Unknown said:

The IET define the EAS. As I have observed they have removed the competent person from Sept 21 from being acceptable with just an 18th edition qualification.

I suggest everyone reads this article written by a training company explaining the changes to the EAS back in September 2021, it will make things clearer and hopefully is written from a fairly independent viewpoint without any bias.

https://theelectricalacademy.co.uk/important-update-major-changes-to-dei-and-cps-this-september/

I am not clear as to why a discussion about JIB registration is actually relevant? Comparisons can be made, but does JIB registration fall under the requirements of the EAS?

The JIB contributes to the EAS, just like the other committee members, but I thought they set their own requirements for their own registration scheme?

The EAS sets out the standard for a QS amongst other things. I am aware of the change. I used to assess for a certification body.

I will just point out that the changes regards requirements for Qualified Supervisors were not retrospective, so if you are registered as a QS and stay registered the changes should not affect you, and leave it at that.

eas-21-478-revised-eas-october-2021.pdf (theiet.org)

And if you have been a QS but give that and bring a QS in who leaves after ten years leaving you without QS and to find out even though you have been compliant for twenty years but unfortunately your quals no longer satisfy to find out the certification body removes you from their scheme because some idiot has decidied you are no longer competent after 40 years. Point that out when actively help ruins someones business hecause the EAS/IET have decided your fate although you were competent right sept 21. Point that out

Unknown said:

That is typical of the response from the IET.

That's a response from ME, not the IET ...

Unknown said:

Keep going. I have constant CPD.

Did you register for an ECS Gold Card when you had the opportunity?

Unknown said:

You are a joke organisation and it’s time people see through you.

Sorry, it's just me, not the IET here ... but glad I'm transparent, I always try to be open and honest.

Unknown said:

wasted so much money for idiots like you to tell me I cannot connect three wires up.

I haven't assessed you, or made any statement about your competence. However, you have called me an idiot because I happen to have an opinion that appears to be different to yours. Perhaps that in itself says something?

Unknown said:

Your IET tells me I am not an electrician anymore and it’s ***.

I don't think that's the case, it's just that there is a gap in the records that needs to be assessed, and unfortunately because it wasn't done under an earlier scheme, the accepted route is now quite costly.
(Also, note that I haven't said whether I agree with the current requirement for re-assessment or not ... the costs of and timescales for that are separate discussions entirely.)

At the end of the day, we knew that this was coming over 20 years ago. I have practical qualifications to maintain as well, and I am also over 48 years old! But, as well as registering with the IET (and maintaining constant CPD record), I also did the same with ECS Gold Card for the practical quals ... OK, granted there was some incentive working on large construction sites that mandated CSCS and affiliated card schemes for managers, and those using tools and test equipment ... but that was just the start of where we are now.

Unknown said:

has decidied you are no longer competent after 40 years.

No-one is saying you're not competent. Just that there's a gap that needs to be assessed.

As the IET is a Professional Engineering Institution, one of its core activities is registering Engineers and Technicians, and providing a framework for them to demonstrate CPD.

Consequently, I'm not sure that you will get far in an IET Forum, by trying to argue that it's OK to be outside of those kind of frameworks, and a "home brew" approach to CPD be accepted without re-assessment ? By the same token, those who let their CEng, IEng or EngTech lapse need to be re-assessed ... and that costs money and takes time.

Thank you for your response, I agree on being wrong with my view at some angle. 
you agree it is a money making scam. I used my self as an example. I have a black card and no longer require a gold one. Myy point it being told you incompetent at a certain age because the IET and EAS decide one day to change it is a scam. Whether it was coming twenty years or not. An NVQ from a reputable college should not be dismissed. To agree that it should he would say the NVQ route is a scam as nothing stopping current ones being defunct in 20 years. The system is a joke

I wont he reapplying or give them anymore money once it lapses. I can’t see the point in being qualified by a system designed to ruin livelihoods through the need to inject money into a systemthat isnt required

Unknown said:

I have a black card and no longer require a gold one.

That's interesting. I had both, keeping the gold one alongside, but have (for certain reasons) let the black one go (easier to get the black one back TBH).

I do understand your frustrations, but I think given the fallout from the Grenfell enquiry, things aren't going to get easier in this regard going forward.