Scott Seedell said:

blatant discrimination

There may well be an element of unlawful indirect discrimination on the ground of age, which is one of the protected characteristics in the Equality Act 2010, but I am not sure how you would enforce it.

Thanks.

It's even more discriminatory when considering that the technical certificates studied on apprenticeships directly before and after the CG2330 are both now still deemed acceptable. Being punished for the year of apprenticeship starting seems perfectly acceptable to the EAS (I still don't know who they actually are).

I have also had / am having dealings with EAS that could also perhaps be described as discrimintory.

They acknowledge my qualifications, they acknowledge the qualification could not have been undertaken without an apprenticeship...

yet without proof of that apprenticeship I am unable to work in certain sectors. Even though the qualifcation is by it's existance proof of apprenticeship.

The end result is an admin system flawed that discriminates against skilled people subject to when they qualified

I would suggest a system established that removes a persons ability to practice their trade would need a strong basis for such or risk consequence should a case against be taken to law. It is no minor measure to restrict a persons ability to earn a living in this way and should be given all due process and consideration of all known facts.

I would like to be given such good reason to suggest a person is not competent / suitably qualified and such would need to be a good deal more than: Sorry computer says No

Crazy isn't it. 

I had a 30 minute slanging match with NICEIC technical this afternoon and all he could repeat was that if it was listed on his list of acceptable qualifications then there's nothing he could do. I lost count of the number of times I told him that I wasn't disputing what was on his list, it was the reasons for exclusion that I wanted answers to. They just aren't geared up for critical thinking unfortunately.

It transpires that some bright spark decided to shake things up following Grenfell and revamped the accepted list of accredited qualifications in 2021. It was deemed acceptable to remove CG2330 and retrospectively enforce it's inferiority so that everyone who had ever studied it suddenly had a worthless piece of paper. Why on Earth that was done is beyond me, especially as it was once a prestigious qualification. 

Crazy isn't it. 

I had a 30 minute slanging match with NICEIC technical this afternoon and all he could repeat was that if it was listed on his list of acceptable qualifications then there's nothing he could do. I lost count of the number of times I told him that I wasn't disputing what was on his list, it was the reasons for exclusion that I wanted answers to. They just aren't geared up for critical thinking unfortunately.

It transpires that some bright spark decided to shake things up following Grenfell and revamped the accepted list of accredited qualifications in 2021. It was deemed acceptable to remove CG2330 and retrospectively enforce it's inferiority so that everyone who had ever studied it suddenly had a worthless piece of paper. Why on Earth that was done is beyond me, especially as it was once a prestigious qualification. 

Scott have you read through the disussion 'are the IET resticitng electrical contractors' ?

I am a great believer in looking to patterns. Patterns are reliable indicators. This pattern as told by yourself and many others is becoming ever more an indicator of a fault developing. A fault that is affecting many good long serving electricans.

You certainly nailed it with your comment regarding lack of critical thinking. I see that as not by chance and somewhat concerning. An engineering mindset kept suppresed by numbing administrative committee with a need to justify an existance.