You dug up a 3 year old thread just for that?
I didnt realise. Antar Bolaeisk linked to it in a post from this morning.
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18410018
Why being an Engineer means nothing in this country
- Thread starter Ricochet J
- Start date
I didnt realise. Antar Bolaeisk linked to it in a post from this morning.
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18410018
The fact you might not understand what an engineer is, is part of the problem. Personally as an engineer I can see the both sides of the argument for a protected title. The protection of the title would help to create an understanding of what an engineer is and perhaps then understand the value of engineers and pay accordingly. The same goes with scientists IMO. At the same time, I have worked with some truly innovative engineers with HNCs and as they don't have a degree, they would then be excluded from the title of engineer which to me would be wrong.
It would depend what more they do?
I think this is really a language thing, made more complicated when software is brought into the equation.
Engineering would, to me, include the both the practical consideration (design) AND physical implimatation.
For example, plumbing,
Plugging it in and screwing the pipes on - fitter
Plumbing a house, bending pipes etc - engineer
Figuring out the best way to do it - designer
The problem is that I do understand what an engineer is. It's a vague term, and virtually anyone can call themselves an engineer.
It wouldn't just be a protection of the title, it would be a redefinition of the word. It'd be incredibly complicated and involve things like handing out degrees or exemptions to people, and means testing them. It'd involve a whole lot of policing. And I can't see a real tangible benefit.
You're right in your last sentence - those types of people need defending from the graduate engineers to want to create a new elite.
I do everything from: defining requirements, design, coding, testing, deploying.
So am i a designer? engineer? or something else?
A choochter?
Seriously though whatever you feel is right, as long as it's not a protected term. A software engineer in my opinion sounds right.
A choochter?
FWIW, my official title says "engineer" but i usually say i'm a "developer" if anybody asks.
While I agree that it's misused by various companies, I don't think there should be objection to someone who, for example, designs and implements complicated electrical or IT systems being called an "Engineer", despite the lack of a degree. In my mind an "engineer" is someone with the skills and knowledge to design and build appropriate solutions in their environment.
"Chartered" Engineer is a completely different beast.
I do some design and implementation in my job, along with some programming but I like to stick with the term "analyst" as it implies less responsibility.
"Chartered" Engineer is a completely different beast.
I do some design and implementation in my job, along with some programming but I like to stick with the term "analyst" as it implies less responsibility.
FWIW, my official title says "engineer" but i usually say i'm a "developer" if anybody asks.
Yeah, developer sounds a bit further up the chain than engineer - however I'd expect a developer to be unwilling to get their hands dirty with actual code.
Developer would be most fitting in my understanding
Yeah, developer sounds a bit further up the chain than engineer - however I'd expect a developer to be unwilling to get their hands dirty with actual code.
Engineers write the code! (puts flame proof jacket on).
I couldn't care about the elite, what I care about is the recognition of the role and pay accordingly.
A prime example is where I last worked. It was purchased by a private equity firm and the clueless finance monkeys laid off all the engineers (me being one of them) and thought they would just buy COTs products and plug them together and sell the finished product. Being finance monkeys, they didn't know how to spec things properly so didnt know what to buy, didn't know why things didn't work and how to solve the problem etc.
If all you are going to buy COT product and plug it all together then you have no expertise and are doing something that any other company could do. There is nothing differentiating you from any other company, and are at the mercy of other companies to develop product before you can move forward instead of being the company moving forward and being faster to market. This was all because the finance monkeys didn't understand the value of engineers in an engineering company. Two years later they admit they made a mistake and are on a big recruitment drive for engineers but only want to pay peanuts so still don't understand the value of engineers.
Well, that's their mistake and they're paying the price (as sadly are the engineers they laid off).
However protecting the term engineer wouldn't have made a difference there would it?
Anyone who matters -such as myself - know the difference between the various "Engineers" so what doe it matter? The problem in the UK is that skills of any sort are usually of a very poor quality with all too many people sporting degrees possessing the Intellects of mentally challenged rocking horses ( they are under the illusion that they have really studied hard as they were operating in a field for which they were not suited and should have course have perhaps been better employed working on the sweet counter at the local Co op Naturally the courses have all been dumb ed down to facilitate a suitable pass rate) It is not just "Degree" course that need to be addressed in the UK. Take heating engineers - the quality of many is unspeakable. The situation in Northern Europe is very different
Last edited:
Correct - signing a petition to protect the term engineer is utterly pointless.
Instead we need to ensure universities are actually producing competent graduates instead of making young adults tread water for 3 years before entering the job market.
Education, education, education was what Tony Blair promised. What we got was a façade of education. Companies literally cannot find literate employees. Great swathes of our youth are unemployed and unemployable. We have the highest university attendance we have ever had, it's sky rocketed, yet they spend their time at university working a part time McJob and the main opponent of a student is procrastination and apathy, not exams and learning.
May be and may be not. As you say, it is such a vague term that if it was a protected profession, over time people would understand the value of the profession and would be treated accordingly just like it is in countries in Europe where it is a regulated profession.
You would never see an engineering company try to run without engineers in Germany.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 5,038
I think it potentially could as there would be a clear definition and understanding of what they do and their value.
Instead of them assuming anybody can engineer they will know and acknowledge that Engineers are (normally) very skilled professionals.
I think it potentially could as there would be a clear definition and understanding of what they do and their value.
Instead of them assuming anybody can engineer they will know and acknowledge that Engineers are (normally) very skilled professionals.
Nah, I don't think so. I think they'd still have gone gung-ho on stupid cost cutting exercises. They got rid of the engineers because they thought they were expensive and excessive.
Even aside from that, trying to decide who could call themselves an engineer and who could not would be incredibly difficult, expensive, and fruitless.
Exactly, and with that definition should come a minimal set of standards, something the IET have being trying to set via accredited courses and levels of education.