UK Engineer petition

[gregariz]

For those who believe its a good idea to protect the title of engineer for graduates, please sign the petition

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/6271

[quantumfall]

Definitely a bad Idea.

It might lead to a lot of "paper experts" with no practical experience who would look down on people with far more real world skills, like our dave has.

Who has every right to call himself an engineer IMHO.

They may form associations and act like tin pot dictators in the future.  Or use their elitist title to justify large fees to certify work for invented legal schemes and quangos.

An engineer to me is a man who can do, not a graduate with an exam pass.

In the building industry in the UK I have seen people with membership of professional bodies who have to ask the most basic questions of tradesmen because they

have little practical knowledge, yet justify fees for consultation and design because of a paper trail of exams and so called superior knowledge or membership of a

recognized pro body.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Also disagree - engineers are certainly undervalued but I can't see how this sort of institutionalizing of the title would change this, but it would undoubtedly deter some les academically inclined but very able people from entering the profession.

[gregariz]

I received the link via Linkedin so I posted it here.

Its up to each individually to evaluate their beliefs regarding this. I personally think its very important and don't think it will stop anyone from practicing electronics design work or entering the field. I'm cogniscant that electronics engineering is slightly different to other forms of engineering but I generally want public works projects to be staffed by graduates. I'm not sure that it would lead to an increased valuation in the UK of the role of engineers in the short term but I think it could be a start to remove any ambiguity between what an engineer is and what a tradesman is. I think that is fair given the effort required to graduate. In the long term it would be good if that differentiation lead to improved wage conditions in the UK for engineers which quite often look tragic to me.

[IanB]

This is a debate that has gone around in circles forever.

On the one hand, it is reasonable for there to be a professionally recognized title as there is for doctors and lawyers. (In a sense, there already is--see below.)

On the other hand, it is nearly impossible to claim back the title 'engineer'. In Europe this title means 'one who is ingenious'. In the USA it means 'one who drives trains'.

So protecting the title of engineer is a lost cause. However, what exists now is the title and designation of Chartered Engineer or CEng. To be awarded this title you don't necessarily need to have a degree (although it helps), but you do need to be able to demonstrate professional capability and experience. A degree by itself is not enough.

If you really want to know if someone is an engineer, look to see if they have CEng after their name. (Or EUR ING, or P.E.). Some of us don't, of course, but it is available to us if we try.

[Conrad Hoffman]

Bad idea. Leads to the sort of idiocy like what's necessary to get a PE in some places. The privileged always end up protecting their own with unjustified laws and limitations on everybody else, competent or not.

[DrGeoff]

Oh no, not again ...

Degree engineers will say 'yes' and non-engineers will say 'no'.
The medical profession, legal profession, political profession, military etc all have professional titles protected. I don't see any reason for this not to be different for the engineering profession. However there is a distinction between professional title and job title, allowing a person without the engineering qualification to undertake the role of engineer as a job or career.
I don't really care one way or the other, having been in the industry long enough to know that what you do counts more than what you say you can do (except maybe in marketing). As a martial arts instructor once said to me, 'the elite martial artist is recognised by how they walk, talk and conduct themselves, not by the colour of their belt'.

[quantumfall]

I think its quiet simple, I think of a heating engineer for arguments sake as a person who can design and manufacture and  install a competent heating system or supervise that work to an acceptable standard, IE it works safely and efficiently is cost effective and reliable among other things.

If he can do that he is an engineer of that type.  Apply the same criteria to massive bridges and any other practical problem of engineering.

To limit it to just graduates is wrong do they have some special mind ?  I think not.  I know a UK Cambridge graduate a lovely man, but not at all practical minded.

I know in this litigious age, if you are supplying a service or providing anything to the public or private sector you want to be sure to have some credentials that give you respect and a degree of legal standing if that's possible.

I have a lot of respect for engineering experts who are just that,  a degree is not a prerequisite,  that is just elitist and narrow minded.

[Mechatrommer]

if you can make one subject as a syllibus in U learnt by kids, then you are engineer

[vk6zgo]

I am a "non-engineer" & I believe that an "Engineer" is someone with a Degree.

In a few parts of Electronics,I probably know more than some Engineers,but that doesn't detract from the amount of work & effort they had to put into obtaining their qualification.
The term "engineer" has been diluted for many years in the UK,as compared to Australia,where at least among my generation of Technician/Technical Officers,"Engineer" has meant a Univerity graduate.

The funny thing is that in Australia,"Technician" has also become downgraded  as a level of competency,until in many cases it means basically, a "button-pusher",or "Engineer's labourer"
On the other hand,Auto Mechanics now want to call themselves "Technicians" because it somehow sounds better.
Of course, to be a Lab Technician ,you need a Degree!

In the words of William Shatner, "Weird,or what!"

VK6ZGO

[Uncle Vernon]

It might lead to a lot of "paper experts" with no practical experience who would look down on people with far more real world skills

Might? What happened to" already does"?

like our Dave has.

Who has every right to call himself an engineer IMHO.

Every right in the world! Those without formal qualifications however should never be trying to make others falsely assume they do. Not something I am accusing Dave or anyone in particular of doing. Was Steve Jobs an engineer? The tosspots with their petition would have to say no or concoct yet another of their honorary gongs.

They may form associations and act like tin pot dictators in the future.

May? In the future?

Or use their elitist title to justify large fees to certify work for invented legal schemes and quangos.

That's called consultancy!    You know, where design work is sighted rather than checked. The gentle art of duck shoving responsibility while demanding fees. Where the leg work is done by unassisted graduates and the senior partners efforts are spent entirely on risk minimisation.

An engineer to me is a man who can do, not a graduate with an exam pass.

A qualification is a mark of achievement, it's like a drivers licence, a mark of attainment. Having a license doesn't make you an expert drive having an engineering degree doesn't guarantee expertise.

In the building industry in the UK I have seen people with membership of professional bodies who have to ask the most basic questions of tradesmen because they have little practical knowledge

Asking when you don't know, and not dismissing tradesman and technicians is what a good engineer should do! The stupid ones are the ones who dismiss others and assume only those with a degree could participate.

Only absolute buffoons believe that degrees are the sole path to knowledge equally dismissing degrees as pointless is ignorance. There are lots of people with dumb ideas on this planet including those who determine salaries. Think about it.

[DrGeoff]

Asking when you don't know, and not dismissing tradesman and technicians is what a good engineer should do! The stupid ones are the ones who dismiss others and assume only those with a degree could participate.

Only absolute buffoons believe that degrees are the sole path to knowledge equally dismissing degrees as pointless is ignorance. There are lots of people with dumb ideas on this planet including those who determine salaries. Think about it.

Well put. There is a fine but important distinction between qualification and job title. Many engineering positions can easily be filled by suitably experienced people with the right attitude, rather than qualifications. Even so, there will be some positions that can only be filled by those with suitable qualifications and experience.
Not sure I'd want to be going into theatre knowing that the 'surgeon' was just an enthusiastic butcher!

[Uncle Vernon]

but I generally want public works projects to be staffed by graduates.

I'd have thought the selection criteria of competence would have been more importantant than attainment. Would it be right to reject a more cometent, skilled and experienced candidate on the basis of a paper qualification?

but I think it could be a start to remove any ambiguity between what an engineer is and what a tradesman is.

How quaintly 19Th century, the little man who comes in and the bow tied professional at the drafting table. The world has moved on from that kind of stereotyping (that is those with a clue have) Tradespeople can produce some excellent engineering, more than a few times you can see engineers who are also excellent craftsmen. The boundaries today are very much blurred with considerable overlap. We need to encourage engineering not pontification about some bullshit workplace class system.

I think that is fair given the effort required to graduate.

Oh boohoo did those nasty tutors make you get up at the crack of lunchtime just to be able to attend lectures and stuff? Do you think for the rest of the workplace it just happen? Their ability and considerable expertice somehow just materialised?

In the long term it would be good if that differentiation lead to improved wage conditions in the UK for engineers which quite often look tragic to me.

If you want to take a historical look at why Brittain's one time world leadership in engineering ended up as a basket case. You'd see that a lot of it was directly attributable to wage by status over ability and removal of incentive.  You honestly believe you should earn more than someone of equal competence doing the same job because you had the good fortune to take time out to do a degree? Your degree should be entitlement to be further up the queue in the interview process, after that your pay should be based upon application and ability.

[quantumfall]

In the building industry in the UK I have seen people with membership of professional bodies who have to ask the most basic questions of tradesmen because they have little practical knowledge

Asking when you don't know, and not dismissing tradesman and technicians is what a good engineer should do! The stupid ones are the ones who dismiss others and assume only those with a degree could participate.

Only absolute buffoons believe that degrees are the sole path to knowledge equally dismissing degrees as pointless is ignorance. There are lots of people with dumb ideas on this planet including those who determine salaries. Think about it.

I totally agree some graduates believe they are special or better they have a false sense of worth,  But I understand that a greater depth of theory can be
very good to have, it helps to have programmed in machine code if you later only use a high level language for example, it gives a better grasp of the system and computing.

This knowledge is not just available to graduates though.

Yes the the man I was thinking of was a member of the institute of building M.I.O.B he was a good engineer.

He would often put in structural components that was a lot bigger than really needed to make sure, he did not trust his own calculations and the client had to foot the bill.  A client once asked us if he had shares in British Steel.  he was cautious with his designs.

[Rufus]

I personally think its very important and don't think it will stop anyone from practicing electronics design work or entering the field.

I personally think it quite pointless. If you want to improve the status of engineers and engineering petition for more of them to be paid like doctors and architects.

I generally want public works projects to be staffed by graduates.

The ones that are just a bit too good to be flipping burgers or stacking shelves? In the UK a degree is no longer an indication of anything much except personal debt or rich parents.

[IanB]

Where does all this talk of "graduates" come from? The petition in the first post does not mention that word, and the route to professional registration as a chartered engineer in the UK generally provides alternate paths for those who do not have a degree.

I would suggest that those who care should get themselves registered as a chartered engineer, and those who don't, do not. It's really not that complicated.

In the USA it is true that vested interests and protectionism are involved, but that is really not the case in the UK. If you want it, go for it!

[quantumfall]

Where does all this talk of "graduates" come from? The petition in the first post does not mention that word, and the route to professional registration as a chartered engineer in the UK generally provides alternate paths for those who do not have a degree.

I would suggest that those who care should get themselves registered as a chartered engineer, and those who don't, do not. It's really not that complicated.

In the USA it is true that vested interests and protectionism are involved, but that is really not the case in the UK. If you want it, go for it!

"Where does all this talk of "graduates" come from? " From the original post "For those who believe its a good idea to protect the title of engineer for graduates, please sign the petition"

[IanB]

"Where does all this talk of "graduates" come from? " From the original post "For those who believe its a good idea to protect the title of engineer for graduates, please sign the petition"

Right, but the first post is mistaken. The petition does not ask for that.

(Everyone in the thread has been debating a false premise.)

[quantumfall]

"Where does all this talk of "graduates" come from? " From the original post "For those who believe its a good idea to protect the title of engineer for graduates, please sign the petition"

Right, but the first post is mistaken. The petition does not ask for that.

(Everyone in the thread has been debating a false premise.)

I did not look at the actual petition as I took the original post as a fact. Still its an interesting debate. Edit: He dose talk about more graduates needed in engineering if I'm reading it correctly, but not explicitly only for graduates as you point out apologies if I was sounding harsh.

[EEVblog]

Make 'Engineer' a protected title

Responsible department: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

Engineering suffers from an image problem. People believe that engineers simply fix things, but we don't: we invent things. Unfortunately the false image is propagated by hundreds of companies out there who term repair-persons and equipment installers 'Engineers'. Engineering suffers from a lack of graduates, and at a time people are looking to manufacturing to fix the economy we need all the graduates we can get. Sadly they are put off by the false image of engineering. It is thus proposed that the title 'Engineer' is protected legally, like 'Doctor' or 'Architect'. It would be restricted to those who are professional engineers or product designers, or those who have retired from the industry.

Very ill conceived indeed.
There are countless ways to blow this argument wide open.

Dave.

[vk6zgo]

but I generally want public works projects to be staffed by graduates.

I'd have thought the selection criteria of competence would have been more importantant than attainment. Would it be right to reject a more cometent, skilled and experienced candidate on the basis of a paper qualification?

but I think it could be a start to remove any ambiguity between what an engineer is and what a tradesman is.

How quaintly 19Th century, the little man who comes in and the bow tied professional at the drafting table. The world has moved on from that kind of stereotyping (that is those with a clue have) Tradespeople can produce some excellent engineering, more than a few times you can see engineers who are also excellent craftsmen. The boundaries today are very much blurred with considerable overlap. We need to encourage engineering not pontification about some bullshit workplace class system.

I think that is fair given the effort required to graduate.

Oh boohoo did those nasty tutors make you get up at the crack of lunchtime just to be able to attend lectures and stuff? Do you think for the rest of the workplace it just happen? Their ability and considerable expertice somehow just materialised?

In the long term it would be good if that differentiation lead to improved wage conditions in the UK for engineers which quite often look tragic to me.

If you want to take a historical look at why Brittain's one time world leadership in engineering ended up as a basket case. You'd see that a lot of it was directly attributable to wage by status over ability and removal of incentive.  You honestly believe you should earn more than someone of equal competence doing the same job because you had the good fortune to take time out to do a degree? Your degree should be entitlement to be further up the queue in the interview process, after that your pay should be based upon application and ability.

Of course,a lot of graduates didn't have the luxury of "being able to take time out to do a degree".

In a different field,my daughter just finished an Education Degree,whilst working part time--It was bloody hard!!
She isn't a pampered school leaver with wealthy parents,but a Mature Age student.
Her life experience goes to making her a better teacher.
Is she better than then teachers who went through the old "Teacher's Training College"?---probably not,but she is a damn good one,considering she is in her first year as a graduate,

Many of the better Engineers I've known,came from the ranks of Technical & Trades,& also did their Degree the hard way.

One reason why the Brits occupied a position of leadership in Engineering was due to their political dominance in the latter part of the 19th,& the early years of the 20th centuries,with captive customers throughout the (then),Empire.
When this was no longer the case,there was still a fair time when the UK was the first choice for many.

Big back stocks & investment in old ways of doing things,led them to lose market share,as other countries recovered from WW2.

VK6ZGO

Reason for edit:-"lead instead of led"

[gregariz]

but I generally want public works projects to be staffed by graduates.

I'd have thought the selection criteria of competence would have been more importantant than attainment. Would it be right to reject a more cometent, skilled and experienced candidate on the basis of a paper qualification?

but I think it could be a start to remove any ambiguity between what an engineer is and what a tradesman is.

How quaintly 19Th century, the little man who comes in and the bow tied professional at the drafting table. The world has moved on from that kind of stereotyping (that is those with a clue have) Tradespeople can produce some excellent engineering, more than a few times you can see engineers who are also excellent craftsmen. The boundaries today are very much blurred with considerable overlap. We need to encourage engineering not pontification about some bullshit workplace class system.

I think that is fair given the effort required to graduate.

Oh boohoo did those nasty tutors make you get up at the crack of lunchtime just to be able to attend lectures and stuff? Do you think for the rest of the workplace it just happen? Their ability and considerable expertice somehow just materialised?

In the long term it would be good if that differentiation lead to improved wage conditions in the UK for engineers which quite often look tragic to me.

If you want to take a historical look at why Brittain's one time world leadership in engineering ended up as a basket case. You'd see that a lot of it was directly attributable to wage by status over ability and removal of incentive.  You honestly believe you should earn more than someone of equal competence doing the same job because you had the good fortune to take time out to do a degree? Your degree should be entitlement to be further up the queue in the interview process, after that your pay should be based upon application and ability.

Of course,a lot of graduates didn't have the luxury of "being able to take time out to do a degree".

In a different field,my daughter just finished an Education Degree,whilst working part time--It was bloody hard!!
She isn't a pampered school leaver with wealthy parents,but a Mature Age student.
Her life experience goes to making her a better teacher.
Is she better than then teachers who went through the old "Teacher's Training College"?---probably not,but she is a damn good one,considering she is in her first year as a graduate,

Many of the better Engineers I've known,came from the ranks of Technical & Trades,& also did their Degree the hard way.

One reason why the Brits occupied a position of leadership in Engineering was due to their political dominance in the latter part of the 19th,& the early years of the 20th centuries,with captive customers throughout the (then),Empire.
When this was no longer the case,there was still a fair time when the UK was the first choice for many.

Big back stocks & investment in old ways of doing things,lead them to lose market share,as other countries recovered from WW2.

VK6ZGO

I think the main aim of whoever set up the petition was to differentiate between the situation in the UK whereby your local mechanic are calling themselves engineers. The proposal as I see it would do nothing more than bring the UK into line with the rest of the world. Society will always respect the non-degreed inventor. As someone who has lived and studied in the UK IMO it looks to me like there is some relationship between this and the poor state of engineering there. But everyone will make up their own mind.

I always knew the post was going to cause some ruckus.. simply because academic qualification discussions always do.

As an aside I am one of those guys who trained as a technician before returning to uni to become an engineer... so I get the arguments on both sides. I could hack microcontrollers and code as well back then as I can now. But there were plenty of gaps in my knowledge. My take is however that the days of uni being for the elite has long gone. There are so many options to go to uni these days, be it nightschool, distance or parttime study in order to get a degree that really anyone who is motivated should be able to manage it - but it will never be easy for anyone, that I know myself. And not all the options are obscenely expensive. I just think there should be a reward for those who do it, and I'm not afraid to say so.

[Uncle Vernon]

I just think there should be a reward for those who do it, and I'm not afraid to say so.

Be careful what you wish for. The IT industry saw themselves as a bit special and worth a bit more than other mortals. Come the dot.com boom and they were demanding and getting stupidly good money. Consequentially every Tom, Dick and Maahir was enrolling into IT studies. Bust follows boom and look where entry level IT  salaries are today. 

[slipjointed]

Pun unintended, but this is rather "foreign" to me, as I live in the USA. Odd for me to be commenting, but figure I'll throw my two cents in.

Here it is taboo to call yourself an Engineer without at least a 4 year college degree. Non-degreed engineers have to go by the title "Engineering technician" or something of that sort.

When I interviewed for my current job, I listed "Engineering experience in electronics, etc., etc.", and that was enough to actually offend the interviewers, they said I had no right to claim that I had engineering experience without a degree. I told them they could re-evaluate that statement once I was on the floor for a couple months. I am no longer questioned about my familiarity with engineering principles, but that is getting a bit off topic.

That said, I am a superior designer to many of the engineers, but none of them can admit it to themselves. They may be more well versed in physics as it relates to engineering, but when it comes to raw design talent, they've been tainted by excessive textbook studies. Every one of their designs looks like a diagram from a textbook, not an elegant design produced by an artist.

[8086]

What's wrong with what we have already? There's HNC/HND, then there's degrees - BEng, MEng, etc. Then there's chartered status - CEng, etc.

Medical professions need titles protecting for the good of everyone else as well as the person practicing.

Engineering does not need such protection.

By making it a protected term, you automatically make it more about the bureaucratic hoop-jumping that everything seems to be, and less about the individual and their skills. There's nothing to say that someone with an HNC in electronics engineering can't come up with a design that equals or betters that of a graduate.

I also don't think engineering has an "image problem". The people that don't realise what engineering really is aren't going to change their views if the term becomes protected, are they? They likely won't even hear about it.