qualification is not to be trusted?

Still doesn't explain why someone who was competent (maybe pre-NVQ3) now finds themselves being considered "incompetent" when there are still fast-track routes to achieve "competence on paper" from a "no qualifications or experience" starting point, that doesn't seem to translate to what we'd probably all call "competence".

Neil Bridgeman said:

For me, the QS should be suitably qualified in the discipline they are signing off on. 

Agreed, although "at what level"? What does "suitably qualified" mean?

Neil Bridgeman said:

Just as some don’t deem electricians engineers (a view I disagree with), engineers are not necessarily electricians. 

Again ... agreed, although which "engineers" are you talking about?

I'm not picking holes, and I understand the terms we use don't always help.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm happy with the term "engineers" covering a broad spectrum of people working in the engineering and technology sector, and the "protected titles" of EngineeringTechnician, ICT Tech, Incorporated Engineer, Chartered Engineer, Chartered IT Professional, etc.
HOWEVER, it's definitely the case that there are Incorporated and Chartered Engineers who did not come through the "school-university-graduate-office-engineer" route, and who retain their practical skills and knowledge.

In fact, could be said it's discriminatory to try and pidgeon-hole people based on their current status on the Engineering Council Register, whichever way that is done. (For example, CEng has "never done it", EngTech "won't understand the maths".)
Sometimes, the problems which appear most complex actually REQUIRE the simplest approach in order to solve them.

Luke,

See my post below re costs. I have candidates on the finishing line who started in February. I completed an exemplar logbook over one week so the time issue is firmly in the court of the candidate, at least in our centre.

I appreciate that, but still too long and costly for an electrician who has started on his own after working for other firms with previously acceptable qualifications. Whatever time the course takes, plus the process of joining a scheme. In a perfect world, these guys would achieve any qualifications whilst still gainfully employed, however some might be made redundant, or have another genuine reason that's left them starting up on their own.

Without a doubt they are being completed fraudulently.  There are places on-line that will complete the portfolio on your behalf.  Whilst a small minority of NVQs, the AM2 is just an assurance tool.  

I have been doing this for over 20 years and ever since I started, industry has been making excuses for those that qualified pre-NVQ3.  The NVQ3 has been with us for over 30 years and at some stage we have to say no more to grandfather rights.

Just because someone was deemed competent does not make that so.  Look at the removal of the Domestic Installer route.

Suitably qualified (I purposely did not use the term competent) for me is NVQ3, 2360 or equivalent and 2391 or equivalent.  I would actually like to see it go further and include at least 5 years working in the area someone is QSing in and at least two of those years acting as a supervisor to other electricians.

If any Engineer wants to operate as a QS then they need to train to act as one if not already qualified to the standard of what EAS currently requires.  It is not discriminatory, no Engineer is excluded from the training required to verify their skills in this area.